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

, an excellent divine of the church of England, was born at Manchester, in the beginning of Feb. 1617-18, and was the son of Roger Worthington, a person of “chief note and esteem” in that town. His mother was Mary, the daughter of Christopher Whichcote, esq. and niece to sir Jeremy Whichcote, bart. He was educated at Emanuel college, Cambridge, of which he became a fellow, was created B.D. in 1646, and D. D. in 1655. He was afterwards chosen master of Jesus college, vacant by the ejectment of Dr. Richard Sterne, afterwards archbishop of York, but was with some difficulty prevailed upon to submit to the choice and request of the fellows, his inclination being to a more private and retired life; and soon after the restoration be resigned that mastership to Dr. Sterne. In the mean time he was successively rector of Horton in Buckinghamshire, Gravely and Fen Ditton in the county of Cambridge, Barking, with Needham, in the county of Suffolk, and Ingoldsby in Lincolnshire. During the years 1660 and 1661 he cultivated a frequent correspondence by letters with that great promoter of all useful learning, Mr. Samuel Hartlib; four and twenty of Dr. Worthington’s being published at the end of his Miscellanies; and several others by bishop Kennet in his Register and Chronicle. In 1663, he was collated to the sinecure rectory of Moulton All Saints, in Norfolk. He entered upon the cure of St. Bene't Fink in June 1664, under Dr. George Evans, canon of Windsor, who held a lease from that college of the rectory; and he continued to preach there during the plague-year 1665, coming thither weekly from Hackney, where he had placed his family: and from February 18, 1665-6, till the fire in September, he preached the lecture of that church, upon the death of the former lecturer. Soon after that calamity, he was presented by Dr. Henry More> of Christ’s college in Cambridge, to the living of Ingoldsby, before mentioned, and to the prebend of Asgarby in the church of Lincoln, procured him by archbishop Sheldon, who had a great esteem for him. From Ingoldsby he removed to Hackney, being chosen lecturer of that church with a subscription commencing from Lady-day 1670; and, the church of St. Bene't Fink being then rebuilding, he made suit to the church of Windsor to have his lease of the cure renewed to him, being recommended by the archbishop to Dr. Ryves, dean of that church. This was granted him; but some difficulties arising about the form of the lease, with regard to the parsonage house, agreed to be rebuilt, he did not live to execute it, dying at Hackney Nov. 26, 1671. He was interred in the church there.

His funeral-sermon was preached by Dr. Tillotson at Hackney, on the 30th of Nov. 1671, on John ix. 4. printed, as it was preached on another occasion, in the third volume of his posthumous sermons, published by Dr. Barker. But the character of Dr.Worthington, which was the conclusion of that sermon, and omitted in that edition, is inserted in the preface to that learned man’s “Miscellanies,” published at London in 1704 in 8vo, by Dr. Fowler, bishop of Gloucester, and prefixed to Dr. Worthington’s “Select Discourses,” revised and published by his son John Worthington, M.A. at London, 1725, in 8vo.

, a learned English divine, was born in Merionethshire in 1703, and educated at Oswestry-school, whence he came to Jesus-college, Oxford, where he made great proficiency in learning. From college he returned to Oswestry, and became usher in that school. He took the degree of M. A. at Cambridge in 1742; was afterwards incorporated at Jesus-college, Oxford, July 3, 1758; and proceeded B. and D. D.July 10, in that year. He was early taken notice of by that great encourager of learning bishop Hare, then bishop of St. Asaph, who presented him first to the vicarage of Llanyblodwell, in the county of Salop, and afterwards removed him to Llanrhayader, or Llanrhadra, in Denbighshire, where he lived much beloved, and died Oct. 6, 1778, much lamented. As he could never be prevailed upon to take two livings, bishop Hare gave him a stall at St. Asaph, and a sinecure, “to enable him,” he said, “to support his chanties” (for charitable he was in an eminent degree). Afterwards archbishop Drummond (to whom he had been chaplain for several years) presented him to a stall in the cathedral of York. These were all his preferments. He was a studious man, and wrote several books, of which the principal are here enumerated. I. “An Essay on the Scheme and Conduct, Procedure and Extent, of Man’s Redemption; designed for the honour and illustration of Christianity. To which is annexed, a Dissertation on the Design and Argumentation of the Book of Job,” by William Worthington, M. A. vicar of Blodwel in Shropshire, London, 1743, 8vo. 2. “The historical Sense of the Mosaic Account of the Fall proved and vindicated,” 17. . , 8vo. 3. “Instructions concerning Confirmation,” 17.,. , 8va. 4. “A Disquisition concerning the Lord’s-Supper,” 17. . , 8vo. 5. “The Use, Value, and Improvement, of various Readings shewn and illustrated, in a Sermon preached before the University of Oxford, at St. Mary’s, on Sunday Oct. 18, 1761,” Oxford, 1764, 8vo. 6. “A Sermon preached in the parish-church of Christchurch, London, on Thursday April the 21st, 1768; being the time of the yearly meeting of tl^e children educated in the charityschools in and about the cities of London and Westminster,” 1768, 4to. 7. “The Evidences of Christianity, deduced from Facts, and the Testimony of Sense, throughout all Ages of the Church, to the present Time. In a series of discourses, preached for the lecture founded by the hon. Robert Boyle, esq. in the parish-church of St. James, Westminster, in the years 1766, 1767, 1768; wherein is shewn, that, upon the whole, this is not a decaying, but a growing, Evidence,” 1769, 2 vols. 8vo. 8. “The Scripture Theory of the Earth, throughout all its Revolutions, and all the periods of its existence, from the creation to the final renovation of all things; being a sequel to the Essay on Redemption, and an illustration of the principles on which it is written,” 1773, 8vo. 9. “Irenicum; or, the Importance of Unity in the Church of Christ considered, and applied towards the healing of our unhappy differences and divisions,” 1775, 8vo. 10. “An Impartial Enquiry into the Case of the Gospel-Demoniacs with an appendix, consisting of an Essay on Scripture-­Demonology,” 1777, 8vo. This last was a warm attack on the opinion held out by the Rev. Hugh Farmer, in. his “Essay on the Demoniacs,” 1775, 8vo. and, having produced a spirited reply in 1778, Dr. Worthington prepared for the press (what by the express directions of his will was given to the public after his death) “A farther Enquiry into the case of the Gospel-Demoniacs, occasioned by Mr. Farmer’s on the subject,” 1779, 8vo.

, ranked by Fuller among the learned writers of JCing’s-college, Cambridge, was born in London, about the latter part of the sixteenth century, and educated at Eton, whence, being elected to King’scollege, he was entered, Oct. 1, 1579, commenced B. A. in 1583, M. A. in 1587, and B. D. in 1594. He was also fellow of that college, and some time chaplain to Robert earl of Essex. On the death of Dr. Whitaker in 1596 he stood candidate for the king’s professorship of divinity in Cambridge, with Dr. John Overall of Trinity-college; but failed, by the superior interest of the latter, although he performed his probationary exercises with general applause. In March 1596 he was chosen professor of divinity in Gresham-college, upon the first settlement of that foundation, and in 1598 quitted his fellowship at Cambridge, and marrying soon after, resigned also his professorship. He was then chosen lecturer of Allhallows Barking; but in 1604 was silenced by Dr. Bancroft, bishop of London, for some expressions used either in a prayer or sermon, which were considered as disrespectful to the king; but it does not appear that he remained long under suspension; at least, in a volume of sermons printed in 1609 he styles himself minister of Allhallows.

His next trouble arose from his brethren in London, of the puritan stamp, with which he is usually classed. He was accused of holding an erroneous opinion concerning the doctrine of justification, which, according to him, consisted in the forgiveness of sins. His principal accuser was the Rev. George Walker, minister of St. John the Evangelist in Watling-street, who went so far as to bring forward a charge of Socinianism, heresy, and blasphemy. This produced a conference between eight divines of eminence, four for each party; and the result was, that although these judges differed from Mr, Wotton “in some points of the former doctrine of justification, contained in his expositions,” yet they held “not the difference to be so great and weighty, as that they are to be justly condemned of heresy and blasphemy.” In 1624, as Mr. Wotton had promised to explain himself more fully on the subject in dispute, he published his Latin treatise “De reconciliatione peccatoris,” thinking it more advisable to discuss the question in a learned language, than to hazard differences among common Christians by printing his opinion in English. In this work he professed to agree with the Church of England, the generality ofr the first reformers, and particularly Calvin, and to oppose only the opinion of Flaccus III} ricus, Hemmingius, c. and that of the Church of Rome, as declared in the Council of Trent. Walker, however, returned to the charge, but did not publish any thing until after Mr. Wotton’s death. This obliged his friend Mr. Gataker, one of the eight divines who sat in judgement on him, to write a narrative of the conference, which was published by Mr. Wotton’s son in 1641.

As Mr. Wotton was a zealous advocate for the reformation, he published several books in defence of it, which exposed him to the resentmeni of a different party. He entered particularly into the controversy with Dr. Montague, afterwards bishop of Chichester, whose work entitled “Appello Csesarem” met with a host of opponents, on account of its leaning towards Arminianism and popery. Wotton did not long survive this performance. Though a man acknowledged by all parties to be learned and able, it does not appear he had any other preferment than the lectureship of Allhallows, where, according to the register, he was buried Dec. 11, 1626.

His writings are, 1. “An answer to a popish pamphlet, &c. entitled ‘Certain Articles,’ &c.” Lond. 1605, 4to. 2. “A defence of Mr. Perkins’ booke called A Reformed Catholike, &c.” ibid. 1606, 4to. 3. “The tryal of the Roman Clergy’s title to the Church,” ibid. 1608, 4to. 4. “Sermons on part of chapter first of St. John’s Gospel,” ibid. 1609, 4to. 5. “Run from Rome; or, The necessity of separating from that Church,” ibid. 1624, 4to. 6. “De reconciliatione peccatoris, &c.” Basil. 1624, 4to. 7. “An answer to a book, entitled Appello Coesarem, written by Mr. Richard Mountague,” ibid. 1626. 8. “The art of Logick,” ibid. 1626, 8vo. This is an English translation of Ramus’s logic, made by his son, and with a dedication by our author. This son, Samuel, who died in 1680, was rector of East and West Wretham in Norfolk.

, an eminent physician, celebrated by Leland in his “Encomia,” by the name of Ododunus, was the son of Richard Wotton, superior beadle of divinity in the university of Oxford, and was born there in 1492, and educated at the school near Magdalen-college, of which college he became demy, and took a bachelor’s degree in 1513. Bishop Fox, founder of Corpus Christi college, was his patron, by whose interest he was appointed socius compar and Greek lecturer of that new foundation, and continued there till 1520, when he obtained leave to travel into Italy for three years. It appears that he studied physic on the continent, for he had a doctor’s degree conferred upon him at Padua. After his return he resumed his lectureship, and was incorporated doctor of physic tor wards the end of 1525. He became very eminent in his profession, first about Oxford, and then in London; and was a member of the college of pny^icians, and physician to Henry VIII. He died October 5, 1555, and lies buried in St. Alban’s church, London. He was the first of our English physicians who particularly applied to the study of natural history. He made himself famous at home and abroad by his book, entitled “De Differentiis Animaiium, lib. X.” Paris, 1552; on which Gesner and Possevin have bestowed much praise. It was afterwards considerably improved by Moufet in his “Minim; rum Animaiium Theatrum,” Loud. 1634. Wotton left many children, of whom his son Henry became also a physician of eminence.

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

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

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

After this embassy, he was sent twice more to Venice, once to the States of the United Provinces, twice to Charles Emanuel duke of Savoy, once to the united princes of Upper Germany; also to the archduke Leopold, to the duke of Wittemberg, to the imperial cities of Strasburgh and Ulm, and lastly to the emperor Ferdinand II. He returned to England the year before king James died; and brought with him many servants, of which some were German and Italian artists, and who became rather burthensome to him; for notwithstanding the many public services in which he had been employed, he had by no means improved his private fortune, which was also impaired by his liberality and want of ceconomy. As some recompense, which may at first appear rather a singular one for a man who had spent his days as a courtier and ambassador, he was in 1623 appointed provost of Eton-college. But in fact this situation was very agreeable to him, for he was now desirous of retiring from the bustle of life, and passing the evening of his days in studious pursuits. Whoever peruses his “Remains,” must perceive that he had much of the literary character, and finding now that the statutes of the college required the provost to be io holy orders, he was ordained deacon, and seemed to begin a new life. His usual course now was, after his customary public devotions, to retire into his study, and there daily spend some hours in reading the Bible, and works of divinity, closing those studies with a private prayer. His afternoons he spent partly in philosophical studies, and partly in conversation with his friends, or in some recreation, particularly angling. His sentiments and temper during his latter days will best appear by what he said, on one occasion, when visited by the learned John Hales, then a fellow of Eton. “I have in my passage to my grave met with most of those joys of which a discursive soul is capable and have been entertained with more inferior pleasures than the souls of men are usually made partakers of. Nevertheless, in this voyage I have not always floated on the calm sea of content; but have often met with cross winds and storms, and with many troubles of mind and temptations to evil. And yet though I have been, and am a man compassed about with human frailties, Almighty God has by his grace prevented me from making shipwreck of faith and a good conscience; the thought of which is now the joy of my heart, and I most humbly praise him for it. And I humbly acknowledge, that it was not myself, but he that hath kept me to this gr^at age, and let him take the glory of his great mercy. And, my dear friend, I now see that I draw near my harbour of death; that harbour will secure me from all the future storms and waves of this restless world; and I praise God I am willing to leave it, and expect a better; that world wherein dwelleth righteousness; and I long for it.”

Sir Henry Wotton died in December 1639, and was buried in the chapel belonging to the college. In his will he appointed this epitaph to be put over his grave: “Hie jacet hujus sententine primus auctor, Disputandi Pruritus Ecclesite Scabies. Nomen alias quasre:” that is, “Here lies the first author of this sentence: ‘ The itch of disputation is the scab of the church.’ Seek his name elsewhere.”

Sir Henry Wotton was a man of eminent learning and abilities, and greatly esteemed by his contemporaries. His knowledge was very extensive, and his taste perhaps not inferior to that of any man of his time. Among other proofs of it, he was among the first who were delighted with Milton’s mask of Comus; and although Mr. Warton has pronounced him to be “on the whole a mixed and desultory character,” he has found an able defender in a living author of equal taste and judgment, who observes on Mr. Warton’s expression, that “this in a strict sense may be true, but surely not in the way of censure. He mingled the character of an active statesman with that of a recluse scholar; and he wandered from the crooked and thorny intrigues of diplomacy into the flowery paths of the muses. But is it not high praise to have been thus desultory?” The same writer says of sir Henry as a poet, “It may be true, that sir Henry’s genius was not suited to the” higher conceptions of Milton. His mind was subtle and elegant rather than sublime. In truth the habits of a diplomatist, and of a great poet, are altogether incompatible,“but” for moral and didactic poetry, the experience of a statesman does not disqualify him," and of this species, sir Henry has left some exquisite specimens. He seems to have lived in a perpetual struggle between his curiosity respecting the world, fomented by his ambition, and his love of books, contemplation, and quiet. His letters to sir Edmund Bacon, who married his niece, prove his strong family affections. His heart appears to have been moulded with a high degree of moral tenderness. This, both the sentiments attributed to him by Walton, and the cast of his poems, sufficiently evince.

