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

At about six years of age, he was sent to the school of Kilkenny, and having continued there eight years, he was admitted a student of Trinity college in Dublin*. Here applying himself to books of history and poetry, to the neglect of academic learning, he was, at the end of four years, refused his degree of bachelor of arts for insufficiency; and was at last admitted speciali gratia, which is there considered as the highest degree of reproach and dishonour. Stung with the disgrace, he studied eight hours a day, for seven years following. He commenced these studies at the university of Dublin, where he continued them three years; and during this time he drew up the first sketch of his “Tale of a Tub;” for Wassendon Warren, esq. a gentleman of fortune near Belfast in Ireland, wha was chamber- fellow with Swift, declared that he then saw a copy of it in Swift’s own hand-writing. In 1688, his uncle Godwin was seized with a lethargy, and soon after was deprived both of his speech and memory: by which accident Swift being left without support, took a journey to Leicester, that he might consult with his mother what course of life to pursue. At this time sir William Temple was in high reputation, and honoured with the confidence and familiarity of king William. His father sir John Temple, had been master of the Rolls in Ireland, and contracted an intimate friendship with Godwin Swift, which continued till his death; and sir William, who inherited his title and estate, had married a lady to whom Mrs. Swift was related: she therefore advised her son to communicate his situation to sir William, and solicit his direction what to do. Sir William received him with great kindness, and Swift’s first visit continued two years. Sir William had been ambassador and mediator of a general peace at Nimeguen before the Revolution; in which character he became known to the prince of Orange, who frequently visited him at Sheen, after his arrival in England, and took his advice in affairs of the utmost importance. Sir William being then lame with the gout, Swift used to attend his majesty in the walks about the garden, who admitted him to such a familiarity, that he shewed him how to cut asparagus after the Dutch manner, and once offered to make him a captain of horse; but Swift had fixed his mind upon an ecclesiastical life.

About a year after his return from Ireland, he thought it expedient to take his master of arts degree at Oxford; and accordingly was admitted ad eundem in 1692, with many civilities. These, some say, proceeded from a misunderstanding of the words speciali gratia, in his testimonial from Dublin, which was thcr supposed to be a compliment paid to uncommon merit; but are more probably ascribed by others to his known connection with sir William Temple. It is easy to conceive, however, that Swift, after his reputation was established, might, while he was sporting with this incident in the gaiety of his heart, pretend a mistake which never happened. From Oxford he returned to sir William Temple, and assisted him in revising his works: he also corrected and improved his his own “Tale of a Tub,” and added the digressions. From the conversation of sir William, Swift greatly increased his political knowledge; but, suspecting sir William of neglecting to provide for him, merely that he might keep him in his family, he at length resented it so warmly, that in 1694 a quarrel ensued, and they parted.

Upon the death of sir William Temple, Swift applied, by petition to king William, for the- first vacant prebend of Canterbury or Westminster, for which the royal promise had been obtained by his late patron, whose posthumous works he dedicated to his majesty, to facilitate the success of that application. But it does not appear, that, after the death of sir William, the king took the least notice of Swift. After this he accepted an invitation from the earl of Berkeley, appointed one of the lords justices of Ireland, to attend him as chaplain and private secretary; but he was soon removed from this post, upon a pretence that it svas not fit for a clergyman. This disappointment was presently followed by another; for when the deanery of Derry became vacant, and it was the earl of Berkeley’s turn to dispose of it, Swift, instead of receiving it as an atonement for his late usage, was put off with the livings of Laracor and Rathbeggin, in the diocese of Meath, which together did not amount to half its value. He went to reside at Laracor, and performed the duties of a parish priest with the utmost punctuality and devotion. He was, indeed, always very devout, not only in his public and solemn addresses to God, but in his domestic and private exercises i and yet, with all this piety in his heart, he could not forbear indulging the peculiarity of his humour, when an opportunity offered, whatever might be the impropriety of the time and place. Upon his coming to Laracor, he gave public notice, that he would read prayers on Wednesdays and Fridays, which had not been the cus-> torn; and accordingly the bell was rung, and he ascended the desk. But, having remained some time with no other auditor than his clerk Roger, he began, “Dearly beloved Roger, the Scripture moveth you and me in sundry places;” and so proceeded to the end of the service. Of the same kind was his race with Dr. Raymond, vicar of Trim, soon after he was made dean of St. Patrick’s. Swift had dined one Sunday with Raymond, and when the bells had done ringing for evening prayers, “Raymond,” says Swift, “I will lay you a crown, that I begin prayers before you this afternoon.” Dr. Raymond accepted the wager, and immediately both ran as fast as they could to the church. Raymond, the nimbler of the two, arrived first at the door, and when he entered the church, walked decently towards the reading-desk: Swift never slackened his pace, but running up the aite, left Raymond behind him, and stepping into the desk, without putting on the surplice, or opening the book, began the service in an audible voice, During Swift’s residence at Laracor, he invited to Ireland a lady whom he has celebrated by the name of Stella. With this lady he became acquainted while he lived with sir William Temple: she was the daughter of his steward, whose name was Johnson; and sir William, when he died, left her 1000l. in consideration of her father’s faithful services. At the death of sir William, which happened in 1699, she was in the sixteenth year of her age; and it was about two years afterwards, that at Swift’s invitation she Jeft England, accompanied by Mrs. Dingley, a lady who was fifteen years older, and whose whole fortune, though she was related to sir William, was no more than an annuity of 27l. Whether Swift at this time desired the company of Stella as a wife, or a friend, it is not certain: but the reason which she and her companion then gave for their leaving England was, that in Ireland the interest of money was higher, and provisions were cheap. But, whatever was Swift’s attachment to Miss Johnson, every possible precaution was taken to prevent scandal: they never lived in the same house; when Swift was absent, Miss Johnson and her friend resided at the parsonage; when he returned, they removed either to his friend Dr. Raymond’s, or to a lodging; neither were they ever known to meet but in the presence of a third person. Swift made frequent excursions to Dublin, and some to London: but Miss Johnson was buried in solitude and obscurity; she was known only to a few of Swift’s most intimate acquaintance, and had no female companion except Mrs. Dingley.

In 1701, Swift took his doctor’s degree, and in 1702, soon after the death of king William, he went into England for the first time after his settling at Laracor; a journey which he frequently repeated during the reign of queen Anne. Miss Johnson was once in England in 1705, but returned in a few months, and never crossed the channel afterwards. He soon became eminent as a writer, and in that character was known to both whigs and tories. He had been educated among the former, but at length attached himself to the latter; because the whigs, as he said, bad renounced their old principles, and received others, which their forefathers abhorred. He published, in 1701, “A discourse of the contests and dissentions between the nobles and commons in Athens and Home, with the consequences they had upon both those states” this was in behalf of king William and his ministers, against the violent proceedings of the House of Commons; but from that year to 1708, he did not write any political pamphlet.

Amidst all the business and honours that crowded upon him, he wrote every day an account of what occurred, to Stella; and sent her a journal regularly, dated every fort* night, during the whole time of his connection with queen Anne’s ministry. From these unrestrained effusions of -his heart many particulars are known, which would otherwise have lain hid; and by these it appears, that he was not only employed, but trusted, even by Hariey himself, who to all others was reserved and mysterious. In the mean time, Swift had no expectations of advantage from his con* nection with these persons; he knew they could not long preserve their power: and he did not honour it while it lasted, on account of the violent measures which were pursued by both sides. “I use the ministry,' 1 says he,” like dogs, because I expect they will use me so. I never knew a ministry do anything for those whom they made companions of their pleasures; but I care not.“In the summer of 1711, he foresaw the ruin of the ministry by those misunderstandings among themselves, which at last effected it; and it was not only his opinion, but their own, that if they could not carry a peace, they must soon be sent to the Tower, even though they should agree. In order therefore to facilitate this great event, Swift wrote the” Conduct of the Allies;“a piece, which he confesses cost him much pains, and which succeeded even beyond his expectations. It was published Nov. 27, 1711; and in two months time above 11,000 were sold off, seven editions having been printed in England, and three in Ireland. The tory members in both houses, who spoke, drew their arguments from it; and the resolutions, which were printed in the votes, and would never have passed but for this pamphlet, were little more than quotations from it. From this time to 1713, he exerted himself with unwearied diligence in the service of the ministry; and while he was at Windsor, just at the conclusion of the peace of Utrecht, he drew the first sketch of” An history of the four last years of queen Anne." This he afterwards finished, and came into England to publish it, but was dissuaded from it by lord Bolingbroke, who told him, the whole was so much in the spirit of party-writing, that though it might have made a seasonable pamphlet in the time of their administration, it. would be a dishonour to just history. Swift seems to have been extremely fond of this work, by declaring that it was the best thing he had ever written; but, since his friend did not approve it, he would cast it into the fire. It did not, however, undergo this fate, but was published by Dr. Lucas, to the disappointment of all those who expected any thing great from it.

He was several times in England on a visit to Pope, after his settlement at the deanery, particularly in 1726 and 1727. On Jan. 28, 1727, died his beloved Stella, in her forty-fourth year, regretted by the dean with such excess of affection as the liveliest sensibility alone could feel, and the most excellent character excite: she had been declining from 1724. Stella was a most amiable woman both in person and mind. Her stature was tall, her hair and eyes black, her complexion fair and delicate, her features regular, soft, and animated, her shape easy and elegant, and her manner feminine, polite, and graceful: there was natural music in her voice, and complacency in her aspect; she abounded with wit, which was always accompanied with good-nature her virtue was founded upon humanity, and her religion upon reason her morals were uniform, but not rigid, and her devotion was habitual, but not ostentatious. “Why the dean did not sooner marry this most excellent person; why he married her at all; why his marriage was so cautiously concealed; and why he was never known to meet her but in the presence of a third person; are enquiries which no man can answer,” says the writer of his life, “without absurdity.”

As he lived much in solitude, he frequently amused himself with writing; and it is very remarkable, that although his mind was greatly depressed, and his principal enjoyment was at an end when Mrs. Johnson died, yet there is aji air of levity and trifling in some of the pieces he wrote afterwards, that is not to be found in any other: such in particular are his “Directions to Servants,” and several of his letters to his friend Dr. Sheridan. In 1733, when the attempt was made to repeal the test act in Ireland, the Dissenters often affected to call themselves brother-protestants, and fellow-christians, with the members of the established church. Upon this occasion the dean wrote a short copy of verses, which so provoked one Bettesworth, a lawyer, and member of the Irish parliament, that he swore, in the hearing of many persons, to revenge himself either by murdering or maiming the author; and, for this purpose, he engaged his footman, with two ruffians, to secure the dean wherever he could be found. This being known, thirty of the nobility and gentry within the liberty of St. Patrick’s waited upon the dean in form, and presented a paper subscribed with their names, in which they solemnly engaged, in behalf of themselves and the rest of the liberty, to defend his person and fortune, as the friend and benefactor of his country. When this paper was delivered, Swift was in bed, deaf and giddy, yet made a shift to dictate a proper answer. These fits of deafness and giddiness, which were the effects of his surfeit before he was twenty years old, became more frequent and violent in proportion as he grew into years: and in 1736, while he was writing a satire on the Irish parliament, which he called “The Legion Club,” he was seized with one of these fits, the effect of which was so dreadful, that he left the poem unfinished, and never afterwards attempted a composition, either in verse or prose, that required a course of thinking, or perhaps more than one sitting to finish.

"The late learned Mr. Swinton of Oxford having one day remarked, that one man, meaning, I suppose, no man but himself, could assign all the parts of the Universal History to their proper authors, at the request of sir Robert Chambers, or of myself, gave the account which I now transmit to you in his own hand, being willing that of so great a work the history should be known, and that each writer should receive his due proportion of praise from posterity. I recommend to you to preserve this scrap of literary intelligence, in Mr. Swinton’s own hand, or to deposit it in the Museum, that the veracity of the account may never be doubted. I am, sir,

, deserves a fuller account than can now be given of a learned and diligent man, unfortunately altogether un patronized, who undertook, and in part executed, a translation of the works of Plato. His proposals for this great undertaking were published in a quarto tract in 1759; and he produced successively, between that time and 1767, translation of the “lo, a discourse on poetry,” of “The Greater Hippias,” “The Lesser Hippias,” “The Banquet, Part I.” and “The Banquet, Part II.” He is said to have lived for some years, and finally to have died, in great indigence. The Gentleman’s Magazine places his death on April the 1st, 1787, and adds, that he was born in 1710, and educated at Wadham college, Oxford, where he took the degree of M. A. April 30, 1734. In an account published by the society called the Literary Fund, the following narrative of his death is given: “During the summer recess of the year 1788, an event took place, which tarnished the character of English opulence and humanity, and afflicted the votaries of knowledge. Floyer Sydenham, the well-known translator of Plato, one of the most useful, if not one of the most competent Greek scholars of his age; a man revered for his knowledge, and beloved for the candour of his temper and the gentleness of his manners, died in consequence of having been arrested, and detained, for a debt to a victualler, who had, for some time, furnished his frugal dinner. At the news of that event, every friend of literature felt a mixture of sorrow and shame; and one of the members of a club at the prince of Wales’s coffeehouse proposed, that it should adopt, as its object and purpose, some means to prevent similar afflictions, and to assist deserving authors and their families in distress.” Whether the account reported to these gentlemen, of the time and manner of Sydenham’s death was accurate or not, the friends of literature and humanity will feel great consolation in finding that it gave occasion to a society so benevolent in its designs; which arose 3 after a few changes and modifications, out of the proposal above-mentioned. The society is now in a flourishing and improving state, and has given very timely and important assistance to many deserving authors.

, a very eminent physician, and one of the most eminent as an improver of the art that England has produced, was born in 1624 at Winford Eagle in Dorsetshire, where his father William Sydenham, esq. had a large fortune. Under whose care he was educated, or in what manner he passed his childhood, is not known. At the age of eighteen, in 1642, he entered* as a commoner of Magdalen -hall, Oxford, where it is not probable that he continued long; for he informs us himself, that he was withheld from the university by the commencement of the war; nor is it very clearly known in what state of life he engaged, or where he resided during that long series of public commotion. It is indeed reported, that he had a commission in the king’s army*, but no particular account is given of his military conduct; nor are we told what rank he obtained (unless that of a captain), when he entered into the army, or when or on what occasion he retired from it. It is certain, however, that if ever he took upon him the profession of arms, he spent but few years in the camp; for in 1648 he obtained at Oxford the degree of bachelor of physic, for which, as some medical knowledge is necessary, it may be imagined that he spent some time in qualifying himself.

His works have been collected and frequently printed at London in one volume 8vo. The last edition is that by John Swan, M. D. of Newcastle in Staffordshire, 1742. To this is prefixed a life of Dr. Sydenham, by Dr. Johnson, which we have chiefly followed in the preceding account. His works were also printed at Leipsic in J 711, at Geneva in 1716, in 2 vols. 4to, and at Leyden in 8vo. They were written by himself in English, but translated afterwards into Latin, of which it is our opinion he was fully capable, although these translations, as already noticed, have been attributed to Dr. Mapletoft and others. The last English edition is that by Dr. George Wallis, 1788, 2 vols. 8vo, with notes and opinions of subsequent medical writers. Sydenham has frequently been called the father of physic among the moderns. He tells us, in the preface to his works, that “the increase and perfection of the medical art is to be advanced by these two means: by composing an history of distempers, or a natural and exact description of distempers and their symptoms; and by deducing and establishing a method of cure from thence.” This is the way which that great delineator of the right road to real knowledge in all its various branches, lord Bacon, had pointed out; and its being more closely pursued by Sydenham than by any modern physician before him, is what has justly entitled him to those high encomiums which have ever been paid him. Sir Richard Blackmore allows, and all are now convinced, that Sydenham, “who built all his maxims and rules of practice upon repeated observations on the nature and properties of diseases, and the power of remedies, has compiled so good an history of distempers, and so prevalent a method of cure, that he has improved and advanced the healing art much more than Dr. Willis with all his curious speculations and fanciful hypotheses.” He relates of himself, in his dedication to Dr. Mapletoft, that ever since he had applied himself to the practice of physic, he had been of opinion, and the opinion had been every day more and more confirmed in him, that the medical art could not be learned so surely as by use and experience; and that he, who should pay the nicest and most accurate attention to the symptoms of distempers, would infallibly succeed best in searching out the true means of cure. “For this reason,” says he, “I gave myself up entirely to thjs method of proceeding, perfectly secure and confident, that, while 1 followed nature as my guide, I could never err.” He tells him afterwards, that Mr. Locke approved his method, which he considered as no small sanction to it; and what he says upon this occasion of Mr. Locke is worth transcribing: “Nosti prseterea, quern huic meiE methodo suffragantem habeam, qui earn intimius per omnia perspexerat, utrique nostrum conjunctissimum dominum Joannem Locke; quo quidem viro, sive ingenio judicioque acri & subacto, sive etiam antiquis, hoc est, optimis moribus, vix superiorem quenquam, inter eos qui nunc.sunt homines repertum in confido; paucissimns rertci pares.” There are some Latin elegiac verses by Mr. Locke, addressed to Sydenham, prefixed to his 4< Treatise upon Severs." Mr. Granger has remarked that Sydenham received higher honours from foreign physicians than from his countrymen. This, however, applies only to his contemporaries, for no modern English physician has ever mentioned Sydenham unless in terms of high veneration. The encomiums of Boerhaave and Haller are well known to medical readers. His great merit consists in the accurate descriptions which he has left us of several diseases which first became conspicuous in his time. His account of the smallpox, and of his medical treatment of that disease, is admirable, and contributed in no small degree to establish his celebrity. He was the first person who introduced the cooling regimen in fevers, a method of treatment frequently attended with the happiest effects, though it must be acknowledged that he did not sufficiently distinguish between the typhus and the inflammatory fever, and on that account he sometimes carried his bleedings to an excess. He contributed also essentially to introduce the Peruvian bark as a cure for intermittents.

His publications amount in the whole to sixty-three. Most of these are only pamphlets on temporary topics, and are now little known or sought after; but the following have been thought to possess a more permanent character: “Essay on the Truth of the Christian Religion; wherein its real foundation upon the Old Testament is shown” this was published in 1725 against Collins; and “The principles and connexion bf Natural and Revealed Religion distinctly considered,” 1740, 8vo.

, a French author, generally known by the name of the sieur des Accords, was born in 1549, was proctor for the king in the bailiage of Dijon, and has obtained a kind of fame by some very eccentric publications. That which is best known, and is said to be least exceptionable, though certainly far from being a model of purity, was first published by him at the age of eighteen, but revised and much augmented when he was about thirty-five. It is entitled “Les Bigarrures et Touches du Seigneur des Accords” to which some editions add “avec les Apophtegmes du Sieur Gaulard et les escraignes Dijonnoises;” and the best of all (namely, that of Paris, in 1614), “de nouveau augmentees deplusieurs Epitaphes, Dialogues, et ingenieuses equivoques.” It is in two volumes, 12mo, and contains a vast collection of poems, conundrums, verses oddly constructed, &c. &c. The author died in 1590, at the age of forty-one. Having one daysent a sonnet to mademoiselle Be*gar, he wrote at bottom, “Atous Accords,” instead of his name; the lady in her answer called him the Seigneur des Accords, and the president Begar frequently giving him that title afterwards, Tabourot adopted it. The Dictionnaire Htstorique places his birth in 1547, and makes him forty-three years old at his death; but in his own book is a wooden cut of him inscribed, ætat. 35, 1584, which fixes his age as we hare given it, if the true time of his death was 1590.

