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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Herrnhut soon became a considerable village; but it would far exceed our limits to recount the successive emigrations to Herrnhut, and the additions that were made by the preaching of the rev. Mr. Rothe, minister of Bertholsdorf, and by the zeal of Christian David. Among these settlers were persons of different opinions a circumstance, which engaged the attention of count Zinzendorf, who endeavoured to establish a union among them in the fundamental truths of the protestant religion, ancj, in 1727, formed statutes for their government, in conformity to these truths.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Eight volumes of Zollikofer’s “Sermons,” which are in the highest estimation in Germany, have lately been known in this country by a translation, of great purity and elegance, by the rev. William Took e, F. R. S. who has prefixed some memoirs of the author to the “Sermons on the Dignity of Man,” published in 1802. In these sermons there is no display of the theological learning of their author, and little that is explanatory in regard to peculiar texts of scripture; they discuss not human creeds and systems of divinity: their aim is to explain the nature and grounds of Christian morality, and reconcile it with the best dictates of philosophy to reveal man to himself; and they discover a talent seldom possessed a knowledge of the human heart.

, a Greek historian, who lived about 1120, held some considerable posts at the court of the emperors of Constantinople. He afterwards entered the monastic order of St. Basil. He has left “Annals,” to the death of Alexius Comnenus, 1118; the best edition of them is the Louvre, 1686 and 1687, 2 vols. fol. which form part of the Byzantine history; but these “Annals,” although valuable for their information, are written with little accuracy or critical skill, and discover too much credulity. President Cousin has translated into French what relates to the Roman history. We have also some “Commentaries” by Zonaras, on the canons of the apostles and of the councils, Paris, 1618, folio; and some “Tracts.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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