He was a great enemy to wrangling and disputes about religion and used to cut inquiries short by witticisms. To one who asked him, “Whether a Papist may be saved” he replied, “You may be saved without knowing that look to yourself.” To another, who was railing at the papists with more zeal than knowledge, he gave this advice: “Pray, Sir, forbear, till you have studied the points better; for, the wise Italians have this proverb, c He that understands amiss concludes worse;' and beware of thinking, that, the farther you go from the church of Rome, the nearer you are to God.” One or two more of his bons mots are preserved. A pleasant priest of his acquaintance at Rome invited him one evening to hear their vespermusic, and seeing him standing in an obscure corner of the church, sent a boy to him with this question, writ upon a scrap of paper, “Where was your religion to be found before Luther?” To which sir Henry sent back underwritten, “Where yours is not to be found, in the written word of God.” Another evening, sir Henry sent a boy of the choir with this question to his friend: “Do you believe those many thousands of poor Christians damned who were excommunicated because the popeand the duke of Venice could not agree about their temporalities?” To which the priest underwrit in French, “Excusez moi, Monsieur.”

Sir Henry Wotton had proposed, after he was settled at Eton, to write the “Life of Martin Luther, 7 ' and in it” The History of the Reformation,“as it was carried on in Germany. Ho had made some progress in this work, when Charles I. prevailed with him to iay.that aside, and to apply himself to the writing of a history of England He proceeded to sketch out some short characters as materials, which are in his” Reliquiae," but proceeded no farther.

His works separately or collectively published were, I. “Epistola de Gaspare Scioppio,” Amberg, 1613, 8vo. 2. “Epistola ad Marcum Vc-lserum duuaivirum Augustas Vindelic. arm. 1612.” 3. “The Elements of Architecture,” Lond. 1624, 4to, a treatise still held in estimation. It was translated into Latin, and annexed to the works of Vitruvius, and to Freart’s “Parallel of the ancient architecture with the modern.” 4. “Plausus et Vota ad regem e Scotia reducem,” Lond. 1633, small folio, reprinted in Lamphire’s “Monarchia Britannica,” Oxtord, 1681, 8vo. 5. “Parallel bttween Robert earl of Essex and George late duke.,of Bucks,” London, 1641, 4to, not remarkable for the judgment displayed. There were scarcely any parallelisms in the two characters. 6, “Short View of the life and death of George Duke of Bucks,” London, 1642, 4to. 7. “Difference and disparity between the estates and conditions of George duke of Bucks and Robert earl of Essex.” 8. “Characters of, and observations on some kings of England.” 9. “The election of the new duke of Venice after the death of Giovanni Bembo.” 10. “Philosophical Survey of Education, or moral Architecture.” 11. “Aphorisms of Education.” 12. “The great Action between Pompey and Caesar extracted out of the Roman and Greek writers.” 13. “Meditations on the 22d chapter of Genesis.” 14. “Meditations on Christmas day.” 15. “Letters to and characters of certain personages.” 16. “Various Poems.” All or most of these pieces are published together in a volume entitled “Reliquiae Wotton ianae,” at London, 1651, 1654, 1672, and 1685, in 8vo. 17. “Letters to sir Edmund Bacon,” London, 1661, 8vo, reprinted with some editions of “Reliquiae Wottonianae.” 18. “Letters to the Lord Zouch,” printed at the end of “Reliquiae Wottonianae” in the edition of 1685, 19. “The State of Christendom; or a more exact and curious discovery of many secret passages and hidden mysteries of the times,” Loridon, 1657, folio, reprinted at London in 1667, folio, with this title; “The State of Christendom, giving a perfect and exact discovery of many political intrigues and secret mysteries of state practised in most of the courts of Europe, with an account of their several claims, interests, and pretensions.” 20. He hath also several letters to George duke of Bucks in the “Cabala, Mysteries of State,” London, 1654, 4to, and in “Cabala, or Scrinia sacra,” London, 1663, folio. 21. “Journal of his Embassies to Venice,” a manuscript fairly written, formerly in the library of Edward lord Conway. 22. “Three propositions to the Count d'Angosciola in matter of duel, comprehending (as it seems) the latitude of that subject;” a manuscript some time in the library of Ralph Sheldon, esq.; and since in that of the college of arms.

, an eminent statesman and dean of Canterbury, was, as we have already noticed, grand uncle to the preceding sir Henry. He was the fourth son of sir Robert Wotton, knt. by Anne Belknapp, daughter of sir Henry Belknapp, knt. and was born about 1497. He was educated in the university of Oxford, where he studied the canon and civil law, his skill in which recommended him to the notice of Tunstall, bishop of London, to whom he became official in 1528, being at that time doctor of laws. Having entered into the church, he was collated by archbishop Warham to the rectory of Ivychurch in the county of Kent. But this benefice he resigned in 1555, reserving to himself a pension of twenty-two marks, one third of its reputed value, during his life. He continued to act as a civilian; and in 1536, when sentence was pronounced upon Anne Boleyn, he appeared in court as her proctor.

In 1538 archbishop Cranmer constituted him commissary of his faculties for the term of his natural life. About the same time he became chaplain to the king, who in 1.539 nominated him to the archdeaconry of Gloucester, then vacant by the promotion of archdeacon Bell to the see of Worcester. His next promotion was to the deanery of Canterbury in 1541; in addition to which he obtained in 1544 the deanery of York, and was the only person who ever possessed at the same time the deaneries of the two metropolitan churches. In 1545 he was presented to the prebend of Osbaldwick in York cathedral. In 1553 he resigned the archdeaconry of Gloucester, and was presented in 1557 to the treasuryship of the church of Exeter, which he also relinquished the succeeding year.

Such were the appointments which Wotton obtained, but in 1539 he had refused a bishopric, and it is said that he refused the see of Canterbury, so that whatever he might be as a courtier, he was an unambitious ecclesiastic. His talents indeed were better suited to political negociation, and accordingly he was often employed on foreign embassies. His first service abroad is thought to have been his embassy to Cleves in 1539, in order to carry on the treaty of marriage between Henry and the lady Anne; and it fell to his lot afterwards to acquaint the duke of Cleves with Henry’s repudiation of his sister. In 1546 he was one of the commissioners who met at Campe, a small place between Ardres and Guisnes, in order to negociate peace between England, Scotland, and France. In September following he obtained the royal dispensation for non-residence on his preferments, being then the king’s ambassador in France, and was there at the death of Henry, by whose will he was appointed one of the executors to whom, during the minority of his son Edward VI. he entrusted the government of the kingdom.

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

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

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

The public services of Wotton were afterwards employed in regard to the trade of the English merchants, who had been ill-treated not only in Spain, but more particularly in the Netherlands, upon pretence of civil differences, but in fact out of hatred to the protestant religion. They therefore removed their mart to Embden in East Friesland, But Guzman de Sylva (canon of Toledo), then the Spanish ambassador in England, endeavoured to compose these differences, which he. found materially to affect the interests of the Netherlands. At length Elizabeth, and the duchess of Parma, regent of the Low Countries, exchanged in Dec. 1564, a mutual agreement, by which the commerce between the two countries was restored, and viscount Montague, dean Wotton, and Dr. Haddon, were sent commissioners to Bruges in order to a full discussion of the subject. But, in the following year, the troubles in the Netherlands put a stop to their farther conference, after it had been agreed, that there should be an open trade, till one prince denounced war against the other; and in that case, the merchants should have forty days notice to dispose of themselves and their effects.

This was probably the last employment of the dean, which indeed he did not long survive. He died at his house in Warwick-lane, Jan. 25, 1566, aged about seventy, and was interred in Canterbury cathedral, in the chapel of the Holy Trinity, where is a beautiful and much admired monument, part, if not the whole of which, was executed at Rome. He is represented kneeling at his devotions; the head is said to have been carved by his own order, while living. Over his figure is a very long Latin inscription, containing many particulars of his life. As he died unmarried, he left his nephew Thomas Wotton his heir.

The dean’s life, we have seen, was chiefly devoted to political affairs, yet he was not wholly unemployed as a divine. In 1537, the more learned ecclesiastics of that period were called together in order to the composition of the book entitled “The godly and pious institution of a Christian man;” among these was Dr. Wotton. To their discussion and judgment many of the principal points of religion were submitted. From his compliance under the differing reigns of Henry, Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth, he has been concluded to be a time-server, and a man of no decided religious principle; and he certainly is rather to be considered as a politician than an ecclesiastic, for it was in the former character principally that his services were required by his respective sovereigns. His learning is said to have been profound and extensive, and to have been displayed to the greatest advantage in the force of his arguments, and in the easiness of his elocution. In council his sentiments were delivered with admirable discretion, and maintained with undaunted resolution. The vigilance of his political conduct, both at home and abroad, distinguished him as an exemplary statesman; and the facility with which he could discuss the merits of a cause (his method being exact, and his memory tenacious), marked him as an acute civilian. His knowledge of trade ^nd commerce was no less conspicuous, and in an acquaintance with the polity of nations he was inferior to none. To the greatness of his character Holinshed and Camden have bequeathed their testimonies ^ and Henry VIII. is said to have thus addressed him, when he was about to depart on an embassy> “Sir, I have sent a head by Cromwell, a purse by Wolsey, a sword by Brandon, and I must now send the law by you to treat with enemies.”

, an English divine of uncommon parts and learning, was the son of Mr. Henry Wotton, rector of Wrentham, in Suffolk, a man of considerable learning also, and well skilled in the Oriental tongues. He was born at Wrentham the 13th of August, 1666, and was educated by his father. He discovered a most extraordinary genius for learning languages; and, though what is related of him upon this head may appear wonderful, yet it is so well attested that we know not how to refuse it credit. Sir Philip Skippon, who lived at Wrentham, in a letter to Mr. John Ray, Sept. Is, 1671, writes thus of him: “I shall somewhat surprise you with what I have seen in a little boy, William Wotton, five years old the last month, the son of Mr. Wotton, minister of this parish, who hath instructed his child within the last three quarters of a year in the reading the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, which he can read almost as well as English; and that tongue he could read at four years and three months old as well as most lads of twice his age. I could send you many particulars about his rendering chapters and psalms out of the three learned languages into English,” &c. Among sir Philip’s papers was found a draught of a longer letter to Mr. Ray, in which these farther particulars are added to the above: “He is not yet able to parse any language, but what he performs in turning the three learned tongues into English is done by strength of memory; so that he is ready to mistake when some words of different signification have near the same sound. His father hath taught him by no rules, but only uses the child’s memory in remembering words: some other children of his age seem to have as good a fancy and as quick apprehension.” He was admitted of Catharine Hall, Cambridge, in April 1676, some months before he was ten years old; and upon his admission Dr. John Eachard, then master of the college, gave him this remarkable testimony: Gulidmns Wottonus infra decem annos nee Ilammondo nee Grotio secundus. His progress in learning was answerable to the expectations conceived of him; and Dr. Duport, the master of Magdalen-college, and dean of Peterborough, has described it in an elegant copy of verses; “In Gulielmum Wottanum stupendi ingenii et incomparabilis spei puerum vixdum duodecim annorum.” He then goes on to celebrate his skill in the languages, not only in the Greek and Latin, which he understood perfectly, but also in the Hebrew, Arabic, Syriac, Chaldee; his skill too in arts and sciences, in geography, logic, philosophy, mathematics^ chronology.

In 1679 he took the degree of B. A. when he was but twelve years and five months old; and, the winter following, was invited to London by Dr. Gilbert Burner, then preacher at the Rolls, who introduced him to almost all the learned; and among the rest to Dr. William Llovd, bishopi of St. Asaph, who was so highly pleased with him, that he took him a an assistant in making the catalogue of his library, and carried him the summer following to St. Asaph. Upon his return, Dr. Turner, afterwards bishop of Ely^ procured him by his interest a fellowship in St. John’s colege, where he took his degree of ML A. in 1683, and iri 1691 he commenced bachelor of divinity. The same year bishop Lloyd gave him the sinecure of LlandriUo, in Denbighshire. He was afterwards made chaplain to the earl of Nottingham, then secretary of state, who in 1693 presented him to the rectory of Middleton Keynes, in Buckinghamshire. In 1694- he published “Reflections upon Ancient and modern Learning” and dedicated his book to his patron the earl of Nottingham^ To settle the bounds of all branches of literature, and all arts and sciences, as they have been extended by both ancients and moderns, and thus to make a comparison between each, was a work too vast, one should think, for any one man, even for a whole life spent in study; yet it was executed with very considerable ability by Mr. Wotton at twenty-eight years of age; and if it did involve him somewhat in the controversy between Boyle and Bentley, that was rather owing to his connections with Bentley, whose “Dissertations upon Phalaris,” &c. were printed at the end of the 2d edition of his book in 1697, than to any intermeddling of his own. Boyle himself acknowledged that “Mr. Wotton is modest and decent, speaks generally with respect of those he differs from, and with a due distrust of his own opinion. His book has a vein of learning running through it, where there is no ostentation of it.” This and much more is true of Wotton’s performance yet it must not be dissembled, that this,as it stands in Boyle’s hook, appears to have been said rather for the sake of reflecting on Bentley than to commend Wotton. Wotton suffered, as is well known, under the satirical pen of Swift; and this induced him to write “A Defence of the Reflections upon Ancient and Modern Learning, in answer to the objections of sir William Temple and others;” with “Observations upon the Tale of a Tub;” reprinted with a third corrected edition of the “Reflections,” &c. in 1705, 8vo. He says that this “Tale is of a very irreligious nature, and a crude banter upon all that is esteemed as sacred among all sects and religions among men;” and his judgment of that famous piece is confirmed by that of Mr. Moyle, in the following passage: “I have read over the * Tale of a Tub.' There is a good deal of wild wit in it, which pleases by its extravagance and uncommonness; but I think it, upon the whole, the profanest piece of ribaldry which has appeared since the days of Rabelais, the great original of banter and ridicule.”