, one of the most eminent Roman historians, was born, most probably, in the year of Rome 809 or 810, or about 56 of the Christian aera; but the place of his nativity is no where mentioned. He was the son of Cornelius Tacitus, a procurator appointed by the prince to manage the Imperial revenue, and govern a province in Belgic Gaul. Where he was educated is not known; but it is evident that he did not imbibe the smallest tincture of that frivolous science, and that vicious eloquence which in his time debased the Roman genius. He most probably was formed upon the plan adopted in the time of the republic; and, with the help of a sound scheme of home-discipline, and the best domestic example, he grew up, in a course of virtue, to that vigour of mind which gives such animation to his writings. His first ambition was to distinguish himself at the bar. In the year of Rome 828, the sixth of Vespasian, being then about eighteen, he attended the eminent men of the day, in their inquiry concerning the causes of corrupt eloquence, and is supposed to have been the author of the elegant dialogue concerning oratory, usually printed with his works.

The friendship that subsisted between Tacitus and the younger Pliny, and which is well known, was founded on the consonance of their studies and their virtues. When Pliny says that a good and virtuous prince can never be sincerely loved, unless we shew our detestation of the tyrants that preceded him, we may be sure that Tacitus was of the same opinion. They were both convinced that a striking picture of former tyranny ought to be placed in contrast to the felicity of the times that succeeded. Pliny acted up to his own idea in the panegyric of Trajan, where we find a vein of satire on Domitian running through the whole piece. It appears in his letters, that he had some thoughts of writing history on the same principle, but had not resolution to undertake that arduous task. Tacitus had more vigour of mind: he thought more intensely, and with deeper penetration, than his friend. We find that he had formed, at an early period, the plan of his history, and resolved to execute it, in order to shew the horrors of slavery, and the debasement of the Roman people through the whole of Domitian’s reign. From the year of Rome 853, when along with Pliny, he pleaded in the famous cause of Priscus, the proconsul of Africa, and in behalf of those who had been oppressed by him, Tacitus appears to have dedicated himself altogether to his history. At what time it was published is uncertain, but it was in some period of the reign of Trajan, who died in the year of Rome 870, A. D. 117. In this work he began from the accession of Galba, and ended with the death of Domitian, i. e. from the year of Rome 82-2 to 849, a period of twenty-seven years. Vossius says that the whole work consisted of no less than thirty books; but, to the great loss of the literary world, we have only four books, and the beginning of the fifth. In what remains, we have little after the accession of Vespasian. The reign of Titus is totally lost, and Domitian has escaped the vengeance of the historian’s pen.

, a Jesuit of Antwerp, known for his skill in the mathematical sciences, published, among other things, a good treatise on astronomy; an edition of Euclid’s Elements, with the application of the problems and theorems to practical use. In matters of astronomy, the prejudices of the times seem to have prevented him from more effectually defending the system of Copernicus. He died in 1660. His works were published collectivelv, at Antwerp, in 1669 and 1707, in one volume, folio.

, an Italian poet, whose works were once proscribed by the inquisition, and having become scarce, are therefore accounted valuable, was born at Nola about 1520. He passed a great part of his life attached to the service of don Pedro de Toledo, viceroy of Naples, and don Garcias de Toledo, commander of the gallies in the same kingdom. The period of his death is not precisely known, but he is said to have been judge of Gaieta in 1569; and, as he was then in a very bad state of health, is supposed to have died soon after. He had the reputation of a very good poet, and his productions, as far as they are now known, are these 1. “II Vendeminiatore,” the Vintager, a poem in which he described in too free a manner, the licence of the inhabitants in the vicinity of Nola, at the time of the vintages; Naples, 1534; Venice, 1549, 4to. On this account all his poems were put into the Index expurgatorius. Mortified at this rigour, he addressed an ode to the pope, asserting, that, though his poem was licentious, his life had not been so; remonstrating against the inclusion of his innocent productions in the sentence with the culpable piece; and declaring that he was employed in a poem upon the tears of St. Peter, whose merits, he trusted, would atone for his offence, and procure him deserved honour. In consequence of this ode, when the next edition of the Index expurgatorius appeared, not only the innoxious poems, but the Vendemmiatore also, were omitted, as if the repentance of the poet had purified his poem! 2. “II Cavallarizzo,” Vicenza, 8vo. 4. Sonnets, Songs, Stanzas, and some Comedies, Lastly, in 1767, professor Ranza published an inedited poem of Tansillo’s, entitled “Balia,” which has been elegantly translated into English by Mr. Roscoe, under the title “The Nurse,” 1798, 4to.

, a French physician, born at Courtenai, died in 1761, at what age is uncertain. He was known by Tarious works, of which the following were the chief 1. “Elements of Physiology,” translated from the Latin of Haller, 17-52, 8vo. 2. “Adversaria Anatomica, 1750, 4to, with a medical Bibliography, extracted from the” Methodus Studii Medici“of Haller. 4.” Osteographia,“Paris, 1753, 4to, a compilation, illustrated by engravings. 5.” Anthropotomie,“or the art of dissecting, 1750, 2 vols. 12rno. 6.” Desmographie,“or a treatise on ligaments, the same year. 7.” Observations on Medicine and Surgery,“1758, 3 vols. 12mo. 8.” Myographia," or a description of the muscles, 1753, 4to, with figures from Albinus. He wrote also some medical articles for the Encyclopedia.

, a very ingenious artist, in the modelling department, was born in the neighbourhood of Glasgow, of obscure parents, and began life as a country stonemason, without the expectation of ever rising higher. Going to Glasgow on a fair-day, to enjoy himself with his companions, at the time when the Foulis’s were attempting to establish an academy for the fine arts in that city, he saw their collection of paintings, and felt an irresistible im^ pulse to become a painter. He accordingly removed to Glasgow; and in the academy acquired a knowledge of drawing, which unfolded and improved his natural taste. He was frugal, industrious, and persevering; but he was poor, and was under the necessity of devoting himself to stone-cutting for his support; not without the hopes that he might one day be a statuary if he could not be a painter. Resorting to Dublin for employment, he became known to Dr. Quin, who was amusing himself in his leisure hours with endeavouring to imitate the precious stones in coloured pastes, and take accurate impressions of the engravings that were on them.

That art was known to the ancients, and many specimens from them are now in the cabinets of the curious. It seems to have been lost in the middle ages; was revived in Italy under LeoX. and the Medici family at Florence; and became more perfect in France under the regency of the duke of Orleans, by his labours and those of Homberg. By those whom they instructed as assistants in the laboratory it continued to be practised in Paris, and was carried to Rome. Their art was kept a secret, and their collections were small. It is owing to Quin and to Tassie that it has been carried to such high perfection in Britain, and has attracted the attention of Europe.

As soon as the departure of the prince of Salerno was known, he, and all his adherents, were declared rebels to the state; and Torquato Tasso, though but nine years of age, was included by name in that sentence. Bernardo, following the prince of Salerno into France, committed his son to the care of his friend and relation Maurice Cataneo, a person of great ability, who assiduously cultivated the early disposition of his pupil to polite literature. After the death of Sanseverino, which happened in three or four years, Bernardo returned to Italy, and engaged in the service of Guglielmo Gonzaga, duke of Mantua, who had given him a pressing invitation. It was not long before Ije received the melancholy news of the decease of his wife Portia, which determined him to send for his son, that they might be a mutual support to each other in their affliction. He was now his only child, for his wife, before her death, had married his daughter to Martio Sersale, a gentleman of Sorrento. He was greatly surprised, on his son’s arrival, to see the vast progress he had made in his studies. Although but twelve years of age, he had, according to the testimony of the writers of his life, entirely completed his knowledge in the Latin and Greek tongues: he was well acquainted with the rules of rhetoric and poetry, and completely versed in Aristotle’s ethics. Bernardo soon determined to send him to the university of Padua, to study the laws, in company with the young Scipio Gonzaga, afterwards cardinal, nearly of the same age as himself. With this nobleman Tasso, then seventeen years of age, contracted a friendship that never ended but with hi life. He prosecuted his studies at Padua with great diligence and success: at the same time employ ing his leisure hours upon philosophy and poetry, he soon gave a public proof o/ his talents, by his poem of f< Rinaldo,“which he published in the eighteenth year of his age. This poem, which is of the romance kind, is divided into twelve books in ottava rima, and contains the adventures of Rinaldo, the famous Paladin of the court of Charlemain, who makes so principal a figure in Ariosto’s work, and the first achievements of that knight for the love of the fair Clarice, whom he afterwards marries. The action of this poem precedes that of the” Orlando Furioso.“It was composed in ten months, as the author himself informs us in the preface, and was first printed at Venice in 1562. Paolo Beni speaks very highly of this performance, which undoubtedly is not unworthy the early efforts of that genius which afterwards produced the” Jerusalem."

Tasso’s father saw with regret the success of his son’s poem: he was apprehensive, and not without reason, that the charms of poetry would detach him from those more solid studies-which he judged were most likely to raise him in the world: and he knew well, by his own experience, that the greatest skill in poetry will not advance a man’s private fortune. He was not deceived in his conjecture; Torquato, insensibly carried away by his predominant passion, followed the examples of Petrarch, Boccace, Ariosto, and others, who, contrary to the remonstrances of their friejids, quitted the severer studies of the law for the more pleasing entertainment of poetical composition. In short, he entirely gave himslf up to the study of poetry and philosophy. His first poem extended his reputation through all Italy; but his father was so displeased with his conduct that he went to Padua o'n purpose to reprimand him. Though he spoke with great vehemence, and made use of several harsh expressions, Torquato heard him without interrupting him, and his composure contributed not a little to increase his father’s displeasure. (t Tell me,“said Bernardo, lt of what use is that vain philosophy, upon which you pride yourself so much?” “It has enabled me,” said Tasso modestly, “to endure the harshness of your reproofs.” The resolution Tasso had taken to devote himself to the Muses was known all over Italy; the principal persons of the city and college of Bologna invited him thither' by means of Pietro Donato Cesi, then vice-legate, and afterwards legate. But Tasso had not long resided there, when he was pressed by Scipio Gonzaga, elected prince of the academy established at Padua, under the name of Etherei, to return to that city. He could not withstand this solicitation; and Bologna being at that time the scene of civil commotion, he was the more willing to seek elsewhere for the repose he loved. He was received with extreme joy by all the academy, and being incorporated into lhat society, at the age of twenty years, took upon himself the name of Pentito; by which he seemed to show that he repented of all the time which he had employed in the study of the law. In this retreat he applied himself afresh to philosophy and poetry, and soon became a perfect master of both; it was this happy mixture of his studies that made him an enemy to all kinds of licentiousness. An oration was made one day in the academy upon the nature of love; the orator treated his subject in a very masterly manner, but with too little regard to decency in the opinion of Tasso, who, being asked what he thought of the discourse, replied, “that it was a pleasing poison.”

Though writers have left us very much in the dark with regard to the real motives that induced the duke to keep Tasso in confinement, yet, every thing being weighed, it seems highly probable that the affair of a delicate nature, said to have been divulged by his friend, must have related to the princess Leonora, the duke’s sister : and indeed it will be extremely difficult, from any other consideration, to account for the harsh treatment he received from a prince, who had before shown him such peculiar marks of esteem and friendship. However, Tasso himself had undoubtedly secret apprehensions that increased upon him every day, while the continual attacks which were made upon his credit as an author, not a little contributed to heighten his melancholy. At length he resolved to take the first opportunity to fly from his prison, for so he esteemed it, which after about a year’s detention he effected, and retired to Turin, where he endeavoured to remain concealed; but notwithstanding all his precautions, he was soon known, and recommended to the duke of Savoy, who received him into his palace, and showed him every mark of esteem and affection. But Tasso’s apprehensions still continued; he thought that the duke of Savoy would not refuse to give him up to the duke of B'errara, or sacrifice the friendship of that prince to the safety of a private person. Full of these imaginations he set out for Rome, alone and unprovided with necessaries for such a journey. At his arrival there he went directly to his old friend Mauritio Cataneo, who received him in such a manner as entirely to obliterate for some time the remembrance of the fatigue and uneasiness he had undergone. He was not only welcomed by Cataneo, but the whole city of Rome seemed to rejoice at the presence of so extraordinary a person. He was visited by princes, cardinals, prelates, and by all the learned in general. But the desire of revisiting his native country, and seeing his sister Cornelia, soon made him uneasy in this situation. He left his friend Mauritio Cataneo one evening, without giving him notice; and, beginning his journey on foot, arrived by night at the mountains of Veletri, where he took up his lodging with some shepherds: the next morning, disguising himself in the habit of one of these people, he continued his way, and in four days time reached Gaieta, almost spent with fatigue: here he embarked on board a vessel bound for Sorrento, at which place he arrived in safety the next day. He entered the city and went directly to his sister’s house: she was a widow, and the two sons she had by her husband being at that time absent, Tasso found her with only some of hr i <-n:ale attendants. He advanced towards her, without discovering himself, and pretending he came with news from her brother, gave her a letter which he had prepared for that purpose. This letter informed her that her brother’s life was in great danger, and that he begged her to make use of all the interest her tenderness might suggest to her, in order to procure letters of recommendation from some powerful person, to avert the threatened misfortune. For further particulars of the affair, she was referred to the messenger who brought her this intelligence.The lady, terrified at the news, earnestly entreated him to give her a detail of her brother’s misfortune. The feigned messenger then gave her so interesting an account of the pretended story, that, unable to contain her affliction, she fainted away. Tasso was sensibly touched at this convincing proof of his sister’s affection, and repented that he had gone so far: he began to comfort her, and, removing her fears by little and little, at last discovered himself to her. Her joy at seeing a brother whom she tenderly loved, was inexpressible after- the first salutations were over, she was very desirous to know the occasion of his disguising himself in that manner. Tasso acquainted her with his reasons, and, at the same time, giving her to understand, that he would willingly remain with her unknown to the world, Cornelia, who desired nothing further than to acquiesce in his pleasure, sent for her children and some of her nearest relations, whom she thought might be entrusted with the secret. They agreed that Tasso should pass for a relation of theirs, who came from Bergamo to Naples upon his private business, and from thence had come to Sorrento to pay them a visit. After this precaution, Tasso took up his residence at his sister’s house, where he lived for some time in tranquillity, entertaining himself with his two nephews Antonio and Alessandro Sersale, children of great hopes. The princess Leonora of Este, however, who was acquainted with the place of his retreat, invited him to return to Ferrara, which he did in company with Gualingo, ambassador from the duke to the pope. Concerning the motive of Tasso’s return to Ferrara, some authors think that, weary of living in obscurity, he had resolved to throw himself upon the duke’s generosity. This opinion seems indeed drawn from Tasso’s own words in a letter written by him to the duke of Urbino, in which he declares, “that he had endeavoured to make his peace with the duke, and had for that purpose written severally to him, f the duchess of Ferrara, the duchess of Urbino, and the princess Leonora; yet never received any answer but from the last, who assured him it was not in her power to render him any service.” We see here that Tasso acknowledges himself the receipt of a letter from the princess; and in regard to what he says to be the purport of it, it is highly reasonable to suppose, that he would be very cautious of divulging the real contents to the duke of Urbino, when his affairs with that lady were so delicately circumstanced. This apparent care to conceal the nature of his correspondence with her, seems to corroborate the former suppositions of his uncommon attachment to her; and when all circumstances are considered, it seems more than probable that he returned to Ferrara at the particular injunction of Leonora.

In a short time after he published his “Jerusalem Conquered,” which is a sufficient proof of the injustice of the criticisms that have been passed upon his “Jerusalem Delivered;” since the “Jerusalem Conquered,” in which he endeavoured to conform himself to the taste of his critics, was not received with the same approbation as the former poem, where he had entirely given himself up to the enthusiasm of his genius. He had likewise designed a third correction of the same poem, which, as we are informed, was to have been partly compounded of the Jerusalem Delivered and Conquered; but this work was never completed. In all probability, this last performance would not have equalled the first: and indeed our poet seems to owe his fame to the “Jerusalem Delivered,” the second poem upon that subject being little known.

Manso’s garden commanded a full prospefct of the sea. Tasso and his friend being one day in a summer-house with Scipio Belprato, Manso’s brother-in-law, observing the waves agitated with a furious storm, Beiprato said, “that he was astonished at the rashness and folly of men who would expose themselves to the rage of so merciless an element, where such numbers had suffered shipwreck.” “And yet,” said Tasso, “we every night go without fear to bed, where so many die every hour. Beheve me, death will rind us in all parts, and those places that appear the least exposed are not always the most secure from his attacks.” While Tasso lived with his friend Manso, cardinal Hippolito Aldobrandirii succeeded to the papacy by the name of Clement VIII. His two nephews, Cynthio and Pietro Aldobrandini, were created cardinals: the first, afterwards called the cardinal of St. George, was the eldest, a great patron of science, and a favourer of learned men: he had known Tasso when he resided last at Rome, and had the greatest esteem for him; and now so earnestly invited him to Rome, that he could not peluse, but once more abandoned his peaceful retreat;it Naples. As in consequence of the confines of the ecclesiastical state being infested with banditti, travellers, for security, used to go together in large companies, Tasso joined himself to one of these; but when they came within sight of Mola, a little town near Gaietu, they received intelligence that Sciarru, a famous captain of robbers, was near at hand with a great body of men. Tasso was of opinion, that they should continue their journey, and endeavour to defend themselves, if attacked: however, this advice was overruled, and they threw themselves for safety into Mola, in which place they remained for some time in a manner blocked up by Sciarra. But this outlaw, hearing that Tasso was one of the company, sent a message to assure him that he might pass in safety, and offere.i himself to conduct him wherever he pleased. Tasso returned him thanks, but declined accepting the offer, not choosing, perhaps, to rely on the word of a person of such character. Sciarra upon this sent a second message, by which he informed Tasso, that, upon his account, he would withdraw his men, and leave the ways open. He accordingly did so, and Tasso, continuing his journey, arrived without any accident at Rome, where he was most graciously welcomed by the two cardinals and the pope himself. Tasso applied himself in a particular manner to cardinal Cynthio, who had been the means of his coming to Rome; yet he neglected not to make his court to cardinal Aldobrandini, and he very frequently conversed with both of them. One day the two cardinals held an assembly of several prelates, to consult, among other things, of some method to put a stop to the license of the pasquinades. One proposed that Pasquin’s statue should be broken to pieces and cast into the river. But Tasso' s opinion being asked, he said, “it would be much more prudent to let it remain where it was; for otherwise from the fragments of the statue would be bred an infinite number of frogs on the banks of the Tyber, that would never cease to croak day and night.” The pope, to whom cardinal Aldobrandini related what had passed, interrogated Tasso upon the subject. “It is true, holy father,” said he, “such was my opinion; and I shall add moreover, that if your holiness would silence Pasquin, the only way is to put such people into employments as may give no occasion to any libels or disaffected discourse.”