His “Reflections” were published, as already noticed, in 1694. In 1695 he published, in the “Philosophical Transactions,” an “Abstract” of Agostino Scilla’s book concerning marine bodies which are found petrified in several places at land; and in 1697, a “Vindication” of that abstract, which was subjoined to Dr. John Arbuthnot’s “Examination of Dr. Woodward’s Account of the Deluge,” &c. In 1701, he published “The History of Rome from the death of Antoninus Pius to the death of Severus Alexander,” in 8vo. He paid great deference to the authority of medals in illustrating this history, and prefixed several tables of them to his book, taken chiefly from the collections of Angeloni, Morell, and Vailiant. This work was undertaken at the direction of bishop Burnet, and intended for the use of his lordship’s royal pupil, the duke of Gloucester, who, however, did not live to see it finished. It was therefore dedicated to the bishop, to whom Wotton had been greatly obliged in his youth, and who afterwards, in 1705, gave him a prebend in the church of Salisbury. This history was esteemed no inconsiderable performance: M. Leibnitz immediately recommended it to George II. his late majesty, then electoral prince of Hanover; and it was the first piece of Roman history which he read in our language.

In 1706 Wotton preached a visitation- sermon, at Newport-Pagnel in Bucks, against Tindal’s bookof “The Rights of the Christian Church,” and printed it. This was the first answer that was written to that memorable performance; and it was also the first piece which Wotton published as a divine. In 1707, archbishop Tenison presented him with the degree of doctor of divinity. In 1708 he drew up a short view of Dr. Hickes’s “Thesaurus;” but the appendix and notes are Hickes’s own. In 1714 the difficulties he was under in his private fortune, for he had not a grain of ceconomy, obliged him to retire into South Wales, where, though he had much leisure, he had few books. Yet, being too active in his nature to be idle, he drew up, at the request of Browne Willis, esq v who afterwards published them, the “Memoirs of the Cathedral Churqh of St. David/' in 1717, and of” Landaff“in 1719. Here he also wrote his” Miscellaneous discourses relating to the traditions and usages of the Scribes and Pharisees,“&c. which was printed 1718, in 2 vols. 8vo. Le Clerc tells us that” great advantage may be made by reading the writings of the Rabbins; and that the public is highly obliged to Mr. Selden, for instance, and to Dr. Lightfoot, for the assistances which they have drawn thence, and communicated to those who study the holy scripture. Those who do not read their works, which are not adapted to the capacity of every person, will be greatly obliged to Dr. Wotton for the introduction which he has given them into that kind of learning." In 1719 he published a sermon upon Mark xiii. 32, to prove the divinity of the Son of God from his omniscience.

After his return from Wales he preached a sermon in Welsh before the British Society in 1722; and was, perhaps, the only Englishman who ever attempted to preach in that language. The same year, his account of the life and writings of Mr. Thomas Stanley was published at Eysenach, at the end of Scaevola Sammartbanus’s “Elogia Gallorum.” In 1723 he printed in the “Bibliotheca Literaria” an account of the “Caernarvon Record, 7 ' a manuscript in the Harleian library. This manuscript is an account of several ancient Welsh tenures, and had some relation to the Welsh laws, which he was busy in translating. He undertook that laborious work at the instance of Wake, who knew that the trouble of learning a new and very difficult language would be no discouragemen t to Dr. Wotton. It was published in 1730, under this title,” Cysreithjeu Hywel Dda, ac erail; ceu, Leges Wallicae Ecclesiasticae et Civiles Hoeli Boni, et aliorum Walliae princjpum, quas ex variis Codicibus Manuscriptis eruit, interpretatione Latina, notis et glossario illustravit Gulielmus Wottonus,“in foijo. But this way a posthumous work, for he died at Buxted, in Essex, Feb. 13,1726. He left a daughter, who was the wife of the late Mr. William Clarke, canon-residentiary of Chichester. After his death came out his” Discourse concerning the Confusion of Languages at Babel,“1730, 8vo; as did the same year his” Advice to a young Student, with a method of study. for the four first years.“He was likewise the author of five anonymous pamphlets: 1.” A Letter to Eusebia,“1707. 2.” The case of the present Convocation considered,“1711. 3.” Reflections on the present posture of Affairs, 1712. 4. “Observations on the State of the Nation,” 1713. 5. “A Vindication of the Earl of Nottingham,” 1714.

What distinguished him from other men chiefly was his memory: his superiority seems to have lain in the strength pf that faculty; for, by never forgetting any thing, he became immensely learned and knowing; and, what is more, his learning (as one expresses it) was all in ready cash, which he was able to produce at sight. When he was very young he remembered the whole of- almost any discourse he had heard, and often surprised a preacher with repeating his sermon to him. This first recommended him to bishop Lloyd, to whom he repeated one of his own sermons, as Dr. Burnet had engaged that he should. But above all, he had great humanity and friendliness of temper. His time and abilities were at the service of any person who was making advances in real learning. The narrowness of a party-spirit never broke in upon any of his friendships; he was as zealous in recommending Dr. Hickes’s great work as if it had been his own-, and assisted Mr. Spinkes in his replies to Mr. Collier in the controversy about the necessity of mixing wine and water in the sacrament, in 1718 and 1719. He was a great lover of etymology; and 'Mr. Thwaites in his Saxon Grammar, takes notice of his skill and acuteness that way, which he was extremely well qualified for, by knowing most of the languages from east to west. Mr. John Chapman, chaplain to the archbishop of Canterbury (in “Remarks upon the Letter to Dr. Waterland in relation to the natural account of Languages,” pag. 8, 9.) has done him the honour to place him in a list of great names after Bochart, Walton, Vossius, Scaliger, Duret, Heinsius, Selclen, &c. all men of letters and tracers of languages. Wotton lived at a time when a man of learning would have been better preferred than he was; but it is supposed that some part of his conduct, which was very exceptionable, prevented it.

, an eminent artist of Holland, was born at Haerlem, in 1620, and was the son of Paul Wouvermans, a tolerable history-painter, of whom, however, he did not learn the principles of his art, but of John Wynants, an excellent painter of Haerlem. It does not appear that he ever was in Italy, or ever quitted the city of Haerlem; though no man deserved more the encouragement a-nd protection of some powerful prince than he did He is one instance, among a thousand, to prove that oftentimes the greatest merit remains without either recompence or honour. His works have all the excellences we can wish; high finishing, correctness, agreeable composition, and a taste for colouring, joined with a force that approaches to the Caracci’s . The pieces he painted in. his latter time have a grey or blueish cast; they are finished with too much labour, and his grounds look too much like velvet: but those he did in his prime are free from these faults, and equal in colouring and correctness to any thing Italy can produce. Wouvermans generally enriched his landscapes with huntings, halts, encampment of armies, and other subjects where horses naturally enter, which he designed better than any painter of his time: there are also some battles and attacks of villages by his hand. These beautiful works, which gained him great reputation, did not make him rich; on the contrary, being charged with a numerous family, and but indifferently paid for his work, he lived very meanly; and, though he painted very quick, and was very laborious, had much ado to maintain himself. The misery of his condition determined him not to bring up any of his children to painting. In his last hours, which happened at Haerlem in 1688, he burnt a box filled with his studies and designs; saying, I have been so ill-paid for my labours, that I would not have those designs engage my son in so miserable a profession." Different authors, however, ascribe the burning of his designs to different motives. Some say it proceeded from his dislike to his brother Peter, being unwilling that he should reap the product of his labours; others allege that he intended to compel his son (if he should follow th'e profession) to seek out the knowledge of nature from his own industry, and not indolently depend on copying those designs; and other writers assign a less honourable motive, which seems to be unworthy of the genius of Wouvermans, and equally unworthy of being perpetuated.

Houbraken observes, that the works of Wouvermans and Bamboccio were continually placed in competition by the ablest judges of the art; and the latter having painted a picture which was exceedingly admired, John De Witt prevailed on Wouvermans to paint the same subject, which he executed in his usual elegant style. These pictures being afterwards exhibited together to the public, while both artists were present, De Witt said (with a loud voice), “All our connoisseurs seem to prefer the works of those painters who have studied at Rome; and observe only, how far the work of Wouvermans, who never saw Rome, surpasses the work of him who resided there for several years!” That observation, which was received with general applause, was thought to have had too violent an effect on the spirits of Bamboccio and by many it was imagined that it contributed to his untimely death.

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

, a learned bishop of Ely, was descended of a very ancient family, which came originally from Denmark. His father, Francis, citizen and mercer of London, was the only son of Cuthbert Wren, of Monkskirby.in Warwickshire, second son of William Wren of Sberbume-honse and of Billy-hall in the bishopric of Durham: but the chief seat of the family was at Binchester in that county. Our prelate was born in the parish of St. Petercheap, London, Dec. 23, 1585. Being a youth of promising talents, he was much noticed while at school by bishop Andrews, who being chosen master of Pembroke-hall in Cambridge, procured his admission into that society June 23, 1601, and assisted him in his studies afterwards, which he pursued with such success as to be chosen Greek scholar, and when he had taken his batchelor’s degree was elected fellow of the college Nov. 9, 1605. He commenced M.A. in 1608, and having studied divinity was ordained deacon in Jan. and priest in Feb. 1610. Being elected senior regent master in Oct, 1611, he kept the philosophy act with great applause before king James in 1614, and the year following was appointed chaplain to bishop Andrews, and was presented the same year to the rectory of Teversham in Cambridgeshire. In 1621 he was made chaplain to prince (afterwards king) Charles, whom he attended in that office to Spain in 1623. After his return to England, he was consulted by the bishops Andrews, Neile, and Laud, as to what might be the prince’s sentiments towards the church of England, according to any observations he had been able to make. His answer was, “1 know my master’s learning is not equal to his father’s, yet I know his judgment is very right: and as for his affections in the particular you point at (the support of the doctrine and discipline of the church) I have more confidence of him than of his father, in whom you have seen better than I so much inconstancy in some particular cases.' 7 Neile and Laud examined him as to his grounds for this opinion, which he gave them at large; and after an hour’s discussion of the subject, Andrews, who had hitherto been silent, said,” Well, doctor, God send you may be a true prophet concerning your master’s inclination, which we are glad to hear from you. I am sure I shall be a true prophet: I shall be in my grave, and so shall you, my lord of Durham (Neile), but my lord of St. David’s (Laud) and you, doctor, will live to see the day, that your master will be put to it upon his head and his crown, without he will forsake the support of the church."

In 1624, the rectory of Bingharn in Nottinghamshire was conferred upon Mr.Wren, together with a stall in the church of Winchester. In July 1625 he was chosen master of Peterhouse, in Cambridge, to which he became a great benefactor, building a great part of the college, putting their writings and records into order, and especially contributing liberally, and procuring the contributions of others towards the beautiful chapel, which was completed and dedicated by him in 1632. In July 1628 he was promoted to the dignity of dean of Windsor and Wolverhampton. The same year he served the office of vice-chancellor, and was made register of the garter. While he held this office, he cornposed in Latin, a comment upon the statutes of Henry VIII. respecting the order. This was published by Anstis, in the <c Register of the most noble order of the Garter.“Ashmole had a high opinion of this work, and regretted that he had not met with it before he had almost finished his” Institution of the order of the Garter."

In April 1629, Mr.Wren was sworn a judge of the starchamber for foreign causes. In 1633, he attended Charles I. in his progress to Scotland, and he had some hand in composing the ill-fated form of liturgy fur that country. On his return home he was made clerk of the closet to his majesty, and was about the same time created D. D. at Cambridge. In 1634 he was installed a prebendary of Westminster, and the same year promoted to the bishopric of Hereford, which he held only until the following year, when he was translated to the see of Norwich, in which he sat two years and a half, and appears to have been very unpopular with the puritan party. Lord Clarendon informs us that he “so passionately and warmly proceeded against the dissenting congregations, that many left the kingdom, to the lessening of the wealthy manufacture there of kerseys and narrow cloths, and, which was worse, transporting that mystery into foreign parts.” But the author of the “Parentalia” says, “that this desertion of the Norwich weavers was chiefly procured through the policy and management of the Dutch, who, wanting that manufacture, (which was improved there to great perfection) left no means unattempted to gain over these weavers to settle in their towns, with an assurance of full liberty of conscience, and greater advantages and privileges than they had obtained in England.” This author commends his modesty and humility, particularly in never seeking preferment: but he says too little of his zeal, which was indeed, ardent and active. This drew upon him the unjust imputation of popery. Nothing seems to have rendered him more hateful and invidious to the parliament, than his standing high in the favour of his sovereign.

In 1636 he succeeded Juxon, as dean of his majesty’s chapel, and in May 1638 was translated to the bishopric of Ely. He had not enjoyed this above two years, when in Dec. 1640, the day after the. impeachment of Laud, Hampden was sent by the Commons with a message to the House of Peers, acquainting their lordsbips that the Commons had received informations of a very high nature against Matthew Wren, bisbop of Ely, for setting up idolatry and superstition in divers places, and acting some things of that nature in his own person, and also to signify, that because they hear of his endeavouring to escape out of the kingdom, some course might be taken for his putting in security to be forthcoming, &c. Their lordships fixed his bail at 10,0001.; and this being given, he was impeached July 5, 1641, of high crimes and misdemeanours. These were contained in twenty-four articles, the sum total of which amounts to a zeal he shewed in enforcing the observances of the church. Against these he composed a long and spirited defence, in consequence of which his enemies declined trying him for his life, which they commuted for an order to keep him in prison in the Tower during their pleasure. This lasted full eighteen years, during which he employed himself chiefly in study and in composing some of his works. He bad offers of release from Cromwell, but he disdained the terms, which were an acknowledgment qf f the favour, and submission to the usurper. When the restoration drew nigh, he was released in March 1659, and returned to his palace at Ely in 1660. In May 1661, he introduced to the convocation the form of prayer and thanksgiving which is still in use on May 29. In 1663 he built a new chapel at Pembroke-hall, Cambridge, at his own expence, and settled an estate upon the college for the perpetual support of the building.

Bishop Wren died at Ely-house, London, April 24, 1667, in his eighty-second year, and was buried in Pemhroke-hall chapel. He was a man of unquestionable learning, and sincere in his attachment to the doctrines and discipline of the church, of great courage in suffering for his principles, but of a most intolerant spirit. No prelate’s name occurs oftener in the accounts of the prosecutions of the puritans. He resembled Laud in many respects, and narrowly escaped his fate. He distinguished himself by some publications; as, 1. “Increpatio Bar Jesu, sive Polemica? adsertiones locorum aliquot Sacrse Scripturae ah imposturis perversionum in Catechesi Racoviana,” Loud. 1660, in 4to, and reprinted in the ninth volume of the “Critici Sacri.” 2. “The abandoning of the Scots Covenant, 1661,” 4to 3. “Epistolae Variaj <ul -Vires doctissimos” particularly to Gerard John Vossius. 4. Two “Sermons;” one printed in 1627, the other in 1662. Dr, Richardson made use of some of his Mss. in his “De Presulibus Ano-liae.”