, a well known Psalmodist, was born in Dublin in 1652. His father, Dr. Faithful Tate, was also son to a Dr. Tate, a clergyman, and was born in the county of Cavan, and educated in the college of Dublin, where he took the degree of D. D. In 1641, being then minister of Ballyhays, in that county, he was a great sufferer by the rebels, against whom he had given some information, and in his way to Dublin was robbed by a gang, while about the same time his house at Ballyhays was plundered, and all his stock, goods, and books, burnt or otherwise destroyed. His wife and children were also so cruelly treated, that three of the latter died of the severities inflicted upon them. After this he lived for some time in the college of Dublin, in the provost’s lodgings. He became then preacher of East Greenwich, in Kent, and lastly minister of St. Werburgh’s church, in Dublin. He was esteemed a man of great piety but, as Harris says, was thought to be puritanically inclined, as perhaps may be surmised from his own and his son’s Christian names, names taken from the Scriptures heing very common with a certain class of the puritans. He was living in 1672, but the time of his death we have not been able to fix. Besides two occasional sermons, he published, 1. “The doctrine of the three sacred persons of the Trinity,” Lond. 1669, 8vo; and, 2. “Meditations,” Dublin, 1672, 8vo.

His son, Nahum, at the age of sixteen, was admitted of Dublin college, but does not appear to have followed any profession. It is observed by Warburton, in the notes to the Dunciad, that he was a cold writer, of no invention, but translated tolerably when befriended by Dryden, with whom he sometimes wrote in conjunction. He succeeded Shad well as poet-laureat, and continued in that office till his death, which happened Aug. 12, 1715, in the Mint, where he then resided as a place of refuge from the debts which he had contracted, and was buried in St. George’s church. The earl of Dorset was his patron; but the chief use he made of him was to screen himself from the persecutions of his creditors. Gildon speaks of him as a man of great honesty and modesty; but he seems to have been ill qualified to advance himself in the world, A person who died in 1763, at the age of ninety, remembered him well, and said he was remarkable for a down-cast look, and had seldom much to say for himself. Oidys also describes him as a free, good-natured, but intemperate companion. With these qualities it will not appear surprising that he was poor and despised. He was the author of nine dramatic performances, and a great number of poems; but is at present better known for his version of the Psalms, in which he joined with Dr. Brady, than any other of his works. His miscellaneous poems are enumerated in Gibber’s <c Lives,“and by Jacob, who says Tate’s poem on the Death of queen Anne, which was one of the last, is” one of the best poems he ever wrote.“His share in the” Second Part of Absalom and Achitophel“is far from inconsiderable; and may be seen in the English Poets. He published also” Memorials for the Learned, collected out of eminent authors in history,“&c. 1686, 8vo and his” Proposal for regulating of the Stage and Stage Plays," Feb. 6, 1698, is among bishop Gibson’s Mss. in the Lambeth library.

, a writer of the primitive church, was a Syrian by birth, and flourished about the year 170. He was a sophist by profession, very profound in all branches of literature, and acquired great reputation by teaching rhetoric. Being converted to Christianity, he became the scholar of Justin Martyr, whom he attended to Rome, and partook with him of the hatred of the philosopher Crescens: for he tells us himself, that Crescens laid wait for his life, as well as for Justin’s. While Justin lived he continued steady in the orthodox belief, but after his death became the author of a new set of fanciful opinions, which, after propagating them for some time at Rome, he carried into the east, and opened a school in Mesopotamia, and other places. Nothing is certainly known concerning his death.

His apology for Christianity, entitled “Oratio ad Graecos,” “An address to the Greeks,” the only genuine work of Tatian which remains, every where breathes the spirit of the Oriental philosophy. He teaches that God, after having from eternity remained at rest in the plenitude of his own light, that he might manifest himself, sent forth from his simple nature, by an act of his will, the Logos, through whom he gave existence to the universe, the essence of which had eternally subsisted in himself. “The Logos,” he says, “through the will of God, sprang from his simple nature.” This first emanation, which, after the Alexandrian Platonists, he calls the Logos, and which, like the Adam Kadmon of the Cabbalists, is the first medium through which all things flow from God, he represents as proceeding, without being separated from the divine nature. Matter is conceived by Tatian to have been the production of the Logos, sent forth from his bosom. And the mind of man is, according to him, reason produced from a rational power, or an essential emanation from the divine Logos. He distinguishes between the rational mind and the animal soul, as the Alexandrian philosophers between *3j and ^%>i, and the Cabbalists between Zelem and Nephesh. The world he supposed to be animated by a subordinate spirit, of which all the parts of visible nature partake: and he taught that daemons, clothed in material vehicles, inhabit the aerial regions; and that above the stars, aeons, or higher emanations from the divine nature, dwell in eternal light. In fine, the sentiments and language of Tatian upon these subjects perfectly agree with those of the Ægyptian and the Cabbalistic philosophy, whence it may be presumed that he derived them, in a great measure, from these sources. After Plato, this Christian father maintained the imperfection of matter as the cause of evil, and the consequent merit of rising above all corporeal appetites and passions; and it was, probably, owing to this notion, that, with other fathers, he held the superior merit of the state of celibacy above that of marriage; and that he adopted, as Jerom relates, the Gnostic opinion, that Christ had no real body. The tenor of Tatian’s Apology concurs with what is known of his history, to prove, that he was a Platonic Christian. His “Oratio” was first printed at Zurich in 1546, together with the Latin version of Conradus Gesner. It was afterwards subjoined to Justin Martyr’s works, printed at Paris in 1615 and 1636, folio but the best edition of it is that of Oxford, 1700, in 12mo.

His distinguished abilities as a mathematician had now recommended him particularly to the esteem of the Royal Society, who, in 1714, elected him to the office of secretary. In the same year, he took the degree of doctor of laws, at Cambridge. In 1715, he published his “Methodus incrementorum,” and a curious essay in the Philosophical Transactions, entitled, “An Account of an Experiment for the Discovery of the Laws of Magnetic Attraction;” and, besides these, his celebrated work on perspective, entitled “New Principles of Linear Perspective: or the art of designing, on a plane, the representations of all sorts of objects, in a more general and simple method than has hitherto been done.' 7 This work has gone through several editions, and received some improvements from Mr. Colson, Lucasian professor at Cambridge. In the same; year Taylor conducted a controversy, in a correspondence with Raymond count de Montmort, respecting the tenets of Malbranche, which occasioned him to be noticed afterwards in the eulogium pronounced on that celebrated metaphysician. In 1716, by invitation from several learned men, to whom his merits were well known, Dr. Taylor visited Paris, where he was received with every mark of respect and distinction. Early in 1717, he returned to London, and composed three treatises, which are in the thirtieth volume of the Philosophical Transactions. But his health having been impaired by intense application, he was now advised to go to Aix-la-chapelle, and resigned his office of secretary to the Royal Society. After his return to England in 1719, it appears that he applied his mind to studies of a religious nature, the result of which were found in some dissertations preserved among his papers,” On the Jewish Sacrifices,' 7 &c. He did not, however, neglect his former pursuits, but amused himself with drawing, improved his treatise on linear perspective, and wrote a defence of it against the attacks of J. Bernoulli!, in a paper which appears in the thirtieth volume of the Philosophical Transactions, Bernouilli objected to the work as too abstruse, and denied the author the merit of inventing his system. It is indeed acknowledged, that though Dr. B. Taylor discovered it for himself, he was not the first who had trod the same path, as it had been done by Guido Ubaldi, in a book on perspective, published at Pesaro in 1600. The abstruseness of his work has been obviated by another author, in a work entitled, “Dr. Brook Taylor’s method of Perspective made easy, both in theory and practice, &c. by Joshua Kirby, painter;” and this publication has continued to be the manual both of artists and dilettanti. Towards the end of 1720, Dr. Taylor visited lord Bolingbroke, near Orleans, hut returned the next year, and published his last paper in the Philosophical Transactions, which described, “An Experiment made to ascertain the Proportion of Expansion in the Thermometer, with regard to the Degree of Heat.”

About this time also he was appointed chaplain 4n ordinary to the king, having already been made chaplain to archbishop Laud; and in March 1638, he was instituted to the rectory of Uppingham, in the county of Rutland, by Francis Dee, bishop of Peterborough, on the presentation of William Juxon, bishop of London. He had no sooner received institution into this preferment than he commenced his charge over it, and continued to reside at Uppingham until 1642. In May 1639 he was married in the church of that town to Phoebe Landisdale, or Langsdale, a lady of whose family little is known, unless that she had a brother of the medical profession, a Dr. Langsdale of Gainsborough. By her Mr. Taylor had four sons and three daughters. Of the exemplary manner in which he administered the spiritual concerns of his parish, a fair conclusion may be drawn, both from his ardent piety, and from the way in which he himself speaks of his experience in the conduct of souls. He was no less attentive and useful in managing the secular affairs of his parish, of which many proofs exist in its records.

While in Wales, he was obliged to maintain himself and family by keeping school, at Newton, in Carmarthenshire, where he was assisted by Mr. William Wyatt of St. John’s college, Oxford, and they jointly produced, in 164-7, “A new and easie institution of Grammar,” London, 12mo. This scarce little volume has two dedications, one in Latin to lord Hatton by Wyatt, the other in English, by Taylor, addressed to lord Hatton’s son. The eminence of Dr. Taylor’s learning, and the integrity of his principles procured him scholars, who, as his biographer says, “having, as it were, received instruction from this prophet in the wilderness, were transplanted to the universities.” He found also a generous patron in Richard Vaughan, earl of Carbery, who resided at Golden Grove, the seat of his ancestors, in the parish of Llanfihangel Aberbythick, near Llandillo Fawr, in Carmarthenshire. Into this hospitable family he was received as chaplain, and had a stipend allotted him, as he himself intimates in his dedication to lord Carbery, prefixed to his “Course of Sermons.” It would appear that persecution had followed him into Wales, before he obtained his present comfortable asylum, but in what manner or to what extent is not known.

It is not ascertained whether his wife survived him; but it is well known that he left three daughters, Phosbe, Joanna, and Mary. The eldest died single; the second married Mr. Harrison, a barrister in Ireland, and the youngest became the wife of Dr. Francis Marsh, afterwards archbishop of Dublin. In this sketch of bishop Taylor’s life, we have principally followed a recent valuable publication, “The Life of the Rt. Rev. Jeremy Taylor, D. D. &c. By the rev. Henry Kaye Bonney, M. A. of Christ’s college, Cambridge, prebendary of Lincoln, and rector of King’s Cliffe, in the county of Northampton,” 1815, 8vo.

, a learned dissenting teacher, was born near Lancaster in 1694, and educated at Whitehaven. He settled first at Kirksteadin Lincolnshire, where he preached to a very small congregation, and '.aught a grammar school for the support of his family, near twenty years; but in 1733, his merit in this obscure situation being known, he was unanimously chosen by a presbyterian congregation at Norwich, where he preached many years, and avowed his sentiments to be hostile to the Trinitarian doctrine. From this city he was, in <757, invited to Warrington in Lancashire, to superintend an academy formed there; being judged the fittest person to give this new institution a proper dignity and reputation in the world. With this invitation, which was warmly and importunately enforced, he complied; but some differences about precedency and authority, as well as some disputes about the principles of morals, soon involved, and almost endangered, the very being of the academy, and subjected him to such treatment as he often said, “would shorten his days:” and so it proved. He had a very good constitution, which he had preserved by temperance, but it was now undermined by a complication of disorders. “The last time I saw him,” says Dr. Harwood, “he bitterly lamented his unhappy situation, and his being rendered (all proper authority, as a tutor, being taken from him) utterly incapable of being any longer useful, said his life was not any object of desire to him, when his public usefulness was no more; and repeated with great emotion some celebrated lines to this purpose out of Sophocles.”

In the following year the learning and critical abilities of Dr. Taylor were again called forth. The late earl of Sandwich, on his return from a voyage to the Greek islands, of which his own account has been published since his death, and which shews him to have been a nobleman of considerable learning, brought with him a marble from Delos. That island, “which lay in the very centre of the then trading world,” (to use the words of our learned countryman, Mr. Clarke,) “was soon seized by the Athenians and applied to the purposes of a commercial repository: and this subtle and enterprizing people, to encrease the sacreclness and inviolability of its character, celebrated a solemn festival there once in every olympiad.” The marble in question contained a particular of all the revenues and appointments set apart for that purpose. From the known skill of Dr. Taylor on all points of Grecian antiquity it was submitted to his inspection, and was published by him in 1743, under the title of “Marmor Sandvicense cum commentario et notis;” and never probably was an ancient inscription more ably or satisfactorily elucidated. In the same year he also published the only remaining oration of Lycurgus, and one of Demosthenes, in a small octavo volume, with an inscription to his friend Mr. Charles Yorke.

, marquis de Louvois, by which title he is generally known, was born at Paris, January 18, 1641. He was the son of Mit-hel le Teilier, secretary of state, and afterwards chancellor of France, and keeper of the seals. The great credit and power of the father gave an early introduction to the son into the offices of slate, and he was onlv twenty- three when the reversion of the place of war-minister was assigned to him. His vigilance, activity, and application, immediately marked him as a man of superior talents for business; and two years afterwards, in 1666, he succeeded his father as secretary of state. In 1668 he was appointed post-mastergeneral, chancellor of the royal orders, and grand vicar of the orders of St. Lazarus and Mount Carmel; in all which places he fully justified the first conception of his talents. By his advice, and under his care, was built the royal hospital of invalids; and several academies were founded for the education of young men of good families in the military line. After the death of Colbert, in 1683, Louvois was appointed superintendant of buildings, arts, and manufactures. Amidst this variety of occupations, to which his genius proved itself fully equal, he shone most particularly in the direction of military affairs. He established magazines, and introduced a discipline which was felt with advantage in every department of the army. He several times acted in person as grand master of the ordnance, and in that branch of duty signalized his judgment and energy no less than in every other. The force of his genius, and the success of his most arduous undertakings, gained him an extreme ascendant over the mind of Louis XIV. but he abused his power, and treated his sovereign with a haughtiness which created disgust and hatred in all who saw it. One day, on returning from a council, where he had been very ill received by the king, he expired in his own apartment, the victim of ambition, grief, and vexation. This happened when he was no more than fifty-one, on the 16th of July, 1691.

, otherwise called Molyn, and Pietro Mulier, another artist of note, was born at Haerlem in 1637, and according to some authors, was the disciple of Snyders, whose manner he at first adopted, and painted huntings of different animals, as large as life, with singular force and success. He afterwards changed both his style and subjects, and delighted to paint tempests, storms at sea, and shipwrecks, which he executed admirably, and therefore got the name, by which he is generally known, of Tempesta. After travelling through Holland he went to Rome, and having changed his religion from protestantism to popery, became greatly caressed as an artist, and received the title of cavaliere. After passing some years at Rome he visited Genoa, where he was likewise highly honoured, and fully employed, but appears to have lost all sense of principle or shame; for, in order to marry a Genoese lady, he caused his wife, whom he had left at Rome, to be murdered. This atrocious affair being discovered, he was sentenced to be hanged, but by the intervention of some of the nobility, who admired his talents, his sentence would probably have been changed to perpetual imprisonment. From this, however, he contrived to escape, after being confined sixteen years, and died in 1701, in the sixty-fourth year of his age. It was from this crime that he obtained the name of Pietro Mu­Lier, or de Mulieribus. His pictures are very rare, and held in great estimation, and those he painted in prison are thought to be of very superior merit. He executed also, by the graver only, several very neat prints, in a style greatly resembling that of Vander Velde. They consist chiefly of candle-light pieces, and dark subjects.

This recommendation was effectual with both these statesmen, as well as with the king, although he was not immediately employed. Sir William Templew^s nev.er forgetful of this obligation he constantly kept np a Correspondence with the duke of Ormond, and afterwards zealously defended him against the attempt of the earl of Essex to displace him from the government of Ireland. In the mean time, during his interviews with lord Arling­‘ton, who seems to have had his promotion at heart, he took occasion to hint to his lordship, that if his majesty thought him worthy of any employment abroad, he should be happy to accept it; but begged leave to object to the northern climates, to which he had a great aversion. Lord Arlington expressed his regret at this, because the place of envoy at Sweden was the only one then vacant. In 1665, however, about the commencement of the first Dutch, war, lord Arlington communicated to him that his majesty wanted to send a person abroad upon an affair of great importance, and advised him to accept the offer, whether in all respects agreeable or not, as it would prove an introduction to his majesty’s service, This business was a secret commission to the bishop of Munster, for the purpose of concluding a treaty between the king and him, by which the bishop should be obliged, upon receiving a certain sum of money, to join his majesty immediately in the war with Holland. Sir William made no scruple to accept this commission, which he executed with speed and success, and in the most private manner, without any train or official character. In July he began his journey to Qoesvelt, and not long after it was known publicly, that he had in a very few days concluded and signed the treaty there, in which his perfect knowledge in Latin, which he had retained, was of no little advantage to him, the bishop. conversing in no other language. After signing the treaty, he went to Brussels, saw the first payment made, and received the news that the bishop was in the fielfl, by which this negotiation began first to be discovered;, but no person suspected ’the part he had in it; and he continued privately at Brussels till it was whispered to the marquis Castel-Rodrigo the governor, that he came upon some particular errand (-which he was then at liberty to own). The governor immediately sent to desire his acquaintance, and that he might see him in private, to which he easily consented. Soon after a commission was sent him to be resident at Brussels, a situation which he had long contemplated with pleasure, and his commission was accompanied with a baronet’s patent. Sir William now sent for his family (April 1666); but, before their arrival, was again ordered to Munster, to prevent the bishop’s concluding peace with the Dutch, which he threatened to do, in consequence of some remissness in the payments from England, and actually signed it at Cleve the very night sir William Temple arrived at Munster. On. this he returned to Brussels; and before he had been there a year, peace with the Dutch was concluded at Breda. Two months after this event, his sister, who resided with him at Brussels, having an inclination to see Holland, he went thither with her incognito, and while at the Hague, became acquainted with the celebrated Pensionary De Witt.

* An extract from one of his letters months. In a dearth of new tilings on will give some idea of this plan, which each of those heads, to extract out of never took effect. “I spoilt the whole the French Memoirs, German Epheafternoon yesterday with Dr. Pother- nierides, &c. such things os shall apgill in settling the plan of our design, pear to the society to be useful discowhich in short is this by a settled re- veries or observations, and not suffigular correspondence in the principal ciently known or attended to. The cities of Europe, to have the most early greatest difficulty lying on us is the intelligence of the improvements in choice of proper persons to execute chemistry, anatomy, botany, chinir- this design some being too much gery, with accounts of epidemical di- taken up in business, and others justly seases, state of the weather, remark- exceptionable as being untractable, able cases, observations, and useful presumptuous, and overbearing. The medicines. A society to be formed men of business, however, will he of here in town, to meet regularly once a some use to us, in communicating reweek, at which meeting all papers trans- markable. cases and occurrences. Such milted to be read, and s,uch as are ap- a work will require a great number of proved of to be published in the Eng- hands; and, besides good abilities, it lish language, in the manner of our will be neiessary they should be good Philosophical Transactions a pam- sort of men too.” ms Letter to Dr. phlet of 2s, or 2. 6d. once in three Cuming. met with proper encouragement from the public, it was his intention to have extended the work to twelve volumes, with an additional one of index, and that he was prepared to publish two such volumes every year. His translation of “Norden’s Travels” appeared in the beginning of 1757 and in that year he was editor of “Select Cases and Consultations in Physic, by Dr. Woodward,” 8vo. On the establishment of the British Museum in 1753, he was appointed to the office of keeper of the reading-room, which he resigned on being chosen, in 1760, secretary to the then newly instituted Society of Arts, Manufactures, and Commerce. In 1762 he was elected a corresponding member of the Royal Academy of Science of Paris, and also of the CEconomical Society at Berne. Very early in life Dr. Templeman was afflicted with severe paroxysms of an asthma, which eluded the force of all that either his own skill, or that of the most eminent physicians then living, could suggest to him; and it continued to harass him till his death, which happened September 23, 1769. He was esteemed a man of great learning, particularly with respect to languages; spoke French with great fluency, and left the character of a humane, generous, and polite member of society.

, was a Latin poet and grammarian, whose age is not exactly known, unless he was the Posthumus Terentianus to whom Longinus dedicated his admirable treatise on the sublime, and whom Martial celebrates as praefect of Syene, in Egypt. Both these things are uncertain, but both have been affirmed by Vosius, and others. Some have also called him a Carthaginian; that he was a Moor, he himself tells us, and thence he is called Maurus. Certain it is, that he was earlier than St. Augustin, who quotes him, Da Civ. Dei, vi. 2. He wrote a most elegant poem in various measures, “De literis, syllabis, pedibus, et metris,” addressed to his son Bassinus, and his son-in-law Novatemus, which gives a truly pleasing impression of his genius, and admirably exemplifies the precepts it delivers. This poem is still extant, having been found in a monastery at Bobbio, in the Milanese, by G. Merula. It was first published by him at Milan, with Ausonius, in 1497; afterwards by Janus Parrhasius, and Nic. Brissaeus; then by Jacobus Micyllus, at Francfort, 1584, in 8vo. It appeared also in the “Grammatici veteres,” of Putschius, published at Hanau, in 1605, 4to; and in the “Corpus omnium veterum Poetarum Romanorum,” Geneva, 1611, 2 vols. 4to.

, a French writer of more industry than genius, was born at St. Malu’s, in 1715. He entered for a time into the society of the Jesuits, where he taught the learned languages. Returning into the world, he was employed with Messrs. Freron and de la Porte, in some periodical publications. He was also a member of the literary and military society of Besangon, and of the academy at Angers. He died April 17, 1759, at the age of forty-four. Besides his periodical writings, he made himself known by several publications: 1. “An Abridgment of the History of England,” 3 vols. 12mo, which has the advantages of a chronological abridgment, without its dry ness. The narration is faithful, simple, and clear the style rather cold, but in general, pure, and of a good taste and the portraits drawn with accuracy yet the abridgment of the abbé Millet is generally preferred, as containing more original matter. 2 “Histoire des Conjurations et des Conspirations celebres,” 10 vols. 12 mo; an unequal compilation, but containing some interesting matters. 3, The two last volumes of the “Bibliotfaeque amusante.” 4. “L'Almanach des Beaux-Arts,” afterwards known by the title of te La France literaire.“He published a very imperfect sketch of it in 1752; but it has since been extended to several vols, 8vo. 5.” Memoires du Marquis de Choupes,“1753, 12mo. He had also a hand in the” History of Spain," published by M. Desormaux.

, the iirst Latin writer of the primitive church whose writings are come clown to us, was an African, and born at Carthage in the second century. His father was a centurion in* the troops which served under the proconsul of Africa. Tcrtullian was at first an heathen, and a man, as he himself owns in various parts of his works, of loose manners; but afterwards embraced the Christian religion, though it is not known when, or upon what occasion. He flourished chiefly under the reigns of the emperor Severus and Caracalla, from about the year 194 to 216 and it is probable that he lived several years, since Jerome mentions a report of his having attained to a decrepit old age. There is no passage in his writings whence it can be concluded that he was a priest; but Jerome affirms it so positively, that it cannot be doubted. He had great abilities and learning, which he employed vigorously in the cause of Christianity, and against heathens and heretics; but towards the latter part of his life quitted the church to follow the Montanists, which is the reason why his name has not been transmitted to us with the title of saint. The cause of his separation is not certainly known. Baronius has attributed it to jealousy, because Victor was preferred before him to the see of Rome; Pamelius hints at his disappointment, because he could not get the bishopric of Carthage; and Jerome says, that the envy which the Roman clergy bore him, and the outrageous manner with which they treated him, exasperated him against the church, and provoked him to quit it. What perhaps had as much weight as any of these reasons was the extraordinary austerity, which the sect of Montanus affected, which suited his monastic turn of mind. Whatever the cause, he not only joined them, but wrote in their defence, and treated the church from which he departed, with unbecoming contempt. Error, however* says a modern ecclesiastical historian, is very inconstant; for Tertullian afterwards left the Montanists, or nearly so, and formed a sect of his own, called Tertullianists, who continued in Africa till Augustine’s time, by whose labours their existence, as;i distinct body, was brought to a close. The character of Tertullian is very strongly delineated by himself in his own writings if there bad been any thing peculiarly Christian, which he had learned from the Montanists, his works must have shown it; but the only change discoverable is, that he increased in his austerities. He appears to have been married, and lived all his life, without separating from his wife upon his commencing priest, if, indeed, he did not marry her after. The time of his death is no where mentioned.

The style of Pietro Testa as a designer, Mr. Fuseli pronounces unequal “he generally tacked to antique torsos ignoble heads and extremities copied from vulgar models. Of female beauty he seems to have been ignorant. Of his compositions, generally perplexed and crowded, the best known and most correct, is that of Achilles dragging Hector from the walls of Troy to the Grecian fleet. He delighted in allegoric subjects, which are mines of picturesque effects and attitudes, but in their meaning as obscure as the occasions to which they allude. Of expression he knew only the extremes, grimace, or loathsomeness and horror; but the charge of having been a bad colourist is founded on ignorance: his tone is genial, harmonious, and warm, as his pencil marrowy and free; supported by powerful masses of chiaroscuro and transparent shades.”

The compositions of this poet are distinguished among the ancients by the name of “I-iyllia,” in order to express the smallness and variety of their natures; they would novr be called “Miscellanies, or Poems on several Occasions.” The nine first and the eleventh are confessed to be true pastorals, and hence Theocritus has usually passed for nothing more than a pastoral poet: yet he is manifestly robbed of a great part of his fame, if his other poems have not their proper laurels. For though the greater part of his “Idyllia” cannot be called the songs of shepherds, yet they have certainly their respective merits. His pastorals doubtless ought to be considered as the foundation of his credit. He was the earliest known writer of pastorals, and will be acknowledged to have excelled all his imitators, as much as originals usually do their copies. There are, says Dr. Warton, “few images and sentiments in the Eclogues of Virgil, but what are drawn from the Idylliums of Theocritus: in whom there is a rural, romantic wildness of thought, heightened by the Doric dialect; with such, lively pictures of the passions, and of simple unadorned nature, as are infinitely pleasing to lovers and judges of true poetry. Theocritus is indeed the great store-house of pastoral description; and every succeeding painter of rural beauty (except Thomson in his Seasons) hath copied his images from him, without ever looking abroad upon the face of nature themselves.” The same elegant critic, in his dissertation on pastoral poetry, says, “If I might venture to speak of the merits of the several pastoral writers, I would say, that in Theocritus we are charmed with a certain sweetness, a romantic rusticity and wildness, heightened by the Doric dialect, that are almost inimitable. Several of his pieces indicate a genius of a higher class, far superior to pastoral, and equal to the sublimest species of poetry: such are particularly his Panegyric on Ptolemy, the fight between Amycus and Pollux, the Epithalamium of Helen, the young Hercules, the grief of Hercules for Hylas, the death of Pentheus, and the killing of the Neniean Lion.” At the same time it imi;t be allowed that Theocritus descends sometimes into gross and mean ideas, and makes his shepherds ahusive and immodest, which is never the case with Virgil.

king of Corsica, baron Niewhoff, grandee of Spain, baron of England, peer of France, baron of the holy empire, prince of the Papal throne for thus he styled himself; “a man whose claim to royalty,” says lord Orford, “was as indisputable, as the most ancient titles to any monarchy can pretend to be;” was born at Metz about 1696. The particulars of his eventful history are thus related. In March 1736, whilst the Corsican mal-contents were sitting in council, an English vessel from Tunis, with a passport from our consul there, arrived at a port then in the possession of the roal-contents. A stranger on board this vessel, who had the appearance of a person of distinction, no sooner went on shore, but was received with singular honours by the principal persons, who saluted him with the titles of excellency, and viceroy of Corsica. His attendants consisted of two officers, a secretary, a chaplain, a few domestics and Morocco slaves. He was conducted to the bishop’s palace; called Himself lord Theodore; whilst the chiefs knew more about him than they thought convenient to declare. From the vessel that brought him were debarked ten pieces of cannon, 4000 fire-locks, 3000 pair of shoes, a great quantity of provisions, and coin to the amount o 200,000 ducats. Two pieces of cannon were placed before his door, and he had 400 soldiers posted for his guard, He created officers, formed twenty-four companies of soldiers, distributed among the mal-contents the arms and shoes he had brought with him, conferred knighthood on one of the chiefs, appointed another his treasurer, and professed the Roman Catholic religion. Various conjectures were formed in different courts concerning him. The eldest son of the pretender, prince Ragotski, the duke de Ripperda, comte de Bonneval, were each in their turns supposed to be this stranger; all Europe was puzzled but the country of this stranger vas soon discovered he was, in fact, a Prussian, well known by the name of Theodore Antony, baron of Niewhoff.

Bestow‘d a kingdom, and deny’d him bread. Theodore had a son, known by the name of colonel Frederick, who, after following his father into England, entered into the army in foreign service, but appears to have been disappointed in his hopes of rising, or acquiring even a competence, and after sustaining many distresses, without timely relief, put an end to his life, by a pistol, near the gate of Westminster Abbey, Feb. 1, 1797. He was a man of gentleman-like manners, and accomplishments, x and much regretted by those who knew him intimately. He was interred in the church-yard of St. Anne’s Soho, by the side of his father. He published in 17G8, “Memuires pour servir a l'Histoire de Corse,” 12mo, of which there is an English translation and, “A Description of Corsica, with an account of its temporary union to the crown of Great Britain, &c.” 8vo.

, an illustrious writer of the church, was born at Antioch about the year 386, of parents who were both pious and opulent. His birth has been represented as accompanied with miracles before and after, according to his own account, in his “Religious History;” in which he gravely informs us, that it was by the prayers of a religious man, called Macedonius, that God granted his motirer to conceive a son, and bring him into the world. When the holy anchorite promised her this blessing, she engaged herself on her part to devote him to God; and accordingly called him Theodoretus, which signifies either given by God, or devoted to God. To promote this latter design, he was sent at seven years of age to a monastery, where he learned the sciences, theology, and devotion. He had for his masters Theodore of Mopsuestia, and St. John Chrysostom, and made under them a very uncommon progress. His learning and piety becoming known to the bishops of Antioch, they admitted him into holy orders; yet he did not upon that account change either his habitation or manner of living, but endeavoured to reconcile the exercises of a religious life with tha function of a clergyman. ' After the death of his parents, he distributed his whole inheritance to the poor, and reserved nothing to himself. The bishopric of Cyrus becoming vacant about the year 420, the bishop of Antioch ordained Theodoret against his will, and sent him to govern that dumb. Cyrus was a city of Syria, in the province of Euphratesia, an unpleasant and barren country, but very populous. The inhabitants commonly spake the Syriac to;ig.e, Tew of them understanding Greek; they were almost all poor, rude, and barbarous; many of them were engaged in profane superbtitions, or in such gross errors as shewed them to be rather Heathens than Christians. The learning and worth of Theodoret, which were really very great, seemed to qualify him for a better see; yet he remained in this, and discharged all the offices of a good bishop and good man. He was afterwards engaged in the Nestorian dispute, very much against his will; but at length retired to his see, spent his life in composing books, and in acts of piety and charity, and died there in the year 457, aged seventy and upwards. He wrote “Commentaries upon the Holy Scriptures” an “Ecclesiastical History” a “Religious Histor\ T” containing the lives and praises of thirty monks, and several other things, which are still extant.

In his botanical works, “The History of Plants,” and the “Causes of Plants,” which have come down to us almost entire, he mentions, and endeavours to describe, about 500 species; but his descriptions are very imperfect and doubtful, although Sprengel, in his *' Historia Rei Herbaria?,“has bestowed uncommon pains in endeavouring to ascertain them, These works were first published in the fourth volume of the Aldine edition of Aristotle, Ven. 14-97, and have been since reprinted separately, particularly by Bodseus, 1644. There is an edition of his entire works by Heinsius, 1613, folio; and there are editions of his tracts,” De Igne,“” De Ventis,“&c. But the work of Theophrastus most generally known, and oftenest reprinted, is his” Characters," which give him the merit of having been the first who drew characters from common life, and with somewhat of what we might call modern humour. Of this entertaining work the most ancient editions contained only fifteen chapters, to which Camotius, in the Aldine edition of 1551, added eight, and the remaining five were discovered in a ms. at Heidelberg, by Marquard Freher, from whose copy Casaubon inserted them in his second edition of 1659, which, however, is the least correct of the two. The best since are those of Needham, Cambridge, 1712, 8vo Pauw, 1737, 8vo; Newton, 1757, Qxou. Fischer, Cobourg, 1763, 8vo; Goezius, Nurimberg, 179&, 8vo and Coray, Paris, 1799, 8vo. There are translations of this work into almost every European language.

“The History of Perukes” is one of his most known and curious books. He designed it againat those ecclesiastics who were not contented to wear their own hair. The year 1621) (says he) is the epoch of perukes in France. He maintains, that no clergyman wore a peruke before 1660, and pretends that there is no instance of it in antiquity. He observes, that cardinal de Richelieu was the first who wore a calot and that the bishop of Evreux having prefixed to the life of St. Francis de Sales (which he presented to pope Alexander VIII.) a print wherein that saint appeared with a leather cap on, the pope had much ado to accept that book, attended with such an irregularity. M. Thiers exclaims against those ecclesiastics, who powder their perukes, and wear them of a different colour from their own hair. He answers the arguments that may be alledged in favour of the clergy. As for what concerns their beard and their bands, he says, no ecclesiastic wore a band before the middle of last century. There have been many variations about their beard. Sometimes shaving was looked upon as a kind of effeminacy, and a long beard appeared very suitable with the sacerdotal gravity; and sometimes a venerable beard was accounted a piece of pride and stateliness. When cardinal d'Angennes was about to take possession of his bishopric of Mans in 1556, he wanted an express order from the king to be admitted with his long beard, which he could not resolve to cut. M. Thiers acknowledges those variations about the beard; but he maintains that the discipline has been constant and uniform as to perukes; and therefore, he says, they ought to be laid aside, and beseeches the pope and the king to suppress such a novelty. Among his other works are, 2. “Traité des Superstitions qui regardent les Sacremena,” 4 vols. 12mo, a book esteemed agreeable and useful by those of his own communion. 3. “Traité de I'exposiiioii. du Saint Sacrement de PAutel,” 1663, 12mo. Some have esteemed this his best production. Many other articles are enumerated by his biographers, but few of them interesting in this country.

Tbirlby then studied the civil law, in which he lectured while the late sir Edward Walpole was his pupil; but he was a careless tutor, scarcely ever reading lectures. The late learned Dr. Jortin, who was one of his pupils, was very early in life recommended by him to translate some of Eustathius’s notes for the use of “Pope’s Homer,” and complained “that Pope having accepted and approved his. performance, never testitied any curiosity or desire to see him.” The civil law displeasing him, he applied to common law, and had chambers taken for him in the Temple by his friend Andrew Reid, with a view of being entered of that society, and being called to the bar; but of this scheme he likewise grew weary. He came, however, to London, to the bouse of his friend sir Edward Walpole, who procured for him the office of a king’s waiter in the port of London, in May 1741, a sinecure place worth about \00l. per annum. While he was in sir Edward’s house he kept a miscellaneous book of memorables, containing whatever was said or done amiss by sir Edward or any part of his family. The remainder of his days were passed in private lodgings, where he lived in a very retired manner, seeing only a few friends, and indulging occasionally in excessive drinking, being sometimes in a state of intoxication for five or six weeks together; and, as is uual with such men, appeared to be so even when sober; and in his cups he was jealous and quarrelsome* An acquaintance who found him one day in the streets haranguing the crowd, and took him home by gentle violence, was afterwards highly esteemed by Thirlby for not relating the story. He contributed some notes to Theobald’s Shakspeare; and afterwards talked of an edition of his own. Dr. Jortin undertook. to read over that poet, with a view to mark the passages where he had either imitated Greek and Latin writers, or at least had fallen into the same thoughts and expressions. Thirlby, however, dropped his design; but left a Shakspeare, with some abusive remarks on Warburton in the margin of the first volume, and a very few attempts at emendations, and those perhaps all in the first volume. In the other volumes he had only, with great diligence, counted the lines in every page. When this was told to Dr. Jortin, “I have known him,” said he, “amuse himself with still slighter employment: he would write down all the proper names that he could call into his memory.” His mind seems to have been tumultuous and desultory, and he was glad to catch any employment that might produce attention without aqxiety. The copy, such as it was, became the property of sir Edward Walpole, to whom he bequeathed all his books and papers, and who lent it to Dr. Johnson when he was preparing his valuable edition of “Shakspeare” for the press; accordingly the name of Thin by appears in it as a commentator. He died Dec. 19, 1753. One of Dr. Thirlby’s colloquial topics may be quoted, as in it he seems to have drawn his own character, with one of those excuses for which self-conceit is never at a loss. “Sometimes,” said he, “Nature sends into the world a man of powers superior to the rest, of quicker intuition, and wider comprehension; this man has all other men for his enemies, and would not be suffered to live his natural time, but that his excellencies are balanced by his failings. He that, by intellectual exaltation, thus towers above his contemporaries, is drunken, or lazy, or capricious; or, by some defect or other, is hindered from exerting his sovereignty of mind; he is thus kept upon the level, and thus preserved from the destruction which would be the natural consequence of universal hatred.”