, eldest son of the preceding, was born Aug. 20, 1629, at Peter- house, Cambridge, ut which time his father was master of that college. His first education was in that university, heing admitted of St. Peter’s-college in 1642, whence he removed to Oxford, where he was a student, not in a college or hall, but in a private house, as he could not conform to the principles or practises of the persons who then had the government of the university. At the restoration' he was elected burgess of St. Michael in Cornwall, in the parliament which began May8, 1661, and was appointed secretary to the earl of Clarendon, lord high chancellor of England, who visiting the university of Oxford, of which he was chancellor, in Sept. 1661, Mr. Wren was there created master of arts. He was one of the first members of the Royal Society, when they began their weekly meetings at London, in 166O. After the fall of his patron, the earl of Clarendon, he became secretary to James duke of York, in whose service he continued till his death, June 11, 1672, in the fortythird year of his age. He was interred in the same vault with his father, in the chapel of Pembroke- hall, Cambridge. He wrote, 1. “Considerations on Mr. Harrington’s Commonwealth of Oceana, restrained to the first part of the preliminaries, London, 1657,” in 8vo. To this book is prefixed a long letter of our author to Dr. John Wilkins, warden of Wadham-college in Oxford, who had desired him to give his judgment concerning Mr. Harrington’s “Oceana.” Harrington answered this work in the first book of his “Prerogative of popular government,” 1658, 4to, in which he reflects on Mr. Wren as one of those virtuosi, who then met at Dr. Wilkins’ a lodgings at Wad ham- college, the seminary of the Royal Society, and describes them as an assembly of men who “had an excellent fcculty of mag^ nifying a louse, and diminishing a commonwealth.” Mr. Wren replied in 2, “Monarchy asserted; or, the State of Monarchical and Popular Government, in vindication of the considerations on Mr. Harrington’s * Oceana,' London, 1659,” in 8vo. Harrington’s rejoinder was an indecent piece of buffoonery, entitled “Politicaster i or, a Comical Discourse in^answer to Mr. Wren’s book, entitled ‘ Monarchy asserted, &c.’” 1659, 4to. Sir Edward Hyde, after^ wards earl of Clarendon, in a letter to Dr. John Barwick, dated at Brussels the 25th of July, 1659, and printed in the appendix to the doctor’s “Life,” was very solicitous, that Mr. Wren should undertake a confutation of Hobbes’s “Leviathan:” “I hope,” says he, “it is only modesty in Mr. Wren, that makes hirn pause upon undertaking the work you have recommended to him; for I dare swear, by what I have seen of him, he is very equal to answer every part of it: I mean, every part that requires an answer. Nor is there need of a professed divine to vindicate the Creator from making man a verier beast than any of those of the field, or to vindicate scripture from his licentious interpretation. I dare say, he will find somewhat in Mr. Hobbes himself, I mean, in his former books, that contradicts what he sets forth in this, in that part in which he takes himself to be most exact, his beloved philosophy. And sure there is somewhat due to Aristotle and Tuily, and to our universities, to free them from his reproaches; and it is high time, if what I hear be true, that some tutors read his Leviathan, instead of the others, to their pupils. Mr. Hobbes is my old friend, yet I cannot absolve him from the mischiefs he hath done to the king, the church, the laws, and the nation; and surely there should be enough to be said to the politics of that man, who, having resolved all religion, wisdom, and honesty, into an implicit obedience to the laws established, writes a book of policy, which, I may be bold to say, must be, by the established laws of any kingdom or province in Europe, condemned for impious and seditious: and therefore it will be very hard if the fundamentals of it be not overthrown. But I must ask both yours and Mr. Wren’s pardon for enlarging so much, and antedating those animadversions he will make upon it.”

Besides the above works, Mr. Wren wrote a kind of historical essay “On the origin and progress of the revolutions in England,” printed in vol. I. of Mr. Gutch’s “Collectanea Curiosa,” 1731, from a transcript in the hand-writing of archbishop Bancroft.

, a learned and illustrious English architect and mathematician, was nephew to bishop Wren, and the son of Dr. Christopher Wren, who was fellow of St. John’s college, Oxford, afterwards chaplain to Charles I. and rector of Knoyle in Wiltshire; made dean of Windsor in 1635, and presented to the rectory of Hasely in Oxfordshire in 1638; and died at Blechindon, in the same county, 1658, at the house of Mr. William Holder, rector of that parish, who had married his daughter. He was a man well skilled in all the branches of the mathematics, and had a great hand in forming the genius of his only son Christopher.' In the state papers of Edward, earl of Clarendon, vol.1, p. 270, is an estimate of a building to be erected for her majesty by dean Wren. He did another important service to his country. After the chapel of St. George and the treasury belonging to it had been plundered by the republicans, he sedulously exerted himself in recovering as many of the records as could be procured, and was so successful as to redeem the three registers distinguished by the names of the Black, Blue, and lied, which were carefully preserved by him till his death. They were afterwards committed to the custody of his son, who, soon after the restoration, delivered them to Dr. Bruno Ryves, dean of Windsor.

His son Christopher, who is the subject of this article, was born at Knoyle Oct. 20, 1632 and, while very young, discovered a surprising turn for learning, especially for the mathematics. He was sent to Oxford, and admitted a gentleman-commoner at Wadham college, at about fourteen years of age: and the advancements he made there in mathematical knowledge, before he was sixteen, were, as we learn from Oughtred, very extraordinary, and even astonishing. His uncommon abilities excited the admiration of Dr. Wilkins, then warden of his college, and of Dr. Seth Ward, Savilian professor of astronomy, who then resided in Wadham. By Dr. Wilkins he was introduced to Charles, elector palatine, to whom he presented several mechanical instruments of his- own invention. In 16*7 he became acquainted with sir Charle* Scarborough, at whose request he undertook the translation of Oughtred’s geometrical dialling into Latin. He took a bachelor of arts degree in 1650; and in 1651 published a short algebraical tract relating to the Julian period. In 1652 betook his master’s degree, having been chosen fellow of All Souls’ college. Soon after, he became*one of that ingenious and learned society, who then met at Oxford for the improvement of natural and experimental philosophy.

Aug; 1657, he waschosen professor of astronomy in Gresham college; and his lectures, which were much frequented, tended greatly to the promotion of real knowledge. In his inaugural oration, among other things, he proposed several methods, by which to account for the shadows returning backward ten degrees on the dial of king Ahaz, by the laws of nature. One subject of his lectures was upon telescopes, to the improvement of which he had greatly contributed; another was on certain properties of the.air and the barometer. In 1658, he read a description of the body and different phases of the planet Saturn, which subject he proposed to pursue; and the same year communicated some demonstrations concerning cycloids to Dr. Wallis, which were afterwards published by the doctor at the end of his treatise upon that subject. About that time also, he solved the problem proposed by Pascal, under the feigned name of John de Montfort, to all the English mathematicians; and returned another to the mathematicians in France, formerly proposed by Kepler, and then solved likewise by himself, of which they never gave any solution. He did not continue long at Gresham college; for, Feb. 5, 1660-1, he was chosen Savilian professor of astronomy at Oxford, in the room of Dr. Seth Ward. He entered upon it in May; and in September was created doctor of civil law.

Among his other eminent accomplishments, he had gained so considerable a skill in architecture, that he was sent for the same year from Oxford, by order of Charles II. to assist sir John Denham, surveyor-general of his majesty’s works. In 1663, he was chosen 'fellow of the Royal Society; being one of those who were first appointed by the council after the grant of their charter. Not long after, it being expected that the king would make the society a visit, the lord Brounker, president, by a letter desired the advice of Dr. Wren, who was then at Oxford, concerning the experiments which might be most proper for his majesty’s entertainment: to whom the doctor recommended principally the Torricellian experiment, and the weatherneedle, as being not bare amusements, but useful, and likewise neat in the operation, and attended with little incumbrance. Dr. Wren did great honour to this illustrious body, by many curious and useful discoveries in astronomy, natural philosophy, and other sciences, related in the “History of the Royal Society” where the author Sprat, who was a member of it, has inserted them from the registers and other books of the society to 1665. Among other of his productions there enumerated is a lunar globe, representing not only the spots and various degrees of whiteness upon the surface, but the hills, eminences, and cavities; and not only so, but it is turned to the light, shewing all the lunar phases, with the various appearances that happen from the shadows of the mountains and valleys; The lunar globe was formed, not merely at the request of the Royal Society, but likewise by the command of Charles II. whose pleasure, for the prosecuting and perfecting of it was signified by a letter under the joint hands of sir Robert Moray and sir Paul Neile, dated from Whitehall, the 17th of May, 1661, and directed to Dr. Wren, Savilian professor at Oxford. His majesty received the globe with satisfaction, and ordered it to be placed among the curiosities of his cabinet. Another of these productions is a tract on the doctrine of motion that arises from the impact between two bodies, illustrated by experiments. And a third is, the history of the seasons, as to the temperature, weather, productions, diseases, &c. &c. For which purpose he contrived many curious machines, several of which kept their own registers, tracing out the lines of variations, so that a person might know what changes the weather had undergone in his absence: as wind-gages, thermometers, barometers, hygrometers, rain- gages, &c. &c. He made also great additions to the new discoveries on pendulums; and among other things shewed, that there may be produced a natural standard for measure from the pendulum for common use. He invented many ways to make astronomical observations more easy and accurate, He fitted and hung quadrants, sextants, and radii more commodiously than formerly: he made two telescopes to open with a joint like a sector, by which observers may infallibly take a distance to half minutes, &c. He made many sorts of retes, screws, and other devices, for improving telescopes to take small distances, and apparent diameters, to seconds. He made apertures for taking in more or less light, as the observer pleases, by opening and shutting, the better to fit glasses for crepusculine observations. He added much to the theory of dioptrics; much to the manufacture of grinding good glasses. He attempted, and not without success, the making of glasses of other forms than spherical. He exactly measured and delineated the spheres of the hamoura of the eye, the proportions of which to one another were only guessed at before: a discussion shewing the reasons why we see objects erect, and that reflection conduces as much to vision as refraction. He displayed a natural and easy theory of refractions, which exactly answered every experiment. He fully demonstrated all dioptrics in a few propositions, shewing not only, as in Kepler’s Dioptrics, the common properties of glasses, but the proportions by which the individual rays cut the axis, and each other, upon which the charges of the telescopes, or the proportion of the eye-glasses and apertures, are demonstrably discovered. He made constant observations on Saturn, and a true theory of that planet, before the printed discourse by Huygens, on that subject, appeared. He made maps of the Pleiades and other telescopic stars: and proposed methods to determine the great question as to the earth’s motion or rest, by the small stars about the pole to be seen in large telescopes. In navigation he made many improvements. He framed a magnetical terella, which he placed in the midst of a plane board with a hole, into which the terella is half immersed, till it be like a globe with the poles in the horizon the plane is then dusted over with steel filings from a sieve the dust, by the magnetical virtue, becomes immediately figured intofurrows that. bend like a sort of helix, proceeding as it were out at one pole, and returning in it by the other; the whole plane becoming figured like the circles of a planisphere. It being a question in his time among the problems of navigation, to what mechanical powers sailing against the wind was reducible; he shewed it to be a wedge: and he demonstrated, how a transient force upon an oblique plane would cause the motion of the plane against the first mover: and he made an instrument mechanically producing the same effect, and shewed the reason of sailing on all winds. The geometrical mechanism of rowing, he shewed to be a lever on a moving or cedent fulcrum: for this end, he made instruments and experiments, to find the resistance to motion in a liquid medium; with other things that are the necessary elements for laying down the geometry of sailing, swimming, rowing, flying, and constructing of ships. He invented a very speedy and curious way of etching. He started many things towards the emendation of waterworks. He likewise made some instruments for respiration, and for straining the breath from fuliginous vapours, to try whether the same breath, so purified, will serve again. He was the first inventor of drawing pictures by microscopical glasses. He found out perpetual, or at least long-lived lamps, for keeping a perpetual regular heat, in order to various uses, as hatching of eggs and insects, production of plants, chemical preparations, imitating nature in producing fossils anji minerals, keeping the motion of watches equal, for the longitude and astronomical uses. He was the first author of the anatomical experiment of injecting liquor into the veins of animals. By this operation, divers creatures were immediately purged, vomited, intoxicated, killed, or revived, according to the quality of the liquor injected. Hence arose many other new experiments, particularly that of transfusing blood, which has been prosecuted in sundry curious instances. Such is a short account of the principal discoveries which Dr. Wren presented, or suggested, to the Royal Society, or were improved by him. We now return to his progress as an architect.

In 1665, he went over to France, where he not onljr surveyed all the buildings of note in Paris, and made excursions to other places, but took particular notice of what was most remarkable in every branch of mechanics, and contracted acquaintance with all the considerable virtuosi*. Upon his return home, he was appointed architect and one of the commissioners for the reparation of St. Paul’s cathedral; as appears from Mr. Evelyn’s dedication to him of “The Account of Architects and Architecture,” 1706, folio, where we have the following account. “I have named St. Paul’s, and truly not without admiration, as oft as I recall to mind, as I frequently do, the sad and deplorable condition it was in; when, after it had been made a stable of horses, and a den of thieves, you, with other gentlemen and myself, were by the late king Charles named to survey the dilapidations, and to make report to his majesty, in order to a speedy reparation. You will not, as I am sure, forget the struggle we had with some who were for patching it up any how, so the steeple might stand, instead of new building; when, to put an end to the contest, five days after, that dreadful conflagration happened, out of whose ashes this phoenix is risen, and was by providence designed for you.” Within a few days after the fire, which began Sept. 2, 1666, he drew a plan for a new city, of which Oldenburg, the secretary of the Royal Society, gave an account to Mr. Boyle. “Dr. Wren,” says he, “has drawn a model for a new city, and presented it to the king, who produced it himself before his council, and manifested much approbation of it. I was yesterday morning with the doctor, and saw the model, which methiriks does so well provide for security, conveniency, and beauty, that I can see nothing wanting as to these three main articles: but whether it has consulted with the populousness of a great city, and whether reasons of state would, have that consulted with, is a qusere with me,” &c. The execution of this noble design was unhappily prevented by

St. Paul’s escaped, but Hampton court Walpole. the disputes which arose about private property, and the haste and hurry of rebuilding; though it is said that the practicability of Wren’s whole plan, without infringement of any property, was at that time demonstrated, and all material objections fully weighed and answered.

Upon the decease of sir John Denham, in March 1688, he succeeded him in the office of surveyor-general of his majesty’s works. The theatre at Oxford will be a lasting monument of his great abilities as an architect; which curious work was finished by him in 1669. As in this structure the admirable contrivance of the flat roof, being eighty feet over one way, and seventy the other, without any arched work or pillars to support it, is particularly remarkable, it has been both largely described, and likewise delineated, by the ingenious Dr. Plott, in his “Natural History of Oxfordshire.” But the conflagration of the city of London gave him many opportunities afterwards of employing his genius in that way; when, besides the works of the crown, which continued under his care, the cathedral of St. Paul, the parochial churches, and other public structures, which had been destroyed by that dreadful calamity, were rebuilt from his designs, and under his direction; in the management of which affair he was assisted in the measurements and laying out of private property by the ingenious Mr. Robert Hooke. The variety of business in which he was by this means engaged requiring his constant attendance and concern, he resigned his Savilian professorship at Oxford in 1673; and the year following he, received from the king the honour of knighthood. He was one of the commissioners who, at the motion of sir Jonas Moore, surveyor-general of the ordnance, had been appointed by his majesty to find a proper place for erecting a royal observatory; and he proposed Greenwich, which was approved of. On Aug. 10, 1675, the foundation of the building was laid; which, when finished under the direction of sir Jonas, with the advice and assistance of sir Christopher, was furnished with the best instruments for making astronomical observations; aud Mr. Flamsted was constituted his majesty’s first professor there.

About this time he married the daughter of sir Thomas Coghill, of Belchington, in Oxfordshire, by whom he had one son of his own name; and, she dying soon after, he married, a daughter of William lord Fitzwilliam, baron of Lifford in Ireland, by whom he had a son and a daughter In 1680, he was chosen president of the Royal Society; afterwards appointed architect and commissioner of Chelsea-college; and, in 1684, principal officer or comptroller of the works in the castle of Windsor. He sat twice in parliament, as a representative for two different boroughs; first, for Piympton in Devonshire in 1685, and again in 1700 for Melcomb-Regis in Dorsetshire. He was employed in erecting a great variety of churches and public edifices, when the country met with an indelible disgrace in a court intrigue, in consequence of which, in April 1718, his patent for royal works was superseded, when this venerable and illustrious man had reached his eighty- sixth year, after half a century spent in a continued, active, and laborious service to the crown and the public. Walpole has well said that “the length of his life enriched the reigns of several princes, and disgraced the last of them.” Until this time he lived in a house in Scotland-yard, adjoining to Whitehall; but, after his removal from that place in 1718, he dwelt occasionally in St. James’s-street, Westminster. He died Feb. 25, 1723, aged ninety -one, and was interred with great solemnity in St Paul’s cathedral, in the vault under the south wing of the choir, near the east end. Upon a flat stone, covering the single vault, which contains his body, is a plain English inscription and another inscription upon the side of a pillar, in these terms

As to his person, he was of low stature, and thin; but, by temperance and skilful management, for he was not unacquainted with anatomy and physic, he enjoyed a good state of health to a very unusual length of life. He was modest, devout, strictly virtuous, and very communicative of what he knew. Besides his peculiar eminence as an architect, his learning and knowledge were very extensive in all the arts and sciences, and especially in the mathematics. Mr. Hooke, who was intimately acquainted with him, and very able to make a just estimate of his abilities, has comprised his character in these few but comprehensive words: “I must affirm,” says he, “that since the time of Archimedes, there scarcely ever has met in one man, in so great a perfection, such a mechanical hand, and so philosophical a mind.” And a greater than Hooke, even the illustrious and immortal Newton, whose signet stamps an indelible character, speaks thus of him, with other eminent men: “D. Christophorus Wrennus, Eques Auratus, Johannes Wallisius, S. T. D. et D. Christianus Hugenius, hujus aetatis Geometrarum facile principes.” Mr. Evelyn, in the dedication referred to above, tells him, that “he inscribed his book with his name, partly through an ambition of publickly declaring the great esteem I have ever had,” says he, “of your virtues and accomplishments, not only in the art of building, but through all the learned cycle of the most useful knowledge and abstruser sciences, as well as of the most polite and shining; all which is so justly to be allowed you, that you need no panegyric, or other history, to eternize them, than the greatest city of the universe, which you have rebuilt and beautified, and are still improving: witness the churches, the royal courts, stately halls, magazines, palaces, and other public structures; besides that you have built of great and magnificent in both the universities, at Chelsea, and in the country; and are now advancing of the royal Marine-hospital at Greenwich: all of them so many trophies of your skill and industry, and conducted with that success, that, if the whole art of building were lost, it might be recovered and found again in St. Paul’s, the historical pillar, and those other monuments of your happy talent and extraordinary genius.”

St. Anne and Agnes. St. Lawrence Jewry.

St. Clemeut Danes. St. Mary Aldermanbury. of the city of London, royal palaces, hospitals, and public edifices, built by sir Christopher Wren, siirveyor-general of the royal works during fifty years, viz. from 1668 to 1718.

Among the many public buildings erected by him in the city of London, the church of St. Stephen in Waibroke, that of St. Mary-le-Bow, the Monument, and the cathedral of St. Paul, have more especially drawn the attention of foreign connoisseurs. “The church of Waibroke,” says the author of the ‘ Critical Review of the public buildings, &c. of London,’ “so little known among us, is famous all over Europe, and is justly reputed the master-piece of the celebrated sir Christopher Wren. Perhaps Italy itself can produce no modern building that can vie with this in taste or proportion. There is not a beauty which the plan would admit of, that is not to be found here In its greatest perfectjon; and foreigners very justly call our judgment in question, for understanding its graces no better, and allowing it. ho higher a degree of fame.” The steeple of St. Mary-le-Bow, which is particularly grand and beautiful, stands upon an old Roman causey, that lies eighteen feet below the level of the present street; and the body of the church on the walls of a Roman temple. The Monument is a pillar of the Doric order, the pedestal of which is forty feet high and twentyone square, the diameter of the column fifteen feet, and the altitude of the whole 202; which is a fourth part higher than that of the emperor Trajan at Rome. It was begun in 167 1, and finished in 1677. But St. Paul’s will probably be considered as the greatest monument of sir Christopher’s genius. He died, says Waipole, at the age of ninety-one, having lived to see the completion of St. Paul’s; a fabric and an event, which one

Sir Christopher Wren never printed any thing himself; but several of his works have been published by others: some in the “Philosophical Transactions,” and some by Dr. Wallis and other friends; while some are still remaining in manuscript, and several volumes of his designs are in the library of All Souls college. The title of one of them is, “Delineationes novae fabricae templi Paulinijuxta tertiam propositionem et ex sententia regis Caroli II. sub private sigillo expresses 14 Maii, ann. 1678.” By this it appears that he floated very much in his designs for St. Paul’s. One of them is very much like that of San Gallo for St. Peter’s at Rome. In another, the dome is crowned with a pine-apple, and it is curious to observe how every design for the present beautiful dome excels the other. The favourite design, however, of the great architect himself was not taken.

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

, a learned and loyal divine of the seventeenth century, was the son of Richard Wright, citizen and silk-dyer of London, who was the son of Jeffrey Wright, of Loughborough, in Leicestershire. He was born in Black- Swan alley, Thames-street, in the parish of St. James’s, Garlick Hythe, London, Dec. 23, 1611, and educated partly at Mercers’- chapel school, but principally at Merchant Taylors, whence he was elected scholar of St. JobnVcollege, Oxford, in 1629, by the interest of Dr. Juxon, then president, w/ho became his patron. He was much admired at this time for a natural eloquence, and a love of polite literature. In 1632 he was elected fellow, and while bachelor of arts, made a collection of modern Latin poetry, which he published afterwards under the title of “Delitiae delitiarum, siveepigrammatum ex optimis quibusque hujus novissimi seculi Poetis in amplissima ilia Bibl. Bodleiana, et pene omnino alibi extantibus artthologia in unum corollum connexa,” Ox. 1637, 12mo. In 1636, when archbishop Laud entertained the royal family at St. JohnVcollege, Mr. Wright was selected to make an English address, and afterwards distinguished himself as a performer in a comedy called “Love’s Hospital,” which was acted before their majesties in the hall, by a company of St. John’s men.

In Sept. 1637, and 1639, betook deacon’s and priest’s orders, and was so much admired as an eloquent preacher as to be frequently called upon to preach at St. Mary’s, St. Paul’s, London, &c, In 1645 he became vicar of Okeham in Rutlandshire, by the interest of his patron Jnxon, now bishop of London, and received institution, but refused induction, because in that case he must have taken the covenant, which was altogether repugnant to his principles, and therefore a nonconformist was placed in his living, one Benjamin King. Mr. Wright then went to London, and lived retired till after the death of the king, when he was hospitably received into the family of sir George Grime or Graham at Peckham, and while here he instructed sir George’s sons in Latin and Greek, and read the Commonprayer on all Sundays and holidays, and preached and administered the sacrament. About 1655 he returned to London, on being chosen by the parishioners of St. Olave, Silver-street, to be their minister. In this office he remained for four years, and was in fact rector, but would not take possession on account of the republican oaths and obligations necessary. He performed all his duties, however, according to the forms of the Church of England, although at some risk. On the restoration Benjamin King, who had been put into his living at Okeham, resigned, by his hand and seal, all title to it, and Mr. Wright took possession and retained it to his dying day, refusing some other preferments. He lived here to a very advanced age, and died May 9, 1690, and was buried in Okeham church. Besides the “Delitiae paetarum” already mentioned, he published 1. “Five Sermons in five several stiles or ways of preaching,” Lond. 1656, 8vo. The object of this curious collection is to exhibit the advantages of education in fitting for the ministry, as well as the different styles of some eminent men of that period, viz. bishop Andrews, bishop Hall, Dr. Mayne, and Mr. Cartwright. Dr. Birch is mistaken in calling this an imitation of different stjles; it is a selection from the works of the respective authors, 2. “A practical commentary, or exposition on the hook of Psalms,” Lond. 1661, fol. 3. “Practical Commentary on the Pentateuch,” ibid. fol. 4. “Parnassus biceps, or several choice pieces of poetry, composed by the best wits that were in both the universities before their dissolution,” ibid. 1656, 8vo. He wrote some other works which have not been printed.

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

Wright, who was born about 1644, was probably educated at Merchant Taylors’ school, but was not of either university. In 1666 be became a student of New Inn, and in three years removed to the Middle Temple, and was at length called to the bar. He died about 1715.

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

Mr. Wright first dicovered the true way of dividing the meridian line, according to which the Mercator’s charts are constructed, and upon which Mercator’s sailing is founded. An account of this he sent from Caius college, Cambridge, where he was then a fellow, to his friend Mr. Blondeviile, containing a short tahle for that purpose, with a specimen of a chart so divided, together with the manner of dividing it. Ail which Blondeviile published in 1594, among his “.Exercises.” And, in 1597, the rev. Mr. William Barlowe, in his “Navigator’s Supply,” gave a demonstration of this division as communicated by a. friend.

At length, in 1599, Mr. Wright himself printed his celebrated treatise entitled “The Correction of certain Errors in Navigation,” which had been written many years before; where he shews the reason of this division of the meridian, the manner of constructing his table, and its uses in navigation, with other improvements. In 1610 a second edition of Mr. Wright’s book was published, and dedicated to his royal pupil* prince Henry; in which the author inserted farther improvements; particularly he proposed an excellent way of determining the magnitude of the earth; at the same time recommending, very judiciously, the making our common measures in some certain proportion to that of a degree on its surface, that they might not depend on the uncertain length of a barley corn. Some of his other improvements were the table of latitudes for dividing the meridian, computed as far as to minutes: an instrument, he calls the sea-rings, by which the variation of the compass, the altitude of the sun, and the time of the day, may be readily determined at once in any place, provided the latitude be known; the correcting of the errors arising from the eccentricity of the eye in observing by the cross-staff; a total amendment in the tables of the declinations and places of the sun and stars, from his own observations, made with a six-foot quadrant, in 1594, 95, 96, 97; a sea-quadrant, to take altitudes by a forward or backward observation; having also a contrivance for the ready finding the latitude by the height of the polar-star, when not upon the meridian. And that this book might be the better understood by beginners, to this edition is subjoined a translation of Zamorano’s Compendium; and added a large table of the variation of the compass as observed in very different parts of the world, to shew it is not occasioned by any magrietical pole. The work has gone through several other editions since. And, beside the books above mentioned, he wrote another on navigation, entitled “^he Haven-finding Art.” Some accounts of him say also, that it was in 1589 that he first began to attend the earl of Cumberland in his voyages. It is also said that he made for his pupil, prince Henry, a large sphere with curious movements, which, by the help of springwork, not only represented the motions of the whole celestial sphere, but shewed likewise the particular systems of the sun and moon, and their circular motions, together with their places and possibilities of eclipsing each other: there is in it a work for a motion of 17,100 years, if it should not be stopped, or the materials fail. This sphere, though thus made at a great expence of money and ingenious industry, was afterwards in the time of the civil wars cast aside, among dust and rubbish, where it was found in 1646, by sir Jonas Moore, wh.o at his own expence restored it to its first state of perfection, and deposited it at his own house in the Tower, among his other mathematical instruments and curiosities.

, commonly called Wright of Derby, a very distinguished painter, was born at Derby, September 3, 1734. His father was an attorney there. In early life, he gave indications of a taste for mechanics, and those habits of attentive observation, which generally lead to perfection in the fine arts. In 1751, he came to London, and was placed with Hudson, the most eminent portraitpainter of the day, and who, lord Orford tells us, pleased the country gentlemen with “his honest similitudes, fair tied wigs, blue velvet coats, and white sat tin waistcoats, which he bestowed liberally on his customers.” Wright used to lament that he could not receive much instruction from this master, but it is certain he at this time painted both portraits and historical pieces in a very capital style, of which his “Blacksmith’s forge,” “Air-pump, &c.” are proofs. In 1773, after marrying, he visited Italy, and made great advances in his profession. In 1775, he returned to England, and settled for two years at Bath, after which his residence was entirely at Derby.

His attention was directed for some years to portrait painting; and from the specimens he has left, there can be no dbubt that he would have stood in the first rank in this branch of the art, had he chosen to pursue it; but his genius was not to be circumscribed within such narrow limits, and therefore, at a mature age, he visited Italy* to study the precious remains of art which that country possessed. His fine drawings, after Michael Angelo (which have scarcely been seen except by his particular friends), and the enthusiasm with which he always spoke of the sublime original, evinced the estimation in which he held them; and from their extreme accuracy, they may be considered as faithful delineations of the treasures of the Capella Sestina. In 1782 he was elected an associate of the Royal Academy; but offended at Mr. Garvey’s being chosen royal academician before himself, he resigned his associate’s diploma in disgust, yet continued to exhibit at intervals with that society. In 1785 he made an exhibition of his own pictures at the auction room, now Robins’s, in the Great Piazza, Covent Garden. The collection consisted of twenty four pictures.

During his abode in Italy he had an opportunity of seeing a very memorable eruption of Vesuvius, which fe^­kindled his inclination for painting extraordinary effects of light; and his different pictures of this sublime event stood decidedly chef d* ceuvres in that line of painting; for who but Wright ever succeeded in fire or moonlights? His later pictures were chiefly landscapes, in which we are at a loss, whether most to admire the elegance of his outline, his judicious management of light and shade, or the truth and delicacy of his colouring; but of those, the greatest part have never been exhibited, as they were always purchased from the easel by amateurs who knew how to appreciate their value: a large landscape (his last work) now at Derby, being a view of the head of Ullswater, may be considered amongst the finest of his works, and deservedly ranks with the most valued productions of Wilson, or even Claude himself.