Brncker gives the following brief specimen of the more peculiar tenets of this bold, eccentric, and inconsistent philosopher. "Thought arises from images impressed upon the brain; and the action of thinking is performed in the whole brain. Brutes are destitute of sensation. Man is a corporeal substance, capable of thinking and moving, or endued with intellect and will. Man does not always think. Truth is the agreement of thought with the nature of things. The senses are not deceitful, but all fallacy is the effect of precipitation and prejudice. From perceptions arise ideas, and their relations; and from these, reasonings. It is impossible to discover truth by the syllogistic art. No other rule is necessary in reasoning, than that of following the natural order of investigation; beginning from those things which are best known, and proceeding, by easy steps, to those which are more difficult.

, known to the world by the name of Corinna, with which Dryden flattered her, was born in 1675; and, after a life of ill health and various disappointments, died Feb. 3, 17 3O, in her fifty-sixth year, and was buried in the church of St. Bride. Among her other misfortunes, she laboured under the displeasure of Pope, whom she had offended, and who took care to place her in his “Dunciad.” He once paid her a visit, in company with Henry Cromwell, esq. whose letters, by some' accident, fell into her hands, with some of Pope’s answers. As soon as that gentleman died, Curl I found means to wheedle them from her, and immediately committed them to the press; which so enraged Pope, that he never forgave her. Corinna, considered as an author, has very few; claims to notice: she had not so much wit as Mrs. Behn or J Mrs. Manley, nor so happy a gift at intellectual painting; but her poetry was once thought soft and delicate, and her letters sprightly and entertaining. Her poems were published after her death, by Curll; and two volumes of letters (under the title of “Pylades and Corinua,”) which passed between her and a Mr. Gwynnet, who was to have been her husband, but died before matters could be accomplished. In this last publication she gives an account of her own life, which has been abridged in Gibber’s “Lives,” and other collections but which Mr. Malone has proved such a tissue of improbabilities and falsehoods, that a mere reference to it may be thought sufficient

, bishop of Rochester, the eldest of three sons of the rev. John Tnomas, many years vicar of Brampton in Cumberland, was born at Carlisle Oct. 14, 1712. Many of his ancestors, both on the paternal and maternal side, were remarkable for their longevity; so that he might be considered as “born with somewhat like an hereditary claim to length of days.” Being designed for the church, at a proper age he was placed in the grammar-school at Carlisle, whence he was sent to Oxford, in 1730, and, on the 23d of November, was admitted a commoner of Queen’s-college. Soon after his admission he had a clerkship given him by Dr. Smith, then provost. Having discharged this office, and completed his terms, he put on a civilian’s gown, and, leaving Oxford, became an assistant at the classical academy in Soho-square. In this situation he acquitted himself so well, as to be recommended to be private tutor to the younger son of sir William Clayton, bart. a charge which led to his future elevation. How long he remained in it, is not precisely known, but probably till he had completed his pupil’s education. His conduct, however, was so well approved, that shortly after, with the consent of sir William Clayton, the sister of his pupil, on the death of her first husband, sir Charles Blackwell, of Sprowston-hall, Norfolk, became his wife. Mr. Thomas lived in habits of the closest friendship with his brother-in-law, until about 1784, when that gentleman met a premature death, occasioned by a fall from his horse.

He published in his life-time, “An Apology for the Church of England, 1678-9,” 8vo. “A Sermon preached at Caermarthen Assizes,” printed in 1657. “The Mammon of Unrighteousness,”, a sermon preached at the cathedral church of Worcester when he was in a very languishing state of health. His “Letter to the Clergy,” and an imperfect work, entitled “Roman Oracles silenced,” were published after his death. All these shew him to have been a good bishop and industrious divine, but not a writer of parts or genius; his style is harder and more antiquated than that of most writers of his time; but his matter shews the simplicity and humility of his heart; for meekness and unaffected humility were his chief ornaments. These rendered him peaceable and quiet, patient of contradiction, and contented in all conditions, the same easy man when sequestered as when bishop and with the same easy- tranquillity and cheerfulness of mind he prepared to lay down his bishopric, as in his younger years he had done his vicarage. He was never known to have been in a passion. When he was dean of Worcester, one of the prebendaries in chapter fell into a sudden and violent emotion upon no great provocation, which made the dean say to him. “Brother, brother, God give you more patience.” To which the angry gentleman replied, “Mr. Dean, Mr. Dean, God give you more passion.” The good man made no reply, but by a smile. His memory was very good, for though he penned his sermons with great' accuracy, yet he always delivered them memoriter. He was of a stature somewhat tall anci slender, of a long visage, his forehead large, his countenance graceful, and his aspect venerable. The constitution of his body in his younger years was strong and healthful, though afterwards much broken by frequent infirmities, particularly the gout; to frequent and violent fits of which he was subject for upwards of four and twenty years: and that disorder would much sooner have brought him to an end, if it had not been checked by his great temperance and repeated abstinence.

In 1767 he published his “Sailor’s Letters,” 2 vols. 12mo, in which there are many particulars of his life, from 1754 to 1759, told in a rambling and desultory manner. He afterwards edited the works of Oldham in 3 vols. and in 1777, those of Paul Whitehead, in one vol. 4to, and of Andrew Marvell, in 3 vols, 4to, none of which added much to his reputation, either for judgment or correctness. When the war with France commenced, he was, in 1778, appointed to the command of the Hyaena, and was in Rodney’s famous action off Cape St. Vincent, of which he is said to have brought home the intelligence; but this, and other accounts of his progress, as related by his biographer, are certainly erroneous. There was a capt. Thompson, of the America, who brought home the news of Rodney’s having captured a valuable Spanish convoy, but this was capt. Samuel Thompson, a much older officer; and as to Rodney’s action off Cape St. Vincent, a reference to the Gazette will show that it was capt. Uvedale of the Ajax; who brought home that intelligence. We are told, which may be correct, that he was soon afterwards appointed commodore of an expedition against Demerara, and afterwards conveyed home a fleet of merchantmen from St. Eustathius. In 1785 he was appointed commander of the Grampus, and sent to the coast of Africa, where he died on board of his ship, Jan. 17, 1786. He was considered as a brave and skilful commander, and had that infallible test of merit, the affection of his crew. It must also be noticed to his honour that when he acquired some degree of opulence, he with great alacrity and liberality repaid his obligations to many persons who had before assisted him. The most impartial of his biographers concludes with observing that “the merits by which capt. Thompson will be best known to posterity, are his sea songs, which are still on every one’s lips: more especially those three beautiful and affecting compositions, beginning” Loose every sail to the breeze,“” The topsail shivers in the wind,“and” Behold upon the gallant wave."

Thomson himself hints, somewhere in his works, that his exterior was not the most promising, his make being rather robust than graceful. His worst appearance was, when he was seen walking alone, in a thoughtful mood; but when a friend accosted him, and entered into conversation, he would instantly brighten ^ito a most amiable aspect, his features no longer the same, and his eye darting a peculiarly animated fire. He had improved his taste upon the best originals, ancient and modern, but could not bear to write what was not strictly his own. What he borrows from the ancients, he gives us in an avowed and faithful paraphrase, or translation, as we see in a few passages taken from Virgil; and in that beautiful picture from the el<!er Pliny, where the course and gradual increase of the Nile, are figured by the stages of a man’s life. 1 he autumn was his favourite season for poetical composition, and the deep silence of the night the time he commonly chose for such studies: so that he would often be heard walking in his study till near morning, humming over, in his way, what he was to correct and write out the next day. The amusements of his leisure hours were civil and natural history, voyages, and the best relations of travellers; and, had his situation favoured it, he would certainly have excelled in gardening, agricultuie, and every rural improvement and exercise. Although he did not perform on any instrument, he was passionately fond of music, and would sometimes listen a full hour at his window to the nightingales in Richmond-gardens. Nor was his taste less exquisite in the arts of painting, sculpture, and architecture. In his tr.vels, he had seen all the most celebrated monuments of antiquity, a.id the best productions of modern art, and had studied them so minutely, and with so true a judgment, that, in some of his descriptions in the poem of “Liberty,” we have the masterpieces, there mentioned, placed in a stronger light than many visitors can see them witii their own eyes. A* for the more distinguishing qualities of his mind and heart, they are better represented in his writings, than they can be by the pen of any biographer. There his love of mankind, of his country, and friends; his devotion to the Supreme Being, founded- on the most elevated and just conceptions of his operations and providence, shine out in every page. So unbounded was his tenderness of heart, that it took in even the brute creation: he was extremely tender towards his own species. He is not indeed known, through his whole life, to have given any person one moment’s pain by his writings, or otherwise. He touk no part in the poetical- squabbles of his time, and so was respected and left undisturbed by both sides. These virtues did not fail to receive their due reward. The best and greatest men of his time honoured him with their friendship and protection; the app'ause of the. public attended all his productions; his friends loved him with an enthusiastic ardour, and sincerely lamented his untimely death.

The plague beginning at Paris in 1580, he retired to Touraine, and took an opportunity of seeing Normandy and Britany; and on his return to Paris, after the plague Stopped, was sent, with other counsellors in parliament, to administer justice in Guyenne. He came again to Paris in 1582, and had the misfortune not to arrive till the day after his father was buried. To make amends*, however, for not being able to pay his last duties to him, he erected a most noble monument to his memory, and adorned it with eulogiums written by the first wits of the age. la 1584 he was made master of the requests; and at that time, late as it may seem, entered upon a new course of study. He took into hix house Bressieu, the professor royal of mathematics; and under his d-rection applied, this year and the following, to read the Greek Euc-lu) with the notes of Proclus. The anvction which the cardinal de Vendome had conceived for him induced him to spend some time at court; but this affection abating, he withdrew from a place he did not at all like, and devoted -himself entirely to the composing his History, which he had begun two years before. In 1587 he took a wife, having first by the official of Paris been thoroughly absolved from all ecclesiastical engagements; for he had taken the four lesser orders. He lost his mother in 158S; and other troubles of a more public kind exercised him this year. The spirit of the league had seized Paris, and obfigef Henry II. to quit the city. Thuanus followed this prince^ and went by his order into Normandy, to sound the governors and magistrates; to acquaint them with what had happened at Paris; to confirm them m their duty; and to make known his intentions of assembling the states. Uponi his return, he was made a counsellor of state.

During the holding of the states at Blois, he returned to Paris, where he was in danger of losing his life; fur the news of the duke of Guise’s death arriving, all who were of known attachment to the king were obliged to hide themselves. Thuanus was among them, hut happily escaped under the disguise of a soldier. He repaired to the king, who, being removed to Tours, resolved to establish a parliament there, to oppose that of the league; and De Thou would have been made the first president of it, if he had not been fixed against accepting that office; He afterwards accompanied Mr. de Schomberg into Germany, to assist in raising forces for the king, and drawing succours from the German princes he passed by Italy, and was at Venice, when the news of Henry Illd’s death made him immediately return to France. Henry IV. received him very kindly, to whom he gave an exact account of all that had been done, and continued very faithfully in his service; while the king placed the greatest confidence in him, and employed him in many important negotiations. After the battle of Yvry, which Henry IV. gained in 159O, De Thou obtained leave to visit his wife at Senlis, whom he had not seen above a year; and arrived there, after having been detained some time upon the road by a fever. His purpose was to settle at Tours and he was one evening upon the road thither, when a party of the enemy carried off his wife and equipage, while he escaped by the swiftness of his horse, and found ipeaus soon after to recover his lady. In 1592, he had the plague, and despaired of life, but was happily cured by the infusion of bezoarstone into strong waters. The year after, the king made him his first librarian, which place became vacant by the death of the learned James Amyot, famous for his translation of Plutarch and other ancient Greek authors. In 1592, the duke of Guise having made his peace with the king, Thuanus was one of the persons appointed to regulate the conditions of the treaty he became the same year president à mortier by the death of his uucle Augustin de Thou, which honour had long been promised him. He was afterwards concerned in many negotiations with the Protestant party, and was greatly instrumental in bringing forward the edict of Nantes, which was signed in April 1598, and afterwards revoked, as is well known, by Louig XIV. in 1685. In 1601, he lost his wife, whom he immortalized by elegies; but soon after recovered so far from his grief, great as it was, as to take another. During the regency of queen Mary of Medicis, Thuanus was one of the general directors of the finances; and was, to the end of his life, engaged more or less in the service of the state. He died the 17th of May, 1617, and was interred with his fami-ly in the chapel of St. Andrew of the Arches,

He left behind him a general history of his own times from 1545 to 1608, written in very clear and excellent Latin. “Among many things,” says Grotius to him, “which posterity will admire, this above all astonishes me, how you, always as it should seem engaged in business, should find leisure and indefatigable force of mind to know so many and so great things as you have known, and to write them in such a manner as you have written them.” And in another place, “You have comprised a history of the whole world in such a manner, as could not have been expected from a man of the most leisure: such is the plenty of your iQatter, such the elegance of your language.” Isaac Casaubon says, “that Thuanus seems to him to have been providentially given for an example to the age in which he lived of piety, sincerity, probity, and in short of all virtue mid goodness.” Thuanus has acquired immortal glory by his History, which, says Perrault, is written with an exactness and fidelity beyond example. This biographer adds, that he “never disguised or concealed the truth; but had a noble and generous boldness, for which he has been praised by all the great men of his time. This work is worthy of the ancients, and perhaps would have exceeded a great part of what the ancient Romans have left us in the way of history, if he had not affected to imitate them too closely; for this has put him upon Latinizing the proper names of men, towns, countries, and other things, in so strange a manner, as to make a glossary necessary, in order to know frequently what he means.”

It does not appear, that after his exile Thucydides ever again enjoyed his country; nor is it clear from any author, where, or when, or in what year of his age, he died. Most agree, that he died in banishment; yet some have related, that,“after the defeat in Sicily, the Athenians decreed a general revocation of all banished persons, and that he then returned, and was afterwards put to death at Athens. This is not likely; and many other circumstances are related which have no more probability. Hobbcs thinks, that in this variety or' conjectures there is nothing more probable than that which we have from Pausanias, who, in describing the monuments of the Athenian city, says,” The worthy act of Oenobius, in the behalf of Thucydides, is not without honour, for Oenobius obtained to have a decree passed for his return: who returning was slain by treachery, and his sepulchre is near the gate called Melirides." He is reckoned to have been sixty-eight years of age when he died. He left a son, whose name is hardly known, but supposed to have been Timotheus.

In Feb. 1658 he was made chancellor of the university of Glasgow; and, in June following, concurred with Whitelocke in advising the protector to leave the persons who had been detected in a plot, to be proceeded against in the ordinary course of trials at the common law, and not by an high court of justice; it being always his opinion, that the forms and rules of the old constitution should, on every occasion, be inviolably preserved, especially in the administration of justice. Upon the death of Oliver, he was continued in the post of secretary and privy counsellor to his successor Richard; though he was very obnoxious to the principal persons of the army, to whose interests, whenever they interfered with those of the civil government, he was a declared enemy: and their resentment against him on that account was carried to so great a height, that they accused him as an evil counsellor, and one who was justly formidable by the ascendant he had gained over the new protector. For this reason, in Nov. 1658, he desired leave to retire from public business; in hopes that this might tend to quiet things, and facilitate the protector’s affairs with the army: but he was induced still to continue in his employment; and, in December, was chosen member of parliament for the university of Cambridge. He was returned likewise for the tpwn and borough of Wisbech, and for the borough of Huntingdon; but made his election for Cambridge, where he had a greater number of votes than had ever been known on a similar occasion. In April 1659, he used his utmost efforts to dissuade the protector from dissolving the parliament; a step which proved fatal to his authority, though, upon his quitting it, Thurloe still continued in his office of secretary till Jan. 14, 1660. It was then conferred on Thomas Scott, esq.; but on Feb. 27, upon a report of the council of state, the parliament resolved, that Thurloe should be again one of the secretaries of state, and John Thomson, esq. the other. In April 1660, he made an offer of his service for the restoration of Charles II. as appears from a letter of chancellor Hyde to sir John Grenville, in which his lordship observes, that Mr. Thurloe' s offers were very frank, and accompanied with many great professions of resolving to serve his majesty, not only in his own endeavours, but likewise by the services of his friends; but that these offers were mixed with somewhat of curiosity in Mr. Thurloe, who was very inquisitive to know whether his majesty had any confidence in general Monk, or had approached him in the right way: which he desired to know, only to finish what was left undone, or be able the better to advise his majesty. The king returned such answers as were proper, and desired to see some effects of his good affection; and that then he would find his services more acceptable. However, on May 15 following, he was committed by the House of Commons to the custody of their serjeant at arms, upon a charge of high treason; but was soon released, and retired to Great Milton in Oxfordshire, where he generally resided, except in term-time, when he came to his c;, bers at Lincoln’s-inn. He was of great use occasionally to the chancellor Clarendon, by the instructions he gave him with respect to the state of foreign affairs; of which there is a very remarkable instance among his state-papers, in the recapitulation he drew up of all the nei>ociations between England, France, and Spain, from the lime of Cromwell’s taking upon him the protectorship till the restoration. He was likewise often solicited by Charles II. to engage in the administration of public business, but thought proper to decline those offers. He died suddenly, at his chambers in Lincoln’s-inn, Feb. 21, 1668, aged fifty-one; and was interred under the chapel there with an inscription over his grave. He was twice married, first to a lady of the name of Peyton, by whom he had two sons who died before him; and secondly to Anne, third daughter of sir John Lytcote of East Moulsey in Surrey, by whom he had four sons and two daughters.

Hearne published “A discourse of the Dutye and Office of an Heraulde of Armes,” written by Thynne, the 3d day of March, 1605. In 1651 were printed his “Histories concerning Ambassadors and their Functions,” dedicated to his good friend William, lord Cobham. He continued the Chronicle, known by the name of Holingshed’s, finishing Uie annals of Scotland, from 1586 down to where they now end. He drew up a list of English cardinals, added to the reign of Mary I. He wrote the catalogue of English historical writers; but his “Discourses” upon the earls of Leicester, archbishops of Canterbury, lords Cobham, and the catalogue of the wardens of the Cinque ports, were suppressed. He also wrote the history of Dover Castle and the Cinque Ports; the genealogical history of the Cobhams; discourses of arms, concerning the Bath and bachelor knights; the history and lives of the lord treasurers, mentioned in a manuscript life of him in the collection of sir Joseph Ayloffe, barr. Numerous as these works are, yet there are various other literary productions of his: some of them are preserved in the Cotton library, others were possessed by Anstis, sen. garter. His heraldic collections are in the college of arms, and in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford. Some of his manuscripts are collections of antiquities, sepulchral inscriptions, taken by him from English churches, and elsewhere. He intended to have published an edition of Chaucer’s works, but declining that, gave his labours relative to it to Speght, who published them in his edition of that poet’s works, with his own notes, and those of his father, who printed an edition of this ancient writer in 1542. Thynne had meant to have written a comment upon the text, and some verses of his are prefixed to Speght’s edition.

, otherwise Pellegrino, an eminent artist, was of Milanese extraction, but probably a native of Bo. logna, and from the date of his earliest picture known to us, the Nativity in the palace Borghese at Rome, painted 1549, in his twenty-second year, must have been born in 1527. He entered the school of Bagnacavallo, and endeavoured to improve himself, according to Vasari, by designing from the pictures of that master in the refectory of S. Michele in Bosco; but departed for Rome in 1547, chiefly to study the works of Michael Angelo. There he was patronized by Monsig. afterwards cardinal Poggi, who sent him back to Bologna to complete the fabric of his palace, at present the Academical Institute, decorated by his pictures, and the principal monument of his art in Italy though the Carracci seemed to prefer, as objects of imitation for themselves and their scholars, the painting^ with which he had filled the sides and compartments of that noble chapel constructed by him in S. Giacopo of the Augustine friars.

Peilegrino Tibaldi is more known by his works in fresco, than by his pictures in oil, which are extremely scarce: one of the earliest is the Nativity already mentioned, in the palace Borghese, of which the cartoon still exists in a private collection of drawings. It is painted in a sober unaffected tone; and, considered as the work of an artist zealous of his line, with great mellowness of touch. The figures of this are considerably less than the size of life; but there are pictures of his to be met with of diminutive dimensions, with all the finish of miniatures, though rich in figures, touched with great spirit and equal vivacity of colour they are generally set off by back- grounds drawn from his favourite branch of art, architecture.

, son of the rev. Richard Tickell, was born in 1686 at Bridekirk in Cumberland; and in April 1701 became a member of Queen’s college, in Oxford; in 1708 he was made M. A. and two years afterwards was chosen fellow; for which, as he did not comply with the statutes by taking orders, he obtained a dispensation from, the crown. He held his fellowship till 1726, and then vacated it by marrying in that year, at Dublin. Tickell was not one of those scholars who wear away their lives in closets; he entered early into the world, and was long busy in public affairs, in which he was initiated under the patronage of Addison, whose notice he is said to have gained by his verses in praise of “Rosamond.” He produced another piece of the same kind at the appearance of “Cato,” with equal skill, but not equal happiness. When the ministers of queen Anne were negociating with France, Tickell published “The Prospect of Peace,” a poem, of which the tendency was to reclaim the nation from the pride of conquest to the pleasures of tranquillity. Mr. Addison, however he hated the men then in power, suffered his friendship to prevail over the public spirit, and gave in the “Spectator” such praises of Tickell’s poem, that when, after having long wished to peruse it, Dr. Johnson laid hold on it at last, he thought it unequal to the honours which it had received, and found it a piece to be approved rather than admired. But the hope excited by a work of genius, being general and indefinite, is rarely gratified. It was read at that time with so much favour that six editions were sold. At the arrival of king George he sung “The Royal Progress;” which, being inserted in the *' Spectator,“is well known. The poetical incident of most importance in Tickell’s life was his publication of the first book of the” Iliad,“as translated by himself, in apparent opposition to Pope’s” Homer,“of which the first part made its entrance into the world at the same time. Addison declared that the rival versions were both good; but that Tickell’s was the best that ever was made; and with Addison those wits who were his adherents and followers, were certain to concur. Pope does not appear to have been much dismayed;” for,“says he,” I have the town, that is, the mob, on my side.“But he remarks, that it is common for the smaller party to make up in diligence what they want in numbers;” he “appeals to the people as his proper judges; and if they are not inclined to condemn him, he is in little care about the high-flyers at Button’s.” Pope did not long think Addison an impartial judge; for he considered him as the writer of TickelPs version. The reasons for his suspicion we shall literally transcribe from Mr. Spence’s collection. “There had been a coldness between Mr. Addison and me for some time; and we had not been in company together for a good while, any where but at Button’s coffee-house, where I used to see him almost every day. On his meeting me there, one day in particular, he took me aside, and said he should be glad to dine with me at such a tavern, if 1 stayed till those people were gone (Budgell and Philips). We went accordingly; and after dinner Mr. Addison said * that he had wanted for some time to talk with me; that his friend Tickell had formerly, whilst at Oxford, translated the first book of the Iliad; that he designed to print it, and had desired him to look it over; that he must therefore beg that I would not desire him to look over my first book, because, if he did, it would have the air of doubledealing.‘ I assured him that < I did not at all take it ill of Mr. Tickell that he was going to publish his translation; that he certainly had as much right to translate any author as myself; and that publishing both was entering on a fair stage. I then added, that I would not desire him to look over my first book of the ’ Iliad,' because he had looked over Mr. Tickeli’s; but could wish to have the benefit of his observations on my second, which I had then finished, and which Mr. Tickell had not touched upon.‘ Accordingly I sent him the second book the next morning; and Mr. Addison a few days after returned it, with very high commendations. Soon after it was generally known that Mr. Tickell was publishing the first book of the ’ Iliad,‘ I met Dr. Young in the street; and, upon our falling into that subject, the doctor expressed a great deal of surprise at Tickell’ s having had such a translation so long by him. He said, that c it was inconceivable to him, and that there must be some mistake in the matter; that each used to communicate to the other whatever verses they wrote, even to the least things; that Tickell could not have been busied in so long a work there without his knowing something of the matter; and that he had never heard a single word of it till on this occasion.' This surprise of Dr. Young, together with what Steele had said against Tickell in relation to this affair, makes it highly probable that there was some underhand dealing in that business; and indeed Tickelt himself, who is a very fair worthy man, has since in a manner as good as owned it to me. [When it was introduced into a conversation between Mr. Tickell and Mr. Pope by a third person, Tickell did not deny it; which, considering his honour and zeal for his departed friend, was the same as owning it.]” Upon these suspicions, with which Dr. Warburton hints that other circumstances concurred, Pope always, in his “Art of Sinking,” quotes this book as the work of Addison. (See Pope, vol. XXV. p. 168.) When the Hanover succession was disputed, Tickeli gave what assistance his pen would supply. His “Letter to Avignon” stands high among party-poems; it expresses contempt without coarseness, and superiority without insolence. It had the success which it deserved, being five times printed. He was now intimately united to Mr. Addison, who, when he went into Ireland as secretary to the lord Sunderland, took him thither, and employed him in public business; and, when (1717) afterwards he rose to be secretary of state, made him under-secretary. ' Their friendship seems to have continued without abatement; for when Addison died, he left him the charge of publishing his works, with a solemn recommendation to the patronage of Craggs. To these works he prefixed an elegy on the author, which could owe none of its beauties to the assistance which might be suspected to have strengthened or embellished his earlier compositions; but neither he not Addison ever produced nobler lines than are contained in the third and fourth paragraphs, nor is a more sublime or more elegant funeral poem to be found in the whole compass of English literature. He was afterwards (in June 1724) made secretary to the lords justices of Ireland, a place of great honour; in which he continued till 1740, when he died April 23, at Bath. To Tickell cannot be refused a high place among the minor poets; nor should it be forgotten that he was one of the contributors to the “Spectator.” With respect to his personal character, he is said to have been a man of gay conversation, at least a temperate lover of wine and company, and in his domestic relations without censure.

In 1786, he, together with the other teachers of the college, was removed to Marburg, and appointed professor of philosophy. Here he taught with applause logic, metaphysics, empirical psychology, the law of nature, moral philosophy, the history of philosophy and of man, and explained the Greek classics. Of these he is said to have excelled principally in the history of philosophy, and empirical psychology. His religion, we are told, consisted in moral purity and rectitude of conduct: he attached no importance to external worship, though he did not deny its advantages to the great body of the people. He yvas an enemy to every kind of fanaticism, a word which we doubt not was in his creed comprehensive enough to embrace the doctrines of revealed religion. It is more to his honour, however, that he was a man of most extensive learning, particularly in the Greek language. His last performance was a translation of Denon’s Travels in Egypt, illustrated with notes. He died May 24, 1803, in the fifty -fifth year of his age. A prolix account of his studies and his philosophy appeared soon after in the foreign journals, from which we have abridged the present article. His works have never been much known in this country, and were not all very favourably received in his own.

, a landscape-painter, who has left works that sustain their character even in capital collections, was born at Antwerp about 1684, and made himself a painter^ though he studied under very indifferent masters. In 1708, he was brought to England, with his brother-in-law, Casteels, by one Turner, a dealer in pictures, and was employed by him in copying Bourgognon and other masters, in which he succeeded admirably, particularly Teniers, of whom he preserved all the freedom and spirit. He generally painted landscapes with small figures, sea-ports and views, but when he came to be known, he was patronized by several men of quality, and drew views of their seats, huntings, races, and horses in perfection. In this way he was much employed, both in the west and north of England, and in Wales, and drew many prospects for Bridges’s History of Northamptonshire. The duke of Devonshire, in whose collection is a fine view of Chatsworth by Tillemans, and lord Byron, were his chief patrons. He also instructed the latter in his art, who did great credit to his master. After labouring many years under an asthma, for which he chiefly resided at Richmond, he died at Norton in Suffolk, Dec. 5, 1734, and was buried in the church of Stow-Langtoft.

, whom L‘Avocat prqnounces one of the most judicious and accurate critics and historians that France has produced, was born at Paris Nov. 30, 1637. His father, John L,e Nain, was master of the requests. About the age of ten, he was sent to the famous seminary of the Port Royal, where his attention to instruction, and his proficiency, were very extraordinary, and where he very early became fond of ’the study of history. This partiality seems to have been first excited by a perusal of Baronius, and while thus employed he was perpetually putting questions to his master Nicole, who at first gave him such answers as came in his head at the moment, hut soon found that his pupil was not so easily satisfied; and Nicole, although by no means ignorHiit of history, used to dread his approach, lest he might ask questions for which he was not fully prepared. At the age of e ghteen Tillemont began to read the fathers, the lives of the apostles, and their successors in the primitive church, and drew up for himself an account of early ecclesia^tical history, in the manner of Usher’s Annals, a hook he much admired, and formed his pwn somewhat on the same plan. In the mean time he was successfully instructed in other branches but it was a considerable time before he made choice of a profession. In this he was at last influenced by M. Choart de Buzanval, bishop of Brauvais, who determined him in favour of the church, and gave him the tonsure. About 1663, he went to reside with M. Hermant, a canon of the cathedral of Beauvais, and remained there five or six years. He then returned to Paris, and lodged with M. Thomas de Fosse, an old school-fellow, for about two years; but although in all these situations he was constantly employed in study, and had the quiet enjoyment of his time, he removed to the country, and, after receiving the other orders of his church, and being ordained priest in 1676, he settled at Tillemont, whence he took his name, about a league from Paris. About this time he was employed, along with his friend M. de Sacy, on a life of St. Louis, and two years after he travelled in Flanders and Holland. After his return, he continued his studies, and, in 1690, began to publish his <k History of the Emperors,“which was very favourabl\ received, and made the public more anxious to see his history of the church, on which it was well known he had been for some time employed. His” History of the Emperors“was, in fact, a part of his ecclesiastical history; hut when he printed a volume, as a specimen, it fell into the hands of a licenser of the press, who made so many petty objections, that M. Tillemont determined to suppress the work rather than submit to the proposed alterations and omissions, as none of the objections were in any way contrary to the received doctrines of the church. He then, by the advice of his friends, published the history of the emperors separately; and there being no occasion in this case for a theological licenser, he published vol. I. in 1690, 4to; and completed the work in five vols, in 1701, which had abundant success; was reprinted at Brussels, and translated into English. This was followed by his ecclesiastical history,” Memoires pour servir a l'Histoire ecclesiastique des six premiers siecles," &c. 1693, &c. completed in sixteen volumes, quarto. Extreme accuracy of facts and dates constitute the great merit of this work, and the want of a more methodical arrangement, and of a better style, its chief objections. Dupin wishes he had reduced his work to the form of annals, in imitation of Baronius; and this opinion having been conveyed to M. Tillemont, he said he could not think of going over the materials anew, but was very willing to give his manuscripts to any person who would take the trouble to put them in the form of annals. No such person offering his services, M. Tillemont proceeded in his own way, in which he met afterwards with very little opposition, except a short controversy, of no great importance, with father Lamy.

In 1656, Tillotson left his college, and went upon invitation to Edmund Prideaux, esq. of Ford-abbey in Devonshire, to be tutor to his son. Prideaux had been commissioner of the great seal under the long parliament, and was then attorney-general to the protector Cromwell. How long he continued in this Station does not appear;, but he was in London at the time of Cromwell’s death, Sept. 3, 1658; and was present about a week after at a very remarkable scene in Whitehall palace, which we have already related from Burnet in our account of Dr. Owen. The time of his going into orders, and by whom he was ordained, are particulars not known. Some have supposed, that he was curate to Dr. Wilkins at St. Lawrence Jewry, before the restoration; but Wilkins was not admitted to that vicarage till 1662. The first sermon of his that appeared in print was in Sept. 1661: it was preached at the morning exercise at Cripplegate, on “Matth. vii. 12.” and published among a collection with that title, but not admitted among his works till the edition of 1752. At the time of preaching this sermon he was still among the Presbyterians, whose commissioners he attended, thou. h as an auditor only, at the conference held at the Savoy for the review of the Liturgy, in July 1661 but he immediately submitted to the act of uniformity, which commenced on St. Bartholomew’s-day the year following. Upon thus becoming a preacher in the church, he was very little disposed to follow the patterns then set him, or indeed of former times; and therefore formed one to himself, which was long esteemed as a model. He certainly began his course of divinity with the true foundation of it, an exact study of the Scriptures, on which he spent four or five years. He then applied himself to the reading ol all the ancient philosophers and writers upon ethics, and among the fathers chiefly St. Basil and St. Chry*.ostom, with Episcopius among the moderns, whom he made the pattern both of his principles and eloquence. With these preparations, he set himself to compose the greatest variety of sermons that any divine had yet undertaken.

After he had been settled about a year in his see, he found himself confirmed in the notion he had always entertained, that the circumstances attending grandeur make it not near So eligible, with regard to the possessor’s own ease and happiness, as persons at a distance from it are apt to imagine. To this purpose he entered reflections in short-hand in his common-place book, under the title of “Some scattered thoughts of my own upon several subjects, and occasions, begun this 15th of March, 1(191-2, to be transcribed:” and his remarks concerning a public and splendid way of living, compared with a private and retired life, deserve to be inserted, as they did not result from spleen and disappointment, but from the experience ofonfe who at the time actually possessed the highest honours of his country, in his own profession. “One would be apt to wonder,” says he, “that” Nehemiah should reckon a huge bill of fare, and a vast number of promiscuous guests, among his virtues and good deeds, for which he desires God to remember him; but, upon better consideration, besides the bounty, and someiimes charity of a great table, provided there be nothing of vanity or ostentation in it, there may be exercised two very considerable virtues; one in temperance, and the other self denial, in a man’s being contented, for the sake of the public, to deny himself so much, as to sit down every day to a feast, and to eat continually in a crowd, and almost never to be alone, especially when, as it often happens, a great part of the company that a man must have is the company that a man would not have. I doubt it will prove but a melancholy business when a man comes to die, to have made a great noise and bustle in the world, and to have been known far and near, but all this while to have been hid and concealed from himself. It is a very odd and fantastical sort of life, for a maa to. be continually from home, and most of all a stranger at his own ho use. It is surely an uneasy thing to sit always in a frame, and to be perpetually upon a man’s guard, not to be able to speak a careless word, or to use a negligent posture, without observation and censure. Men are apt to think that they who are in the highest places, and have the most power, have most liberty to say and do what they please; but it is quite otherwise, for they have the least liberty, because they are must observed. It is not mine own observation: a much wiser man, I mean Tully, says, * In maxima quaque fortuna minimum licere;' that is, they that are in the highest and greatest condition have, of all others, the least liberty." All these, and many more, are the evils which attend on greatness; and the envy that pursues it is generally -the result of ignorance and vanity.

authors they were so remarkably dis- I have rewarded them accordingly.‘ 3 tinguished by his grace.- * Those,’ said He did not long survive the writing of this letter; for, Nov. I 8th following, he was suddenly seized with an illness, which, turning to a dead palsy, put an end to his life on the 24th, in the sixty-fifth year of his age. He was attended the two last nights of his illness by his dear friend Mr. Nelson, in whose arms he expired. The sorrow for his death was more universal than ever was known for a subject: anil his funeral was attended by a numerous train of coaches, filled with persons of the first quality, who went voluntarily to assist at the solemnity. His funeral-sermon was preached by th^ bishop of Salisbury; and, being soon after published, was remarked on by Dr. Hickes, in a piece entitled, “Some Discourses upon Dr. Burnet and Dr. Tillotson, &c.” The acrimony of this piece is scarce to be matched among the invectives of any age or language: bishop Burnet, however, gave a strong and clear answer to these discourses, in some Reflections on them; and shewed them to be, what they really are, a malicious and scurrilous libel. But whatever attempts were made against archbishop Tillotson, his character may safely be trusted to posterity; for his life was not only free from blemishes, but exemplary in all parts of it, as appears from facts founded on indisputable authority. In his domestic relations, friendships, and the whole commerce of business, he was easy and humble, frank and open, tender-hearted and bountiful to such an extent, that, while he was in a private station, he laid aside two tenths of his income for charitable uses. He despised money too much, insomuch that if the king had not forgiven his first-fruits, his debts could not have been paid; and he left nothing to his family but the copy of his posthumous sermons, which were sold for 2500 guineas; a poor maintenance for the widow of an archbishop, if the king had not increased it by an annuity of 400l. in 16‘jo, and the addition of ’200l. more in 1C98.