In the historical line, the Dead Soldier, which is now known by Heath’s admirable print, would alone establish his -fame, if his Edwin (in the possession of J. Milnes, esq. of Wakefield, who has also his Destruction of the Floating Batteries off Gibraltar, and some of his best landscapes), the two pictures of Hero and Leander, Lady in Comus, Indian Widow, and other historical subjects, had not already ascertained his excellence. His attachment to his native town, added to his natural modesty, and his severe application both to the theory and practice of painting, prevented his mixing with promiscuous society, or establishing his reputation by arts which he would never descend to practise. His friends long urged him to reside in London; but his family attachments, and love of retirement and study were invincible, and he fell a victim to his unwearied attention to his profession. He died of a decline, Aug. 29, 1797;

His pictures have been so much in request, that there is scarcely an instance of their ever having come into the hands of dealers; neither have his best works ever been seen in London; a strong proof of their intrinsic worth, and that no artifices were necessary to ensure their sale. It is with pleasure therefore that we record, that his pecuniary circumstances were always affluent, and shew that the world has not been unmindful of his extraordinary talents, and also that, as a man, he enjoyed the friendship and esteem of all who had the pleasure of his acquaintance.

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

, an eminent dissenting clergyman, was born Jan. 30, 1682-3, being eldest son of Mr. James Wright, a nonconformist minister at Retford, in the county of Nottingham, by Mrs. Eleanor Cotton, daughter of Mr Cotton, a gentleman of Yorkshire, and sister to the rev. Mr. Thomas Cotton of Westminster, whose funeral-sermon his nephew preached and published. At eleven years old he lost his father, being then at school at Attercliffe, in Yorkshire, whence he removed to Darton, in the same county, under the care of his grandmother, and his uncle Cotton. At sixteen he studied under the care of the rev. Mr. Jollie, at Attercliffe, whom about the age of twentyone he quitted, and went to his uncle’s house at the Haigh, >!vhere he officiated as his chaplain and after his death he came to London, having preached only three or four sermons in the country. He lived a little while in his uncle’s family at St. Giles’s, and thence went to be chaplain to Jady Susannah Lort, at Turnham-green, and was chosen 10 preach the Sunday evening-lecture at Mr. Cotton’s, at St. Giles’s. Being soon after invited to assist Dr. Grosvenor at Crosby-square meeting, he quitted lady Lort and St. Giles’s, and was soon after chosen to carry on the evening-lecture in Southwark, in conjunction with the rev. Mr. Haman Hood, who soon quitting it, it devolved on Mr. Wright, then only twenty-three. On the death of Mr. Matthew Sylvester, 1708, he was chosen pastor of the congregation at Blackfriars, which increased considerably Under his care, and where he continued many years, till he removed to Carter- lane, which meeting-house was built for him, and opened by him Dec. 5, 1734, with a sermon on 2 Chron. vi. 40. His sermons, printed singly, amount to near forty. But his most considerable work was iris? “Treatise on the New Birth, or, the being born again, without which it is impossible to enter into the kingdom of God,” which had gone through fifteen editions before his death. Dr. Wright is traditionally understood to have been the author of the song, “Happy Hours, all Hours excelling.” He was remarkable for the melody of his voice and the beauty of his elocution. Archbishop Herring, when a young man, frequently attended him as a model of delivery, not openly in the meeting house, but in a large porch belonging to the old place in Blackfriars. He married, in 1710, the widow of his predecessor, Mr. Sylvester, daughter of the rev. Mr. Obadiah Hughes, minister of the dissenting congregation at Enfield, aunt to the late Dr. Obadiah Hughes, by whom he had one son, since dead, a tradesman in the city, and one daughter, married to a citizen in Newgate-street, a most accomplished woman, but who became the victim of her own imprudence. He died April 3, 1746, at Newington-green, which was his residence. His funeral -sermon was preached at Carter-lane meeting by Dr. Milner and another at the same place, by Dr. Obadiah Hughes, who wrote his epitaph.

, an eminent modern architect, was born at Burton, in the county of Stafford, about 1743, of a respectable family, which is now become perfectly patriarchal in its numerous and extensive branches. His education, till the age of fourteen, was such as a country town afforded, but having at that period, exhibited a fondness for architectural design, though in humble and rude atlempts, his friends had the happiness to succeed in introducing him into the suite of lord Bagot, then about to depart for Rome as the ambassador of Great Britain at the Ecclesiastical States. That genius which first budded spontaneously in its own obscure, native territory, could hardly fail to shoot forth in strength and beauty when transplanted to the classic and congenial soil of Italy. Amid the architectural glories of the West, the fallen temples of the World’s fallen mistress, our young student stored up that transcendant knowledge of the rules of his profession, and that exquisite taste for the developement of those rules, which, in after-years, placed him without a professional rival in his own country. Brilliant, quick, and intuitive, a2 was his genius, he was never remiss in investigating and making himself master of the details and practical causes by which the great effective results of architecture are produced. He has been heard frequently to state that he measured with his own hand every part of the dome of St. Peter’s, and this too at the imminent danger of his life, being under the necessity of lying on his back on a ladder slung horizontally, without cradle or side-rail, over a frightful void of 300 feet. From Rome he departed for Venice, where he remained above two years a pupil of the celebrated Viscentini, an architect and painter. Under this master he acquired a very unusual perfection in architectural painting; and he has executed a few, and but a few, paintings in that line, which equal any by Panini. At the unripe age of twenty, when few young men have even commenced their pupilage to a profession of so much science and taste, Mr. Wyatt arrived in London with a taste formed by the finest models of ancient Rome, and the instruction of the best living masters in Italy. To him then nothing was wanting but an opportunity to call forth his powers into action, nor was that long withheld. He was employed to build the Pantheon in Oxford-street, a specimen of architecture which attracted the attention and commanded the admiration of all persons of taste in Europe, by its grandeur of symmetry, and its lavish but tasteful richness of decoration. Never, perhaps, was so high a reputation in the arts obtained by a first effort. Applications now poured in upon Mr. Wyatt, not only from all parts of England, Ireland, and Scotland, but also from the Continent. The empress of Russia, that investigator and patron of talent in all departments, desirous to possess the architect of the Pantheon, and to exercise his genius in a projected palace, offered him (through her ambassador at London) a carte blanche, as to remuneration, if he would settle at St. Petersburg; but he was recommended by his friends to decline the offer of the munificent Catherine. From this period it may well be supposed that he ranked foremost in his profession, and executed most of the important and costly works of architecture which were undertaken. On the death of sir William Chambers he received the most flattering and substantial proof of the king’s great estimation, by being appointed surveyor-general to the Board of Works, which was followed by appointments to almost all the important offices connected with his profession in the government departments; and a dispute having arisen in the Royal Academy, which induced Mr. West to relinquish the president’s chair, Mr. Wyatt was elected, and reluctantly obeyed his majesty’s command to accept the vacant office, which he restored to Mr. West the ensuing year. From the building of the Pantheon to the period of his death, this classical architect erected or embellished some of the most considerable mansions, palaces, and other buildings, in the United Kingdom; among which are, the palace at Kew, Fonthili abbey, Hanworth church, House of Lords, Henry the Seventh’s chapel, Windsor castle, Buistrode, Doddington hall, Cashiobury, Ashridge hall, &c. &c. The writer of his life says, that although Mr. Wyatt was educated a Roman architect, and made his grand and successful debut in England in that character, yet his genius was not to be bounded in a single sphere, and it afterwards revived in this country the long- forgotten beauties of Gothic architecture. It is, however, a more general opinion that Mr. Wyatt was far from successful either in his original attempts, or in his restorations of the pure Gothic.

A man who walked foremost in the ranks of a lucrative profession (in a country filled with a rich and liberal aristocracy) for near 48 years, a considerable portion of which he was honoured with the royal favour, might naturally be supposed to have amassed a fortune almost princely; but, Mr. Wyatt bequeathed to his family little more than a name universally beloved and regretted, and a reputation which will live as long as the liberal arts continue to embellish and ennoble human life. To account for this, says his biographer, it is only necessary to observe, that, if to superior and all-powerful genius were added conduct and prudence equivalent, every individual so gifted would become a Napoleon or a Wellington the destroyer or the saviour of nations: but infinite wisdom having ordained that such instances should be most rare, and that the mass of mankind should live in a great degree equalized in power, we commonly find that genius and great parts are paralyzed by an inattention to the minor considerations and details of calculating prudence, while a slow and dull intellect is often compensated by industry and worldly caution. Mr. Wyatt' s genius achieved for him greatness at an early age, without the humbler aids last alluded to, and those discreet handmaids to wealth and permanent prosperity were never afterwards found in his train. He died Sept. 5, 1813, aged about seventy. He was proceeding to London with Mr. Codrington, in that gentleman’s carriage, when it was overturned near Marlborongh. The suddenness and violence of this accident was fatal to Mr. Wyatt: it is supposed to have produced a concussion of the brain. His death was instantaneous. The suavity of manners, the kind and obliging disposition, and the intelligent mind of Mr. Wyatt, attracted and retained the notice and friendship of some of the most v illustrious persons in. this kingdom; among whom are to be ranked the sovereign, and almost every branch of the royal family. No one, indeed, ever obtained more friends, or created fewer enemies. Mr. Wyatt left a widow and four sons, the eldest of whc-m, Mr. Benjamin Dean Wyatt, already has attained great fame in the profession of architecture.

, a statesman and poet, the only son and heir of sir Henry Wyat of Allington-castle, in Kent, was born in 1503. His mother was the daughter of John Skinner, of the county of Surrey. His father was imprisoned in the Tower in the reign of Richard III. when he is said to have been preserved by a cat which fed him while in that place, for which reason he was always pictured with acat in hisarms, or beside him. On the accession of Henry VIL be had great marks of favour shewn him, among which w0,s the honour of knighthood, and a seat in the privy-council. One of the last services in which he was employed by that king, was conducting to the Tower the unfortunate earl of Suffolk, who was afterwards beheaded by Henry VIII. He was also a member of Henry VIII.'s privy-council, master of the jewel-office, and of the vanguard of the army, commanded by the king in person, which fought the memorable battle of the Spurs. He died in 1533.

The honours of educating sir Thomas has been claimed for both universities; by Carter for St. John’s college, Cambridge, and by Anthony Wood for Oxford, because he resided for sometime on the establishment of cardinal Wolsey’s new college, now Christ-church. He then set out on his travels according to the custom of that age, and returned after some years, a gentleman of high accomplishments and elegant manners, and of such conversation talents both as to sense and wit as to have attracted the admiration of all ranks, and particularly of his sovereign, who bestowed on him the order of knighthood, and employed him in various embassies. Mr. Warton appears offended with Wood for saying that “the king was in a high manner delighted with his witty jests,” while he allows that Henry was probably as much pleased with his repartees as his politics. Lloyd, whom Mr. Gray and lord Orford have adopted as an authority, reports enough of his wit, to convince us that he might delight a monarch of Henry’s fickleness and passionate temper. Persons of this character are often more easily directed or diverted by a striking expression, than by a train of argument.

According to Lloyd, he was frequently honoured with the king’s familiar conversation, which never put Wyat so much off his guard as to betray him into any fooleries inconsistent with his character. When urged by the king to dance at one of the court-balls, he replied that, “He who thought himself a wise man in the day-time, would not be a fool at night.” His general deportment is said to have been neither too severe for Henry VIII.‘s time, nor too loose for Henry VII.’s, with whose court, however, he could have little acquaintance. In him also was said to have been combined the wit of sir Thomas More, and the wisdom of sir Thomas Cromwell. It is no small confirmation of this character that his friend Surrey describes him as of “a visage stern and mild,” a contrariety which seems to be very happily preserved in Holbein’s incomparable drawing lately published by Mr. Chamberlain.

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

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

Sir Thomas was a man whose acquaintance was much Courted, for his splendid entertainments, his knowledge of the political relations of the kingdom, his discernment in discovering men of parts, and his readiness to encourage them; and for the interest he was known to possess at court. ID became a proverb, when any person received preferment, that “he had been in sir Thomas Wyat’s closet.” To this may be added, thai his conversation had that happy mixture of the grave and gay which excludes dullness as well as levity, and his manners were so highly polished that he differed in opinion with the utmost civility, and expressed his doubts as if he needed the information which he was able to impart.

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

so, he was well served, and he would he were so." Sir Thomas acknowledged the possibility of his having uttered the first part of this sentence, and explained his meaning, viz. that between the emperor and the king of France, his master Henry would probably be left in the lurch.

He was tried for this by a jury before a committee of the council, and probably acquitted, as we find that he regained the confidence of the king, aild was afterwards sent ambassador to the emperor. His eagerness to execute this con>­mission, whatever it was, proved fatal, for riding post in the heat of summer, he was attacked by a malignant fever, of which he died at Shirebourne in Dorsetshire, 1541, in the thirty-eighth year of his age, and was buried in the great conventual church there.

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

Sir Thomas’s biographers are in general silent on the subject of his connection with lord Surrey. It is known, however, that they were closely allied by friendship, and similarity of taste and studies. Surrey’s character of Wyat is a noble tribute to his memory. The year following his death, Leland published a volume of elegiac verses, some of which are very elegant, and all highly encomiastic, entitled “Naenise in mortem ThomaB Viati, Equitis incomparabilis, Joanne Lelando Antiquario, Auctore,” 4to. This scarce pamphlet has a woodcut of Wyat, supposed to be by Holbein, but represents him as a much older man than he was, and with a huge bushy beard hiding more than half his features. The copy in the British Museum is dated 1552.

His poems were first published by Tottel, along wit^h Surrey’s and the collection by uncertain authors. The authenticity of Surrey’s and Wyat’s poems seems to be confirmed by this care of Tottel to distinguish what he knew from what he did not know, and what, from the ignorance of an editor of so riiuch taste, we apprehend were not generally known. Mr, Warton has favoured us with a very elaborate and elegant criticism on Wyat, but has found it impossible to revive his poetical fame. He contributed but little to the refinement of English poetry, and his versification and language are deficient in harmony and pei> spicuity. From a close study of the Italian poets, his imagination dwells too often on puerile conceits and contrarieties, which, however, to some are so pleasing that they are not to this day totally excluded from our poetry. As a lover, his addresses are stately, and pedantic, with very little mixture of feeling or passion, and although detached beauties may be pointed out in a few of his sonnets, his genius was ill adapted to that species of poetry. In all respects he is inferior to his friend Surrey, and claims a place in the English series chiefly as being the first moral satirist, and as having represented the vices and follies of his time in the true spirit of the didactic muse.

Lord Surrey, we have seen, praises his version of David’s Psalms, a work about the existence of which bibliographers are not agreed. No copy is known to be extant, nor is it noticed in any history of the English press, nor in any library printed or manuscript. In 1549, were published “Certayne Psalms,” a transcript of which appeared in the last edition of the “English poets,” without, perhaps, adding much to the author’s reputation. Mr. Warton observes that the pious Thomas Sternhold and John Hopkins are the only immortal translators of David’s Psalms. But indifferent as they are now thought, there is nothing to be found of a superior kind before their time. In the library of Bene't college, Cambridge, is a manuscript translation of the Psalms into Scotch metre of the fourteenth century.