The lower house of convocation, in queen Anne’s reign, thought that such a character of “The Rights of the Christian Church,” &c. from a man of Le Clerc’s reputation for parts and learning, must have no small influence in recommending the book, and in suggesting favourable notions of the principles advanced in it; and therefore, in their representation of the present state of religion, they judged it expedient to give it this turn, namely, “that those infidels” (meaning Tindal and others) “have procured abstracts and commendations of their own profane writings, and probably drawn up by themselves, to be inserted in foreign journals, and that they have translated them into the English tongue, and published them here at home, in order to add the greater weight to their wicked opinions.” Hence a notion prevailed in England, that Le Clerc had been paid for the favourable account he gave of Tindal’s book; upon which he took occasion to declare, in a subsequent journal, that there never was a greater falsehood, and protests as an honest man before God, “that, for making mention of that or any other hook, he had never had either promise or reward.*' It will easily be imagined that, in the course of this controversy, Dr. Tindal’s antagonists would object to him his variableness and mutability in matters of religion, and insult him not a little upon his Hrst apostatizing to the chjirch of Rome, upon the prospect of a national conversion to Popery, and then, at the revolution, reverting to Protestantism. To <his he replied, that” Coming, as most boys do, a rasa tabula to the university, and believing (his country education teaching him no better) that all human and divine knowledge was to be had there, he quickly fell into the then prevailing notions of the high and independent powers of the clergy; and meeting with none, during his long stay there, who questioned the truth of them, they by degrees became so fixed and riveted in him, that he no more doubted of them than of his own being: and he perceived not the consequence of them, till the Roman emissaries (who were busy in making proselytes in the university in king James*s time, and knew how to turn the weapons of high church against them) caused him to see, that, upon these notions, a separation from the church of Rome could not be justified; and that they who pretended to answer them as to those points, did only shuffle, or talk backward and forward. This made him, fur some small time, go to the Popish mass-house; till meeting, upon his going into the world, with people who treated that notion of the independent power as it deserved, and finding the absurdities of Popery to be much greater at hand than they appeared at a distance, he began to examine the whole matter with all the attention he was capable of; and then he quickly found, and was surprised at the discovery, that all his till then undoubted maxims were so far from having any solid foundation, that they were built on as great a contradiction as can be, that of two independent powers in the same society. Upon this he returned, as he had good reason, to the church of England, which he found, by examining into her constitution, disclaimed all that independent power he had been bred up in the belief of; Candlemas 1687-8 being the last time he saw any of the Popish tricks, the very next opportunity (namely, Easter) he publicly received the sacrament (the warden giving it him first) in his college chapel, &c. And thus having made his escape from errors which prejudice of education had drawn him into, he resolved to take nothing on trust for the future; and, consequently, his notions concerning our civil, as well as religious liberties, became very different from those in which he was educated.“What Dr. Tindal says here may be true; yet it is observable, that his conversion to Popery, and re-conversion to Protestantism, lay between February 1685, and February 1688, that is, between the twenty-seventh and thirtieth, year of his age; and many will be ready to suspect, that a man of his reasoning and inquiring turn must, before then, have been too much fixed and settled in his principles, either to be a dupe of Popish missionaries, or then to discover first the absurdity and falsehood of fundamental principles. In the mean time he endeavoured to defend his work, in a” Defence of the Rights of the Christian Church against a late visitation sermon, entitled The Rights of the Clergy in the Christian Church asserted, preached at Newport- Pagnell in the county of Bucks by W. Wotton, B. D. and made public at the command and desire of the bishop of Lincoln, and the clergy of the deaneries of Buckingham and Newport,“London, 1707, in 8vo, and in his” Second Defence of the Rights of the Christian Church, occasioned by two late indictments against a bookseller and his servant for selling one of thf said books. In a Letter from a- gentleman in London to a clergyman in the country. To which are added two tracts of Hugo Grotius on these questions; I. Whether the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper may be administered where there are no pastors? II. Whether it be necessary at all times to communicate with the Symbols? As also some tracts of Mr. John Hales of Eaton, viz. Of the Lord’s Supper, the Power of the Keys, of Schism, &c.“London, 1707, in 8vo. In 1709 he published at London in 8vo, a pamphlet entitled,” New High Church turned old Presbyterian“and in 1710 several pamphlets, viz.” An High Church Catechism;“” The jacobitism, perjury, and popery of High Church Priests;“”The merciful judgments of 'High Church-triumphant on offending clergymen and others in the reign of Charles I.“In 1711 and 1712 he published at London in 8vo,” The Nation vindicated from the aspersions cast on it in a late pamphlet entitled, A representation of the present State of Religion, with regard to the late excessive growth of infidelity, heresy, and profaneness, as it passed the Lower House of convocation,“in two parts. In 1713, and some following years he published several other pamphlets, mostly political, which attracted more or less attention, but are now forgotten. He had hitherto passed for an enemy to the church of England, but was soon determined to show himself equally hostile to revealed religion, and in 1730, published in 4to, his” Christianity as old as the Creation, or the Gospel a Republication of the Religion of Nature.“It might have been expected from the title of this book, that his purpose was to prove the Gospel perfectly agreeable to the law of nature; to prove, that it has set the principles of natural religion in the clearest light, and was intended to publish and confirm it anew, after it had been very much obscured and defaced through the corruption ct mankind. We should be further confirmed in this supposition from his acknowledging, that” Christianity itself, stripped of the additions which policy, mistake, and the circumstances of time, have made to it, is a most holy religion, and that all its doctrines plainly speak themselves to be the will of an infinitely wise and good God:“for this, and several declarations of a similar nature, he makes in his work; and accordingly distinguishes himself and his friends with the title of” Christian Deists.“Yet whoever examines his book attentively will find, that this is only plausible appearance, intended to cover his real design; which was to set aside all revealed religion, by showing, that there neither is, nor can be, any external revelation at all, distinct from what he calls” the external revelation of the law of nature in the hearts of all mankind;“and accordingly his refuters, the most considerable of whom was Dr. Conybeare, afterwards bishop of Bristol, Foster, and Leland, have very justly treated him as a Deist. It appears from a letter written by the rev. Mr. Jonas Proast to Dr. Hickes, and printed in Hickes’s” Preliminary Discourse“cited above, that Tindal espoused this principle very early in life; and that he was known to espouse it long before even his” Rights of the Christian Church" was published. The letter bears date the 2d of July, 1708, and is in the following terms:

In 1724, he published in monthly numbers, “Antiquities sacred and profane, being a Dissertation on the excellency of the history of the Hebrews above that of any other nation,” &c. a translation from Calmet. He also began a history of Essex, of which he published a small part, in two quarto numbers, proposing to complete it in three quarto volumes, at one guinea each; but left this undertaking, in 1726, for the translation of Rapin’s “History of England,” which has served to perpetuate his name, and was indeed a work of great utility, and success. This translation, originally published in 1726, 8vo, and dedicated to Thomas lord Howard baron of Effingham, was reprinted in weekly numbers, in 1732 and 1733, 2 vols. folio; the first of which was inscribed, in a manly dedication, to Frederick prince of Wales, who rewarded Mr. Tindal with a gold medal worth forty guineas. The second volume of the 8vo edition had been inscribed to sir Charles Wager, when the translator was chaplain on board the Torbay in the Bay of Revel in the Gulph of Finland. Vol. IV. is dedicated to the same, from the same place, 1727. Vol. VI. from Great Waltham, 1728, to the English factors at Lisbon, where the translator officiated as chaplain five months in the absence of Mr. Sims. The “Continuation” was likewise published in weekly numbers, which began in 1744, and was completed March 25, 1747, which is the date of the dedication to the late duke of Cumberland. When the “History” was published, Mr. Tindal was “Vicar of Great Waltham.” In the “Continuation” he is called “Rector of Alverstoke, and chaplain to the royal hospital at Greenwich.” This last was printed in two volumes, but is accompanied with a recommendation to bind it in three; vol. III. to contain the reign and medals of king William; vol. IV. the reign of queen Anne; and vol. V the i\ ign of king George I. with the medals of queen Anne and king George; a summary of the History of England, and the index. A second edition of the “Continuation” appeared in 1751; and anew edition of the whole, in 1757, 21 vols. 8vo. Both in the Translation and Continuation he was materially assisted by Mr. Morant; and the sale of both so far exceeded the expectations of Messrs. Knapton, the booksellers, that they complimented Tindal with a present of 200l. In 1727, he translated the text printed uith Mr. Morant’s translation of the notes of Mess, de Beausobre and L'Enftmt on St. Matthew’s Gospel. On the discovery of the imposition practised on his uncle, he entered into a controversy with Budgell who had cheated him; and published, among other things, a pamphlet entitled “A Copy of the Will of Dr. Matthew Tindal, with an account of what passed concerning the same between Mrs. Lucy Price, Eustace Budgell, esq. and Mr. Nicholas Tindal,” 1733, 8vo. By this will 2000 guineas, and the ms. of a second volume of “Christianity as old as the Creation,” were bequeathed to Mr. Budgell; and only a small residue to his nephew, whom, by a regular will, he had riot long before appointed his sole heir. The transaction is alluded to in the well-known lines of Pope:

, one of the most valuable Italian writers of the last century, was born at Bergamo, in the Venetian states, Dec. Js, 1731. He was sent to the Jesuits’ college at Monza; and when his course of education was completed in 1746, he entered into the order of that society. In 1754, when in his twenty-third year, he was appointed preceptor of grammar, and afterwards of rhetoric, in the college of Brera, in Milan. In that station, in 1755, he republished, for the use of his pupils, the well-known vocabulary of his late colleague, father Mandosio, “Vocabolorio Italiano e Latino del P. Mandosio accrescinto e corretto” and, from 1756 to 1760, he wrote several orations and other fugitive pieces, in which inight be perceived the bent of his mind towards civil and literary history. Of these Fabroni mentions only one as having been published, “DePatriae Oratio,” Milan, 1759. During his professorship he was appointed assistant keeper of the copious and valuable library of the college of Brera, and began to collect original and curious records from printed books and manuscripts. His knowledge of books had already recommended him to the esteem of the illustrious count Firaiian, then Austrian plenipotentiary in Lombardy; and it is not improbable that he might have a share in the compilation of the catalogue of the vast and curious library of that justly renowned patron of letters, which was afterwards printed at Milan in 1783, in nine parts or volumes, 4to.

The first remarkable work of Tiraboschi, and that which procured him a great reputation, was his “Vetera H.umiliatorum monumenta annotationibus ac dissertationibus, prodromis illustrata,” Milan, 1766, 3 vols. 4to; a work which throws much light on the ecclesiastical, civil, and literary history of the middle ages. -Soon after this publication, he was appointed librarian of the ducal library at Modena, to which he accordingly removed in 1770, and in the following year published the first volume of his justly celebrated “History of Italian Literature,” which was continued by successive publications, and the twelfth and last volume Appeared in 17 8:2. The plan of this woik was very extensive; schools, academies, museums, libraries, printing-offices, travellers, patrons, collectors, artists, and, in short, whatever was directly or indirectly connected with the history of the sciences and literature in Italy, had their appropriate places in this elaborate undertaking, in which, it has been ju^lysaid, that the author discovers uncommon penetration, prodigious learning, great industry, a refined spiru oi criticism, with much facility of composition and elegance of style. Its importance was therefore soon felt ah over Europe. In ttie same order as they appeared at Motlc-na, the sexcral volumes were soon republished in Florence, Home, and Naples; two abridgments also were made of the work, one in France, by Landi, another in Germany; and the literary reviews in every part of Europe seemed to want words to express their applause. Among other effects, not very remote, this work has tended to revive, in this country, a taste for Italian literature, which has been successfully cultivated of late years by Messrs. Matthias, Roscoe, and others. Mr. Matthias, it is weil known, has lately republished what regards Italian poetry, from Tiraboschi, in four volumes, judiciously divided into seven chapters the first of these explains the common principles of Italian and Provencalpoetry the second relates the state and vicissitudes of the Provencal poetry from the year 1183 to 1300; the third gives the progress of Italian poetry during the same period; the fourth exhibits its history from 1300 to 1400; the fifth, a similar account of the improvements which took place from 1400 to 1,500; and the sixth and seventh are devoted to the description of the two subsequent periods from 1500 to 1600, and from 1600 to 1700, the latterof which constituted the limits of Tiraboschi' s general history. This elegant work is a suitable companion to Mr. Matthias’s former publications, his “Select Sonnets and Canzonets” from Petrarch; his “Lyric Productions of the most celebrated poets of Italy,” and his new edition of Crescembini.

, generally known by his assumed name Ravisius Textor, was lord of Ravisy, in the district of Nivernois, whence he took the former of his latinized names. He was esteemed as a scholar in his own time, which was the commencement of the sixteenth century, and taught polite literature in the college of Navarre, at Paris, with considerable success. He died in 1522, and, as some say, in great poverty. His writings were chiefly, if not entirely, in Latin; and there are extant of them, 1. “Epistles,” Lyons, 1569, 8vo. 2. “Dialogues,” Rott. 1651, 12mo, published also with the epistles. 3. “Epigrams,” 4. “Epithetorum Opus,” Bas. 1592, 4to. There is an epitome of this work published at London in 1657, 12mo. 5. “Expositio Nominum.” 6. An edition of the “Opera Scriptorurn de claris Mulieribus,” Paris, 1651, fol. This, however, as is evident, must have been a republication from his edition.

, a learned Italian meteorologist, was born in 1719, at Pianez^a, in Vincenza, and educated at Padua, where he took a degree as doctor of theology, but was principally attached to mathematical studies. He obtained in the mean time some ecclesiastical preferment, and in 1762 was appointed professor of astronomy and meteorology in the university of Padua, where his talents were well known. Here he procured an observatory to be built, which was completed in 1774, and furnished with some instruments from England. About three years after, he was elected an honorary member of our royal society, and had contributed some articles to the Philosophical Transactions. He was first known throughout Europe by an ingenious work on the influence of the heavenly bodies on the weather and atmosphere, “Delia vera Influenza,” &c. 1770, 4to, and became afterwards yet more known by his “Meteorological Journal,” which he began in 1773, and continued till his death. His reputation was afterwards extended by a variety of publications, separate, or in the literary Journals, on meteorological subjects, of which Fabroni has given a large list. He died in Nov. 1797, in the seventy-ninth year of his age, and his private character is said to have been no less estimable than his public.

After having remained about two years at Leyden, he came back to England, and soon after went to Oxford, where, besides the conversation of learned men, he had the advantage of the public library. He collected materials upon various subjects, and composed some pieces; among others, a Dissertation to prove the received history of the tragical death of Regulus, a fable; the substance, however, of which he owns he took from Palmerius, who had examined the subject in his “Observationes in optimos fere Authores Graecos.” Toland began likewise a work of greater consequence, in which he undertook to show, that there are no mysteries in the Christian religion; but he left Oxford in 1695, before it was finished, and went to London, where he published it the next year in 12mo with this title, “Christianity not mysterious: or, a treatise shewing, that there is nothing in the Gospel contrary to reason, nor above it, and that no Christian doctrine can be properly called a mystery.” For the foundation of this proposition, Mr. Toland defines mystery, as ha says it is always used in the New Testament, to be a thing intelligible in itself, but which could not be known without a special revelation; contending, as those do who have since called themselves rational Christians, that there is nothing in the New Testament either against or above reason. His treatise was no sooner abroad, than the public were very much alarmed, and several books came out against it. It was even presented by the grand-jury of Middlesex; but, as usual, without any effect in preventing the sale.

Stillingfleet, bishop of Worcester, in his “Vindication of the doctine of the Trinity,” had taken occasion to animadvert on Mr. Toland' s “Christianity not mysterious;” and, as he supposed that Toland had borrowed some principles from Locke’s “Essay on human understanding,” in support of his heretical doctrines, he bestowed some animadversions also on that work. This, and Mr. Toland’s persisting to represent him as his patron and friend, together with his very exceptionable conduct, made Locke renounce all regard for him, and almost disclaim the little countenance he had given him. To this purpose he expresses himself, in a letter dated the 15th of June: “As to the gentleman to whom you think my friendly admonishments may be of advantage for his conduct hereafter, I must tell you, that he is a man to whom 1 never writ in my life; and, I think, I shall not now begin: and as to his conduct, it is what I never so much as spoke to him of; that is a liberty to be taken only with friends and intimates, for whose conduct one is mightily concerned, and in whose affairs one interests himself. I cannot but wish well to all men of parts and learning, and be ready to afford them all the civilities and good offices in my power: but there must be other qualities to bring me to a friendship, and unite me in those stricter ties of concern; for I put a great deal of difference between those whom I thus receive into my heart and affection, and those whom I receive into my chamber, and do not treat there with a perfect strangeness. I perceive you think yourself under some obligation of peculiar respect lo that person, upon the account of my recommendation to you; but certainly this comes from nothing but your over-great tenderness to oblige me. For if I did recommend him, you will find it was only as a man of parts and learning for his age; but without any intention that they should be of any other consequence, or lead you any farther, than the other qualities you shall find in him shall recommend him to you; and therefore whatsoever you shall, or shall not do, for him, I shall no way interest myself in.” At that time Mr. Peter Brown, senior fellow of Trinity college near Dublin, afterwards bishop of Cork, having published a piece against Mr. “Poland’s book, Mr. Molyneux serit it to Mr. Locke, with a letter dated the 20th of July:” The author, says he, “is my acquaintance but two things I shall never forgive in his book one is the foul language and opprobrious names he gives Mr. Toland; the other is upon several occasions calling in the aid of the civil magistrate, and delivering Mr. Toland up to secular punishment. This indeed is a killing argument; but some will be apt to say, that where the strength of his reasoning failed him^ there he flies to the strength of the sword.” At length the storm rose to such a height that Toland was forced to retire from Ireland; and the account which Mr. Molyneux gives of the manner of it, in a letter dated the llth of September, would excite pity, were it not considered as representing the natural consequences of his vanity. “Mr. Toland is at last driven out of our kingdom: the poor gentleman, by his imprudent management, had raised such an universal outcry, that it was even dangerous for a man to have been known once to converse with him. This made all wary men of reputation decline seeing him, insomuch that at last he wanted a meal’s meat, as I am told, and none would admit him to their tables. The little stock of money which he brought into this country being exhausted, he fell to borrowing from any one that would lend him half a crown; and ran in debt for his wigs, cloatbs, and lodging, as I am informed. And last of all, to complete his hardships, the parliament fell on his book; voted it to be burnt by the common hangman, and ordered the author to be taken into custody of the sergeant at arms, and to be prosecuted by the attorney-general at law. Hereupon he is fled out of this kingdom, and none here knows where he has directed his course.” Many in Englan-o approved this conduct in the Irish parliament; and Dr. Gonth in particular was so highly pleased with it, that he complimented the archbishop of Dublin upon it, in the dedication of his third volume of “Sermons,” printed in 1698. After having condemned our remissness here in England, for bearing with Dr. Sherlock, whose notions of the Trinity he charges with heresy, he adds, “but, on the contrary, among you, when a certain Mahometan Christian (no new thing of late) notorious for his blasphemous denial of the mysteries of our religion, and his insufferable virulence against the whole Christian priesthood, thought to have found shelter among you, the parliament to their immortal honour presently sent him packing, and, without the help of a faggot, soon made the kingdom too hot for him.” As soon as Poland was in London, he published an apologeticai account of the treatment he had received in Ire-< land, entitled “An Apology for Mr Toland, &c. 1697” and was so little discouraged with what had happened to him there, that he continued to write and publish his thoughts on all subjects, without regarding in the least who might, or who might not, be offended at him. He had published, in 1696, “A discourse upon Coins,” translated from the Italian of signior Bernardo Davanzati, a gentleman of Florence: he thought this seasonable, when clipping of money was become a national grievance, and several methods were proposed to remedy it. In 1698, after the peace of Hyswick, during a great dispute among politicians, concerning the forces to be kept on foot for the quiet and security of the nation, many pamphlets appeared on that subject, some for, others against, a standing army; and Toland, who took up his pen among others, proposed to reform the militia, in a pamphlet entitled “The Militia Keformed, &c.” The same year, 1698, he published “The Life of Milton,” which was prefixed to Milton’s prose works, then collected in three volumes folio. In this he asserted that the “Icon Basilike” was a spurious production. This being represented by Dr. Blackall, afterwards bishop of Exeter, as affecting the writings of the New Testament, Toland vindicated himself in a piece called, “Amyntor; or, a Defence of Milton’s Life, 1699,” 9vo. This Amyntor however did not give su< h satisfaction, but that even Dr. Samuel Clarke and others thought it necessary to animadvert on it, as being an attack on the canon of the scriptures. Yet Toland had the confidence afterwards (in the preface to his “Nazarenus”) to pretend that his intention in his “Amyntor” was not to invalidate-, but to illustrate and confirm the canon of the New Testanunt; which, as Leland justly observes, may serve as one instance, among the many that might be produced, of the vfriter’s sincerity. The same year, 1699, he published “The Memoirs of Denzil lord Holies, baron of IfieJd in Sussex, from 1641 to 1648,” from a manuscript communicateJ to him by the late duke of Newcastle, who was ono of his patrons and benefactors.