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

Upon the publication of his first play, he became acquainted with several of the wits, both of the court and town; and likewise with the duchess of Cleveland, by whom, according to Mr. Dennis, and the secret history of those times, he was admitted to the last degree of intimacy. Villiers duke of Buckingham 4iad also the highest esteem for him; and, as master of the horse to the king, made him one of his equerries; and, as colonel of a regiment, captain- lieutenant of his own company, resigning to him, at the same time his own pay as captain, with many other advantages. King Charles likewise shewed him signal marks of favour; and once gave him a proof of esteem which perhaps, never any sovereign prince before had given to an author who was only a private gentleman. Wycherley happened to fall sick of a fever at his lodgings in Bowstreet, Covent*Garden, when the king did him the honour to visit him; and, finding his body extremely weakened, and his spirits miserably shattered, and his memory almost totally gone, he commanded him, as soon as he should be able to take a journey, to go to the south of France, believing that the air of Montpelier would contribute to restore him as much as any thing; and assured him, at the same time, that he would order him 500l. to defray the charges of the journey. Wycherley accordingly went into France, and, having spent the winter there, returned to England in the spring, entirely restored to his former vigour both of body and mind. The king, it is said, shortly after his arrival told him, that “he had a son, who he had resolved should be educated like the son of a king; and that he could not chuse a more proper man for his governor than Mr. Wycherley;” for which service 1500l. per annum should be settled upon him. But there seems no solid foundation for this report.

Wycherley, however, soon lost the favour of the king and of the courtiers. Dennis relates, that, immediately after he had received the preceding offer from the king, he went down to Tunbridge, to take either the benefit of the waters, or the diversions of the place when, walking one day upon the Wells- walk with his friend Mr. Fairbard, of Gray’s-Inn, just as he came up to the bookseller’s the countess of Drogheda, a young widow, rich, noble, and beautiful, came to the bookseller, and inquired for “The Plain Dealer.” “Madam,” says Mr. Fairbeard, “since you are for `The Plain Dealer,' there he is for you,” pushing Wycherley towards her. “Yes,” says Wycherley, “this lady can bear plain dealing; for she appears to be so accomplished, that what would be compliment said to others, spoken to her would be plain dealing.” “No truly, sir,” said the countess, “I am not without my faults, any more than the rest of my sex and yet I love plain dealing, and am never more fond of it than when it tells me of them.” “Then, madam,” says Mr. Fairbeard, “you and the Plain Dealer seem designed by heaven for each other.” In short, Wycherley walked with the countess upon the walks, waited upon her home, visited her daily at her lodgings while she was at Tunbridge, and at her lodgings in Hatton-garden, after she went to London; where, in a little time, he got her consent to marry her, which he did without acquainting the king.

But this match, so promising in appearance both to his fortunes and to his happiness, was the actual ruin of both. As soon as the news of it came to court, it was looked upon as an affront to the king, and a contempt of his majesty’s orders; and Wycherley’s conduct after marriage occasioned this to be resented more heinously; for he seldom or never went near the fiourt, which made him be thought ungrateful. But the true cause of his absence was not known: in short, the lady was jealous of him to distraction; jealous to that degree, that she could not endure him to be one moment out of her sight. Their lodgings were in Bowstreet, Covent-garden, over against a tavern, whither if he at any time went with friends, he was obliged to leave the windows open, that his lady might see there was no woman in company; or she would immediately put on the airs of a frantic woman. At last she died, and settled her fortune on him; but his title being disputed after her death, the expence of the law and other incumbrances so far reduced him, that, not being able to satisfy the importunity of his creditors, he was thrown into prison.

In this confinement he languished seven years; nor was he released till James II. going to see his “Plain Dealer,” was so charmed with the entertainment, that he gave immediate orders for the payment of his debts; adding a pension of 200l. per annual while he continued in England. But the bountiful intentions of that prince had not the designed effect, purely through his modesty; he being ashamed to give the earl of Mulgrave, whom the king had sent to demand it, a full account of his debts. He laboured under the weight of these difficulties till his father died; and then, too, the estate that descended to him was left under very uneasy limitations, since, being only a tenant for life, he could not raise any money for the payment of his debts. However, he took a method of doing it that was in his power, though few suspected it to be his choice, and this was, making a jointure. He had often declared, as major Pack says, that “he was resolved to die married, though he could not bear the thoughts of living married again;” and accordingly, just at the eve of his death, married a young gentlewoman of 1500l. fortune, part of which he applied to the uses he wanted it for. Eleven days after the celebration of these nuptials, Jan. 1, 1715, he died, and was interred in the vault of Covent-garden church. He is said to have requested very gravely of his wife upon his death-bed, that she “would not take an old man for her second husband.”

Besides the plays abovementioned, he published a volume of poems in 1704, folio, of very inferior merit; and in 1728, his “Posthumous Works in prose and verse” were published by Theobald, in octavo. His curious correspondence with Pope may be seen in that poet’s works, with many anecdotes of Wycherley, who appears to have been a libertine through the whole course of his life; nor are his works free from the licentiousness, so much encouraged when he was the favourite of Charles and James II.

, a very accomplished nobleman of the fifteenth century, was the son of sir Richard Wydeville, by Jaqueline of Luxembourg, duchess dowager of Bedford. He was born about 1442, and in his seventeenth year accompanied his father, who was now created lord Rivers, to Sandwich, where he had been sent to equip a strong squadron, in order to deprive Richard Nevil earl of Warwick, of his government of Calais but that nobleman contrived to surprize lord Rivers in port, and took him and all his ships, together with his son Anthony, to Calais, where they were for some time detained as prisoners. From this it appears that both father and son were engaged in the interest of the house of Lancaster, and in opposition to that of York. But king Edward IV. being raised to the throne, and afterwards espousing lady Elizabeth Gray, daughter to lord Rivers, and sister to Anthony Wycleville, the former attachment of the Wydeville’s to the Lancastrian interest was forgotten, and they began almost solely to engross the favour of king Edward.

Anthony Wydeville distinguished himself both as a warrior and statesman in king Edward’s service. The Lancastrians making an insurrection in Northumberland, he attended the king into that country, and was a chief commander at the siege of Atnwick castle; soon after which he was elected into the order of the garter. In the tenth of the same reign, he defeated the dukes of Clarence and Warwick in a skirmish near Southampton, and prevented their seizing a great ship called the Trinity, belonging to the latter. He attended the king into Holland on the change of the scene, returned with him, and had a great share in his victories, and was constituted governor of Calais, and captain-general of all the king’s forces by sea and land. He had before been sent ambassador to negociate a marriage between the king’s sister and the duke of Burgundy; and in the same character concluded a treaty between king Edward and the duke of Bretagne. On prince Edward being created prince of Wales, he was appointed his governor, and had a grant of the office of chief butler of England; and was even on the point of attaining the high honour of espousing the Scottish princess, sister to king James III.; the bishop of Rochester, lord privy-seal, and sir Edward Wydeville, being dispatched into Scotland to perfect that marriage.

A remarkable event of this earl’s life was a personal victory he gained in a tournament, over Anthony count de la Roche, called the bastard of Burgundy, natural son of duke Philip the Good. This illustrious encounter was performed -in a solemn and most magnificent tilt held for that purpose in Smithfield. Our earl was the challenger; and from the date of the year, and the affinity of the person challenged, this ceremony was probably in honour of the afore-mentioned marriage of the lady Margaret, the king’s sister, with Charles the Hardy, last duke of Burgundy. Nothing, lord Orford observes (whose narrative we follow), could be better adapted to the humour of the age, and to the union of that hero and virago, than a single combat between two of their near relations. A long account of this affair is given in a note in the Biog. Brit. art. Caxton, vol. III. new edit. It may be sufficient for our purpose to say that Wydeville was victorious.

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

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

The works of this gallant and learned nobleman were (with the exception of a ballad in Percy’s collection) translations, published in the infancy of English printing by Caxton: 1 “The Dictes and Sayinges of the Philosophers, translated out of Latyn into Frenshe by a worshipful man called Messire Jehan de Teonville, sometyme provost of Parys,” and thence rendered into English by lord Rivers. It is supposed to have been the second book ever printed in England by Caxton. The date is Nov. 18, 1477. 2. “The morale Proverbes of Christyne of Pyse.” 3. “The boke named Cordyale or Memorare novissima,” a third translation from the French, the original author not named, dated 1480. Caxton says that lord Rivers “made divers babdesayenst the seven dedely synnes.” All these curiosities will be found amply described in Mr. Dibdin’s “Typographical Antiquities.” Hume says that earl Rivers “first introduced the noble art of printing into England,” but this is evidently a mistake. He did indeed countenance and employ Caxton, and appears to have introduced him to Edward IV.; and both he and Tiptoft, earl of Worcester (See Tiptoft), contributed very much, by their example and patronage, to the restoration of learning in this kingdom. From various causes, however, England was long behind other nations on the continent in real learning, or a wish for it; and we have no great pleasure or pride in contemplating the productions of our first printers.

, the illustrious founder of New college, Oxford, was born at Wykeham in Hampshire in 1324. Whether Wykeham was his family name, seems doubtful. He mentions his father and mother only by their Christian names, John and Sybil), or Sybilla. Some of his biographers are inclined to think that his father’s name was Long, and others Perrot, but there is no direct evidence for either, and we know by many other instances that nothing was more uncertain at the period of his birth than the state of family names.

His parent’s were of good reputation and character, but in mean circumstances when he was born; yet from the number of his contemporary relations, whose names and situations are upon record, it is probable that the family was not of mean extraction. Of their poverty there is less reason to doubt the report, as they could not afford to give their son a liberal education. He soon, however, found a patron, supposed to be Nicholas Uvedale, lord of the manor of Wykeham, and governor of Winchester castle, who must have discovered some talents worth improving, since he maintained him at Winchester school, where he was instructed in grammatical learning, and where he gave early proofs of piety and diligence, employing his leisure hours in acquiring a knowledge of arithmetic, mathematics, logic, divinity, and the canon and civil law. He was afterwards employed by his patron, in quality of secretary, and either by him, or by Edyngdon, bishop of Winchester, or by both) was recommended to the notice of Edward III.

This circumstance, however honourable to his talents, appears to have limited the progress of what was then deemed education, and disposed him to a life of business rather than of study, but can never be advanced to justify the opinion that he was deficient in useful learning. He certainly did not study at Oxford, and escaped the contests prevailing between the disciples of Occham and of Duns Scotus, which seem to have formed the only learning then in vogue; but that one who dignified every office civil and ecclesiastical with the wisdom, talents, and popularity of Wykeham, should have been illiterate, is an absurdity too gross to require refutation, and would have passed unnoticed, had it not been, as far as his architectural abilities are concerned* in some measure countenanced by the Wartons.

He was about twenty-two, or twenty-three years of age' when first introduced at court, but in what employment has not been ascertained, although it was probably of the same nature with those which he afterwards so ably filled, There is" every reason to think that his skill in drawing recommended him to a sovereign who was bent on adding to his country the ornament and utility of magnificent and durable structures. The first office he held, or the first of which we read, had evidently a reference to this object, In May 1356, he was appointed clerk of all the king’s works at the castle, and in the park of Windsor. It was by his advice that the king was induced to pull down great part of this castle, and by his skill that it was rebuilt nearly in the manner in which we find it. His other great work was Queenborough castle; and although in these military structures he had little scope for the genius displayed afterwards at Oxford and Winchester, they would have been sufficient to prove that he had already reached that degree of architectural skill which modern art can but poorly imitate.

With a sovereign of Edward III.'s magnificent taste, it was but natural that Wykeham should now become a favourite, and accordingly we find that his majesty wished to distinguish him by many marks of royal favour. In order to facilitate this, it was necessary he should take orders, as ecclesiastical promotion was more particularly within his majesty’s pjwer, where the pope did not think proper to interfere; but this part of Wykeham’s* history is not so clearly detailed as could be wished. There is, on the contrary, some reason to think that he was in the church before he had given proof of his talents at Windsor and Queenborough. In all the patents for the offices he held, he is styled Clericus, but, as his biographer supposes, he had as yet only the clerical tonsure, or some of the lower orders, while the historian of Winchester thinks he was ordained priest by bishop Edyngdon. The first preferment bestowed on him was the rectory of Pulham in Norfolk, in 1357, and as the court of Rome threw some obstacles in the way which kept him for a time out of that living, the king, in 1359, granted him two hundred' pounds a year over and above all his former appointments, until he should get quiet possession of Pulham, or some other benefice, to the value of one hundred marks. But the disproportion between the worth of the living, and the compensation for delay, is so very striking as to incline us to think, either that Dr. Lowth has by mistake inserted 200l. for 20l. or that the king took this opportunity to shew a special mark of his favour, for which the loss of the living should be the ostensible motive. In the mean time he was presented to the prebend of Flixton in the church of Lichfieid, which he afterwards exchanged for some other benefice, and in 1359 he was constituted chief warden and surveyor of the king’s castles of Windsor, Leedes, Dover, and Hadlam; and of the manors of old and new Windsor, Wichenier, and several other castles, manors, and houses, and of the parks belonging to them. In 1360, the king granted him the deanery of the royal free chapel, or collegiate church of St. Martin le Grand, London, which he held about three years; during which he rebuilt, at his own expense, the cloister of the Chapter-house, and the body of the church. This is the first instance on record in which he is noticed as a public benefactor. In 1361 he was quietly settled in the rectory of Pulham, and in less than two years received many other ecclesiastical preferments, specified by Dr. Lowth. The annual value of his livings, for some years before he became bishop of Winchester, amounted to 842l. but “he only received the revenues of the church with one hand, to expend them in her service with the other.”

His civil promotions were not less rapid and honourable. He was made keeper of the privy seal in 1364, and soon after secretary to the king, and chief of the privy council, and governor of the great council, These last terms his biographer supposes were not titles of office, hut were used to express the influence he now possessed in the management of affairs of state, and which was so great, that, according to Froissart, “every thing was done by him, and nothing was done without him.”

On the death of his old friend and patron William de Edyngdon, bishop of Winchester, in 1366, Wykeham was immediately and unanimously elected by the prior and convent to succeed him. Some delay having taken place before he c'ould be admitted into possession, it has been supposed that he was objected to by the king on account of his want of learning. But this is utterly destitute of foundation, as it was by the king’s express desire that he was chosen, and what is yet more in point, the pope’s bull, contrary to the official language used at that time, and in which there was frequently no mention of learning, declares that Wykeham was recommended to his holiness, “by the testimony of many persons worthy of credit, for his knowledge of letters, his probity of life and manners, and his prudence and circumspection in affairs both spiritual and temporal.” The real cause of the delay is stated at great length by Dr. Lowth, and depended on circumstances belonging to the history of that age, connected with the general state of ecclesiastical patronage.

His advancement to the bishopric was followed by his being appointed chancellor of England. In his speeches to parliament, it has been observed that he innovated on the practice of his clerical predecessors whose oratory savoured more of the pulpit than the bench, by introducing a style and manner wholly* political. In 1371, when the parliament, become jealous of churchmen, requested that secular men only should be appointed to offices of state, Wykeham resigned the seal, but without any loss of favour on the part of the king, the commons, or the public at large. The king was obliged to comply wiih the request to dismiss churchmen from the high offices of state, but soon found it necessary to have recourse to the only persons of that age whose education and talents seemed to fit them for such preferments. Soon after his being settled in the bishopric of Winchester, he began to employ his architectural skill in the repairs of the cathedral, the whole expense of which was defrayed by himself, but his more enlarged designs for this edifice were delayed to a more distant period. The care he bestowed on other parts of his episcopal duty, in reforming abuses, and establishing discipline, was not less exemplary, and in the case of his visitation of the Hospital of St. Cross, involved him in a long and troublesome dispute, which ended greatly to the benefit of that institution, and clearly to the honour of his firmness, judgment, and integrity. His mind appears now to have been deeply impressed by sentiments of enlarged liberality, and wholly influenced by those motives which determined him to become a benefactor to his country upon a most munificent scale.

The foundation of a college, or of some institution for the education of youth, had probably been revolved for a considerable time. About two years after he entered on the bishopric of Winchester, he began to make purchases in the city of Oxford with that view, and he connected with it the plan of a college at Winchester, which should be a nursery for that of Oxford. As early as 1373 he established a school at Winchester, in which he placed certain poor scholars who were to be instructed in grammatical learning, by one Richard de Herton, with an assistant. But the progress of this generous plan was for some time impeded by the intrigues of a party, headed by the duke of Lancaster, in the last year of the reign of Wykeham’s friend and master Edward III. An accusation, branching into eight articles, was brought against him, but upon a fair trial, seven were found destitute of proof, and the eighth only was laid hold of, as a pretext for seizing into the king’s hands the temporalities of the bishopric of Winchester, excluding the bishop from parliament, and removing him from court. A measure so violent, and justified upon such slight grounds, was not to be overlooked even in those days of popular acquiescence. At the ensuing convocation, the bishop of London, William Courtney, had the spirit to oppose any subsidy to the king until satisfaction should be made for the injury done to the whole body of the clergy, in the person of the bishop of Winchester; and he was so firmly supported by the convocation, that the archbishop of Canterbury, though a warm partizan of the duke of Lancaster, was obliged to admit Wykeham into their assembly, where he was received by every member with all possible marks of respect. Nor was he less a favourite with the people, who, when they rose in the affair of Wickliffe, demanded that the duke of Lancaster should allow the bishop to be brought to a fair trial. Wykeham was soon after restored to his temporalities, but with the ungracious condition, that he should fit out three ships of war for a certain time, or if they were not wanted, pay the amount of the probable expense to the king that king who had formerly heaped so many marks of favour on him, but who, although in some measure reconciled to him, was now too much enslaved by a party to act with his wonted liberality.

Edward III. died June 21, 1377; and on the accession of Richard II. Wykeham was released from all his difficulties, and by a solemn declaration of the privy council, most honourably acquitted of the accusations formerly preferred against him by the Lancaster party. This new reign, however, was a period of turbulence, faction, and bloodshed, and it required all the wisdom and circumspection of his steady mind to preserve the favour of the king, and the confidence of the people. Yet in both he was in a considerable degree successful. It was not long before the parliament appointed him one of the commissioners to inquire into the abuses of the former reign, and in their other proceedings they appear to have looked up to him as a statesman of inflexible integrity; nor was he less consulted in all matters of difficulty by the king and council. But notwithstanding such encouragement, the part he had to act was extremely arduous: the new reign was distracted by contending factions, and in the conflict of factions men or independent minds can seldom be safe; but what rendered the danger greater was, that the king, as he grew up, listened more to flatterers and favourites, than to the legitimate advisers of the crown.

When Richard assumed the reins of government, on coming of age, one of his first measures was to appoint Wykeham lord chancellor, and to dismiss the administration which had the care of public affairs during his minority. The new ministers, however, unwilling to be suspected of owing their appointments to a fit of caprice, after a short time, professed to resign, that their conduct might be investigated in parliament; and what they wished, actually happened. The commons declared in favour of their conduct, and they were all restored. In conjunction with them, Wykeham had the satisfaction of being very instrumental in promoting public tranquillity, until his resignation of the great seal in 1391. After this he seems to have kept at a distance from the management of public affairs, and thus avoided the risk of countenancing those ruinous proceedings which led to the deposition of the king; and qluring the succeeding reign his age and infirmities afforded an excuse for his no longer attending as a peer of parliament.

If we consider the importance of the undertaking begun at Oxford, and connected with a similar plan at Winchester, it will not appear surprising that he should, during the greater part of the reign of Richard II. have been disposed to bestow his whole attention on objects so dear to his heart. What he projected was certainly sufficient for the attention of any one man, and enough to immortalize the greatest. The design, bishop Lowth has eloquently expressed, was noble, uniform, and complete. “It was no less than to provide for the perpetual maintenance and instruction of two hundred scholars, to afford them a liberal support, and to lead them through a perfect course of education, fcom the first elements of letters, through the whole circle of the sciences; from the lowest class of grammatical learning to the highest degrees in the several faculties.” A design so enlarged, so comprehensive, so munificent, had not yet been conceived by the most illustrious of our English founders. In bringing it to perfection, we have not only to admire the generosity which supplied the means (for opulence may sometimes be liberal at a small expense), but that grasp of mind which at once planned and executed all that can be conceived most difficult in such a vast undertaking, and which enabled him to shine with equal lustre as benefactor, legislator, and architect, and give a lesson and example which could never be exceeded by the wisest of his posterity.

It has already been mentioned, that in 1373, he had begun his preparatory school at Winchester, and about the same time, having purchased tenements for the purpose, he established a similar institution at Oxford, appointing a governor, and acting in other respects towards his infant society in such a manner, that its constitution might be matured by the test of experience, and “that the life and soul, as it were, might be ready to inform and animate the body of his college, as soon as it could be finished.”

Within less than three years from this commencement of his plan, the society consisted of a warden and seventy fellows, who were called Pauperes Scholares Vtnerabilis Domini Domini Wilhelmi de Wykeham Wynton. Episcopi. The warden had a salary of 20l. a year, and the fellows were lodged in the places hired for them, and then known by the names of Blake-hall, Hert-hall, Shule-hall, Mayden-hall, and Hamer-hall. The annual expense of their lodging amounted to iOi 13.S. 4d.; and each was allowed Is. and 6d. a week for commons.

In 1379, having completed the several purchases of land necessary for the scite of the college, he obtained the king’s patent or licenceto found, dated June 3.0, of that year; and likewise the pope’s bull to the same effect. In his charter of foundation which he published on November 26 following, his college is entitled Seinte Marie College of Wynchestre in Oxenford. But it is raxher remarkable that the name of New college, which was then given in common speech without much impropriety, should be by-some means continued until the present day, when it is in reality the oldest as to its principal buildings, and the seventh in the order of foundation. The foundation-stone was laid March 5, 1380, and the whole completed in six years; and on April 14, 1386, the society took possession by a public entrance accompanied with much solemnity.

According to the statutes, the society consisted of a warden and seventy poor scholars , clerks, students in theology, canon and civil law, and philosophy; twenty were appointed to the study of laws, ten of them to that of the canon, and ten to that of the civil law; the remaining fifty were to apply themselves to philosophy, or arts, and theology; two to the study of medicine, and two to astronomy; all of whom were obliged to be in priest’s orders within a certain time, except in case of lawful impediment. Besides these there were ten priests, three clerks, and sixteen boys or choristers, to minister in the service of the chapel. The body of statutes, wb-ich was entirely of his composition, underwent many revisions and corrections, the result of experience and profound thinking on a subject which appears to have engrossed his whole mind, and although some of the latter revisions left an opening for irregularities which the society have not always been able to prevent, these statutes upon the whole are considered as highly judicious and complete, and have been very closely copied by succeeding founders.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Wyndham, just to freedoraand the throne, The master of our passions, and his own.”

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

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

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

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

In 1774 Mr. Wynne published (but like the former, without his name.) “Eunornus, or Dialogues concerning the Law and Constitution of England. With an Essay on Dialogue,” 4 vols. 8vo. This scientific work, says Mr. Bridgman, would probably have been held in higher estimation had it been better known; but having been written before, and published after the commentaries of sir William Blackstone, its acknowledged merits have been obscured, though not totally eclipsed by the splendour of that great performance: it is, however, highly valued, as having very much illustrated the principles of our laws and constitution, and given an instructive and rational account of the several branches into which the practice of the law is divided, and as having recommended, with much learning, a liberal and enlarged method of study in that science, pointing out its necessary connexion with the other branches of literature. Mr. Hargrave has further observed, that this work treats incidentally of the character and authority of the several law xvriters, and more professedly on the origin and progress of the most important subjects and branches of the law, and their connexion with the history and constitution of England. A second edition of this work appeared after the author’s death, in 1785, but without any alteration.

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

This unfortunate author had an uncle, the rev. Richard Wynne, M. A. rector of St. Alphage, London- wall, and Ayot St. Laurence, near Welwyn in Hertfordshire, where he died in 1799, in the erghty-first year of his age. He published in 1764, in 2 vols. 8vo, “The New Testament carefully collated with the Greek, and corrected, divided, and printed, according to the various subjects treated 6f Ijy the inspired writers, with the common division in the margin; and illustrated with notes critical and explanatory.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In metaphysics, Xenophanes taught, that if ever there had been a time when nothing existed, nothing could ever have existed. That whatever is, always has been from eternity, without deriving its existence from any prior principle; that nature is one and without limit; that what is one is similar in all its parts, else it would be many; that the one infinite, eternal, and homogeneous universe, is immutable and incapable of change; that God is one incorporeal eternal Being, and, like the universe, spherical in form; that he is of the same nature with the universe, comprehending all things within himself; is intelligent, and pervades all things; bat bears no resemblance to human nature either in body or mind.

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

The doctrine of Xenophanes concerning nature is so imperfectly preserved, and obscurely expressed, that it is no wonder that it has been differently represented by different writers. Some have confounded it with the moden impiety of Spinoza, who supposed all the appearances in nature to be only modifications of one material substance. Others have endeavoured to accommodate it to the ancient system of emanation; and others, to the Pythagoric and Stoic notions of the soul of the world. But none of these explanations accord with the terms, in which the tenets of Xenophanes are expressed. Perhaps the truth is, that he held the universe to be one in nature and substance, but distinguished in his conception between the matter of which all things consist, and that latent divine force, which, though not a distinct substance, but an attribute, is necessarily inherent in the universe; and this is the cause of all its perfection. What Xenophanes maintained concerning the immobility and immutability of nature is to be understood of the universe considered as one whole, and not of its several parts, which his physical tenets supposed liable to change. If he asserted, that there is no motion in nature, he probably understood the term motion metaphysically, and only meant that there is no such thing in nature as passing from nonentity to entity, or the reverse, perhaps the disputes among the ancients concerning motion, like many other metaphysical contests, were mere combats in the dark, for want of settling previously the meaning of terms. Brucker thinks that the notion ascribed to Xenophanes concerning the nature and origin of the celestial bodies, as meteors daily renewed, is so absurd as perhaps to have been defectively or unfairly stated; and he is inclined likewise to suppose, that many of the fancies, ascribed to philosophers, are nothing more than the misconceptions of ignorant or careless biographers.

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

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

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

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

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

Xenophon strictly adhered to the principles of his master in action as well as opinion, and employed philosophy, not to furnish with the means of ostentation, but to qualify him for the offices of public and private life; and his integrity, piety, and moderation, proved how much he had profited by the precepU of his master. His whole military conduct discovered an admirable union of wisdom and valour; and his writings, at the same time that they have afforded, to all succeeding ages, one of the most perfect models of purity, simplicity, and harmony of language, abound with sentiments truly Socratic. Of all the disciples of Socrates, he is said, by a recent critic, to be the only one who had the good faith and good sense to report his master’s opinions accurately without addition or disguise. When he teaches, Xenophon is the most delightful of instructors; when he narrates, the most fascinating of all narrators. When he invents, he seasons his fictions with so much of his great master’s genuine philosophy, and so much of his own exquisite taste, that it becomes impossible to decide, whether they are more instructive or more delightful when he speculates as a politician, it is with a good sense and sagacity, which soar above the prejudices of his fellow citizens, and distinguish with correctness, the institutions which lead to virtue and happiness, from those which allow and encourage depravity. The most imperfect of his works, the “Hellenica,” has yet many of the merits peculiar to the writer, and is, at the present day, an invaluable treasure.

The works of Xenophon have often been printed collectively by Junta, Florence, 3516, Gr. folio; by Aldus, Gr. at Venice, 1525, folio; by Henry Stephens, with a Latin version, in 1581, folio; by Wells, at Oxford, 1703, Gr. and Lat. in 5 vols. 8vo; and by Weisk, Lipsia?, Gr. 1798— 1802, 5 vols. 8vo. Separately have been published the “Cyropaedia,” Oxon. 1727, 4to, and 1736, 8vo; “Cyri Anabasis^' Oxon. 1735, 4to, and 1747, 8vo” Memorabilia Socratis," Oxon. 1741, 8vo, and 1804, 2 vols. 8vo, &c.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The composition of the “Night Thoughts” did not so entirely engross the author’s mind as to prevent him from producing other compositions both in prose and verse, and some betraying a little of the same disposition to political ambition which he had reluctantly left. Among those of another kind, is his prose work, entitled “The Centaur not fabulous. In six letters to a friend, on the life in vogue,” and well calculated tq make the infidel and the voluptuary sensible of their error. This has often been reprinted, and the general strain of thought is strongly characteristic of the writer of the “Ni^ht Thoughts,” notwithstanding an air of gaiety and even levity which is occasionally assumed.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The mere list of the various works either written or edited by Zaccaria is sufficient to give him the character. of an extraordinary man. Comprehensiveness of mincf^ depth of erudition, JaboriousnesS of research, and celerity of execution, were happily combined in all his performances. In the earlier part of his life, he had entered the lists with the immortal Muratori and the illustrious Lamb Afterwards he had a great polemic dispute, on the pope’s supremacy, with the celebrated German bishop, John Nicholas Hontheim, better known under the name of Justin us Febronius. In the latter part of his life, he corresponded with many sovereigns and princes, with many Italian academies, and many literary characters, on this side the Alps, among whom were the celebrated Stilting, a Bollandist; Mr. de Courcelles, editor of the Foreign Journal in Paris; the proprietors of the Literary Journal of Italy, published in Amsterdam; and that of the Eneyelopedian Journal of Liege.

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

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

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