He seems now to have quitted politics, and to have betaken himself, in a great measure, to learned and theological inquiries; for, in 1718, he published a work of about one hundred and fifty pages in 8vo, with this long title, “Nazarenus or Jewish, Gentile, or Mahometan Christianity containing the history of the ancient Gospel of Barnabas, and the modern Gospel of the Mahometans, attributed to the same apostle, this last Gospel being now first made known among Christians. Also, the original plan of Christianity occasionally explained in the Nazarenes, whereby divers controversies about this divine (but highly perverted) institution may be happily terminated. With the relation of an Irish manuscript of the four Gospels, as likewise a summary of the ancient Irish Christianity, and the reality of the Keldees (an order of lay religious) against the two last bishops of Worcester.” We make no observation upon this work: the reader knows enough of Toland to conclude that it was not written with any friendly view to revelation. He published the same year “The Destiny of Rome; or, the speedy and final destruction of the Pope,” &c.

Her estate, which was a considerable one, she left to her youngest nephew. Her eldest nephew, Gkorge Toilet, of Betley, in Staffordshire, but formerly of Lincoln’s-inn, who was well known for his valuable notes on Shakspeare, died Oct. 21, 1779. “He was,” says Mr. Cole, " a fellow-commoner of King’s college, and my contemporary about 1745; ashy, reserved man, and of no genteel appearance or behaviour.

He had a brother, named Cornelius Tollius, who was also a very learned man. He was born at Utrecht, and in the beginning of his life was an amanuensis to Isaac Vossius: he was afterwards professor of eloquence and the Greek tongue at Harderwic, and secretary to the curators of the academy. He published an “Appendix to Pierius Valerian us’s treatise De Infelicitate Literatorum,” Amst. 1707, 12mo; and an edition of “Palaephatus,” which last is a scarce and valuable work. Alexander Tollius was also brother to the two persons above mentioned, and is known in the literary world by an edition of “Appian,” 1670, 2 vols. 8vd, which is much esteemed.

, a man of very considerable literary abilities, but more famous as a political adventurer, was the son of John Home, a poulterer in Newport-market, and was born in Newport street in June 1736. He was educated both at Westminster and Eton schools, and after remaining at these seminaries about five or six years, was sent to St. John’s college, Cambridge, in 1755, which he quitted in 1758, after taking his bachelor’s degree. Little seems to be known of his conduct or proficiency in his studies, but his future works showed that the latter could not have been neglected; nor have we much accurate information as to his proceedings when he left college, dates, evidently wrong, being assigned by all who have professed to give any account of him. We can only, therefore, say generally that he was for some time an usher at Mr. Jennings’s school at Blackheath, that he took deacon’s orders at the request of his father, who had probably given him a learned education with that view, and that he first served a curacy in Kent. His own choice is said to have been the law, for which he was well qualified, but he was unable to resist the importunities of his family, and therefore entered into the church, for which he undoubtedly was the most unfit man that ever disgraced the profession. This was a radical error in his outset, and eventually the cause of much of the obloquy which attended his life. It is, as a very acute writer has observed, very necessary to keep steadily in view, in order to form a correct and candid estimate of his character, “that he was from beginning to end, a man labouring under great, perpetual, irremoveable civil disabilities.” It was a real misfortune to a man of an enterprizing disposition, and one regardless, as Home Tooke was, of the means by which such a disposition may be indulged, to become a member of an order, in which propriety and duty enjoin a sparing and partial interference with the concerns of the world, and in which, if propriety and duty are found too feeble restraints, the law interposes with a strong arm, to curb profane activity and unprofessional exertions.

Soon after his return he found his friend Wilkes a candidate to represent the county of Middlesex, and not only supported his pretensions, but pledged his credit for his expences, and in the hearing of his parishioners, declared that, “in a cause so just and so holy, he would dye his black coat red.” He also laid hold of other opportunities to acquire a name with the party in opposition to the court. Among these schemes he supported the widow Bigby in an appeal of blood. Two brothers, named Kennedy, had murdered Bigby, a watchman, and were capitally convicted, but afterwards pardoned. It was suggested that this lenity was procured through the interest of their sister, a well-known courtezan, with a nobleman high in office. If such was the fact, and it has often been asserted, and never sufficiently contradicted, the royal mercy could not have been worse directed, nor through a more disgraceful course. But in this affair, Mr. Home was disappointed, for the woman accepted a compensation in money, and desisted from her suit; and he, suspecting that the late Mr. Murphy had negociated the arrangement, hated him till the time of his death. His activity was also shown in some affairs arising out of election slaughters, particularly in the instances of Allen, Balfe, and M'Quirk. He was chosen a freeman of Bedford, to vex and oppose the duke of Bedford; he is said to have prompted the sheriffs in their proceedings respecting the execution of two rioters, Doyle and Valine: and he suggested the verbal reply which alderman Beckford made to the king, recorded ou the monument of that magistrate in Guildhall. He became also the founder of the “Society for supporting the Bill of Rights,” but this eventually terminated in his disgrace, as much at least as he could be disgraced by a separation from Wilkes. In 1770 and 1771, these two patriots amused the public by an epistolary controversy, illustrative of both their characters; but while these letters amused, they also perplexed the public, for it became a matter of great difficulty to ascertain which was the best, or rather which was the worst character of the two. The origin of the quarrel, however, was not discreditable to Mr. Home. His first objection was that the “Society for supporting the Bill of Rights” was, become merely an instrument for paying Wilkes’s private debts, and this objection might have been fatal to a society that had the public good only in view; but Wilkes finally triumphed for the society of the Bill of Rights, like others since, never took private character into consideration,

In 1786 he published an octavo volume, entitled “Epea Pteroenta, or the Diversions of Purley,” which has given him a considerable rank in the literary world, although opinions were long at variance on the merit of his system, which he afterwards expanded in two volumes, quarto. It seems now generally agreed that this work evinces ingenuity and research; and has served to illustrate some passages hitherto little understood in our ancient poets. It is a mistake, however, to suppose that the idea originated with Mr. Tooke: that all language is reducible to nouns and verbs (the point which he has laboured to establish with respect to the English tongue), was perfectly well known to the philosophical grammarians of antiquity: “Aristoteles duas parte.s orationes esse dicit, vocabula et verba,” says Varro, “De Lingua Latina.” This principle Mr. Tooke has successfully applied in the analysis and etymology of a multitude of English words, especially conjunctions and prepositions, by tracing them to their Saxon original. His speculations, however, though undoubtedly curious, have neither opened to us any new views of the human understanding, nor have they at all extended the limits of metaphysical or logical science, as his admirers wished the world to believe; while his work, professing to be a grammatical treatise, was most preposterously used as the vehicle, of political invective; and, as occasion offered, was made subservient to other purposes still more reprehensible. The disquisition upon the word right is ingeniously contrived to confound all moral distinctions, if the common honesty of mankind did not rest upon some surer foundation than the conclusions of an etymologist of his principles.

In 17yO, Mr. Tooke offered himself as a candidate to represent the city of Westminster, in opposition both to Mr. Fox and lord Hood, and on the hustings from day to day displayed that kind of oratory which was likely to gain the affections of a mob. He did not, however, succeed, although he polled near 1700; but it afforded him an opportunity of sending a petition to the House of Commons, filled with coarse invective, which was declared frivolous and vexatious. His next memorable appearance was at the bar of the Old Bailey, where he was tried in 1794 for high treason. The history of the trial is too recent to require a particular detail. It is well known he was acquitted, and that the event to him was no small triumph. There was no sufficient proof of the charge; and as he knew himself to be perfectly safe, he displayed, on his trial, a degree of coolness, presence of mind, wit and subtlety, which astonished and delighted a great portion of his hearers. Even his adversaries have allowed that he was endowed with every species of courage, active and passive,personal and political, although some of them have expressed his courage by the more offensive word, impudence. When it was reported that, upon being committed to the Tower, his spirit had failed, and he had burst into tears, Wilkes expressed great surprize, and said, “I knew he was a knave, but I never thought him a coward.” On his trial indeed he endeavoured as much as possible to keep principles out of view, and to prove that if he did associate with men of factious designs, it was only to laugh at them; and it is certain that after he made his escape on this memorable occasion, he employed his powers of ridicule, which were very strong, against many of that character whom he met with in other houses, or entertained in his own.

In 1796 he appeared again as a candidate for Westminster, in opposition to sir Alan Gardner, but not in conjunction with Mr. Fox, and although not successful, polled 2819 votes, without expence, or any other solicitation than the speeches he delivered from the hustings. At length, however, in 1801 he obtained what appeared to have been his fond aim, a seat in the House of Commons, an antipathy against which assembly, it has been said, was one of his earliest, strongest, and most enduring feelings. The errors of representation had been long a standing topic with him, and rotten boroughs and corruption his never-failing accusations. But, like others, he seemed at last to think that there was no harm in taking advantage of the present system as long as it lasted. The borough of Old Sarum, offered to him by a young and almost insane nobleman, and which had been a bye-word among parliamentary reformers, had the singular honour of returning him to parliament, and he took his seat, apparently, without any scruple as to the number or quality of his constituents; nor did his dislike to the present order of things reach its utmost height, till all the doors of the House had been finally barred against him by an act of the legislature. In the mean time the expectations excited by his election were completely disappointed. He made no figure in parliament that answered either the hopes or wishes of his friends; and he bad not sat long before his incapacity, as being a priest, was called in question, and it was proposed to expel him. The then minister, Mr. Addington, now lord Sidmouth, was of opinion that a milder course would be more proper, and therefore brought in a declaratory act, effectually preventing a repetition of the abuse; and Mr. Tooke was permitted to sit till the dissolution of parliament in 1802, and then to retire without the renown of martyrdom. His last appearance as the busy, meddling politician, was in the case of a Mr. Paull, a man without birth, property, education, or public services, who offered himself as a candidate for Westminster. This man he first supported, and afterwards deserted. The consequences to this unhappy candidate are well known, but as they involve the characters of persons yet living and perhaps reclaimable, we shall pass them over in silence.

, a learned Danish historian and antiquary, was born in Iceland, and partly educated there, but completed his studies in Denmark. Here he became so well known for his acquaintance with history, that when Frederick III. king of Denmark, himself a very learned prince, wanted some able scholar to translate certain Icelandic Mss. which were in his library, Torfa-us was recommended to him, and executed his task so much to the king’s satisfaction, that he retained him for several years in his court, and employed him on other affairs that had no connexion with his studies, and always admired him as a man of talent and probity. As a reward he gave him a valuable appointment in the customs, but Torfseus found it not very agreeable to one of his disposition, and was about soliciting an exchange when the king died. His successor and son, Christian V. appointed him his historiographer for Norway, with a salary of 600 German crowns. This enabled Torfaeus to reside either at Copenhagen, or at an estate he had in Stongeland, pursuing his researches into history and antiquities. He died in 1719, or 1720, nearly eighty years old. As an historian, he occupies a very high rank among his countrymen. His principal works, or those best known, although all are scarce, are, 1. “Historia rerum Norvegicarum,” Hafniae (Copenhagen) 1711, 4 vols. in 2, fol. 2. “Orcades, seu rerum Orcadensium historiae libri tres,” ibid. 1697, 1715, fol. 3 “Series Dynastarum et Regum Daniae, a Skioldo Odini filio, ad Gormum Grandaevum,” ibid. 1702, 4to. 4. “Historia VinJandiae antiquae,” 1705, 8vo. 5. “Groenlandia antiqua, seu veteris Groenlandiae descriptio,” 1706, 8vo.

, a celebrated Dominican, better known by the name of Turrecremata, was born in 1388, of an illustrious family at Valladolid. He attended the council of Constance in 1417, was admitted doctor of the Sorbonne in 1429, held some important offices in his order, and became master of the sacred palace. Pope EugeniusIV. sent him to the council of Basil, where he strenuously supported the court of Rome. He was created cardinal in 1439, did oreat services to his order, and died at Rome, September 26, 14-68, aged eighty. His works are, “Commentaries on Gratian’s Decretal,” Venice, 157S, 5 torn. a treatise “On the Church and the Papal Authority,” Venice, 1562, fol. “Expositio super toto Psalterio,” Rome, 1470, 4to, reprinted in 1472, and at Mentz in 1474 “Medltatione*,” Rome, 1467, often reprinted in the same century, and all now of great rarity. He wrote also various others in Latin, in which, says L'Avocat, he servilely defends the Ultramontane opinions, like a slave to the court of Rome, rather than like an impartial divine, and a bishop. He was unquestionably an excessive bigot, and of a most persecuting spirit. Father Touron has written his life.

, a celebrated philosopher, was born at Rome in 1710, of a family originally of Genoa, and studied in the Clementine college at Rome. He became afterwards professor of philosophy and mathematics at the college of Ciudad, in the Frioul. Thence he went to Naples, and taught these sciences in the archiepiscopal seminary. Charles of Bourbon, king of Naples, appointed him in 1754 to be his librarian, superintendant of the royal printing-office, and keeper of the museum, which enabled him to devote his time to his favourite pursuits, one of which was the improvement of microscopes, which he brought to a very great degree of perfection, by inventing the highest magnifiers that had ever been known, four of which he sent in 1765 to our royal society. An account of them may be seen in the Philosophical Transactions, vols, LV. and LVI. This ingenious author was a member of the principal academies of Italy, and a corresponding member of those of Paris, London, and Berlin. He died March 7, 1782, not more rt gretted as a man of genius, than as a man of private worth and amiable manners. His principal works are, “On Natural Philosophy,” Naples, 174-9, 2 vols. 4to. 2. “Elementa Physicae,” ibid. 1767, 8 vols. 3. “History and phenomena oi Vesuvius,” 1755, 4to. 4. “Microscopical Observations,” 1766, &c. ]

, in his native language called Vander Beken, a very learned man, who flourished not long after the restoration of letters, was born at Ghent, in Flanders, in 1525, and educated at Louvain, Thence he went to Bologna, in order to study the civil law and antiquities; where he so distinguished himself by his skill in polite literature, and particularly in poetry, that he became known all over Italy, and acquainted with all the learned of Rome, Venice, and Padua. He was not only a man of learning, but of business also; and hence, after returning to his own country, was thought a fit person to be employed in several embassies. He took holy orders, and at length was raised to the bishopric of Antwerp. Hence he was translated to the metropolitical church of Mechlin, where he died in 15;<5, at seventy years of age. He* founded a college of Jesuits at Louvain, the place of his education, to which he left his library, coins, &c. Besides an octavo volume of “Latin poems,” printed by Plantin, at Antwerp, in 1594, he wrote “Commentaries upon Suetonius and Horace;” the former printed in 1592, the latter in 1608, 4to. Scaliger, Lipsius, Scioppius, and indeed all the learned, have spoken well of his “Commentaries.” Fabricius, speaking of explications and emendations of Horace, says, that he and Lambinus were men of great learning and critical talents, and had carefully consulted the best manuscripts, but it is thought that Torrentius had intrusted the collation to some person who had not his own accuracy

Cellini’s account of Torrigiano is, that “he was a hand*­some man; but of consummate assurance, having rather the air of a bravo than a sculptor: above all, his strange gestures and sonorous voice, with a manner of knitting his brows, enough to frighten every man who saw him, gave him a most tremendous appearance, and he was continually talking of his great feats among those bears of Englishmen whose country he had but recently left.” At what time he came into England is not known, but in 1519, according to Stow, he executed the superb tomb of Henry VII. in Westminster-abbey, for which he received 1000l. for the whole stuff and workmanship. It is also said by Vasari that he executed variety of works in marble, brass, and wood, in concurrence with other masters of this country, over all whom he was allowed the superiority. Vertue ascribes to him the tomb of Margaret countess of Richmond, mother of Henry VII.; and that of Dr. Young master of the Rolls in the chapel at the Rolls in Chancerylane; and lord Orford is inclined to attribute to him ahead of Henry VIII. in plaister in a round at Hampton-court. His lordship adds, that at Strawberry-hill is a model in stone of the head of Henry VII. in the agony of death. It is in the great style of Raphael and Michael Angelo, and worthy of either, though undoubtedly by Torrigiano.

In 1760, Mr. Toup published the first work which made him known to the world as a critic. This was the first part of his “Emendationes in Suidam, in quibus plurima loca veterum Grsecorum, Sophoclis et Aristophanis imprimis, cum explicantur turn emenclantur,” 8vo. The second part appeared in 1764. This work procured him the notice of bishop Warburton, who, from the time of its publication, honoured him with his correspondence and patronage. The bishop, in one of his letters, laments his having a see without any preferment on it: “had it been otherwise, he should have been too selfish to invite any of his brethren to share with him in the honour of properly distinguishing such merit as Mr. Toup’s.” All, however, that the bishop could do, he did with the warmth and earnestness of sincere friendship. He repeatedly recommended Mr. Toup to archbishop Seeker, to the trustees for disposing of his options, to lord Shelburne, and to bishop Keppel; and the favours that prelate conferred on Mr. Toup were owing to the solicitations of bishop Warburton.

Mr. Toup’s next work was the “Appendiculum notarum in Suidam,” 177.5, which may be considered as a fourth volume of his “Emendationes.” He closed his labours in 1773 by his edition of “Longinus,” which places his fame as a critic, on an imperishable basis. Indeed as a writer of profound learning, and singular critical sagacity, Mr. Toup must be acknowledged to rank wirli the most eminent men, in those departments. Dr. Buruey, uhose right to judge cannot easily be disputed, place* him as one of the seven pre-eminent scholars who were the critical luminaries of the eighteenth century. As his life was passed in literary retirement, his personal character was known to few. Hrefailings seem principally confined to his works, in which we are often led to lament an excess of conceit, and a petulant manner of noticing his contemporaries. He censured too freely, and praised too sparingly. In private life he was a kind neighbour, an indulgent master, and an affectionate and tender relation. He was a man, too, of great humanity, which he delighted to extend to the brute creation. We may suppose he also carefully attended to his duties as a parish priest, for, of all things, he expressed the greatest aversion to non-residence, and rejected every proposal to quit his situation upon such terms. Mr. Toup died Jan. 19, 1785, in the seventy-second year of his age, and was buried under the communion table in his church of St. Martin. He bequeathed his property to a half-sister, a widow, and her daughters, who lived with him. It was one of his whims, in his latter writings to call himself Joannes, instead of Jonathan Toup. Many additional particulars respecting this excellent scholar may be found in our authority.

His merit as a botanist now began to be known at Paris, whither he went in 1683, and was introduced to M. Fagon, first physician to the queen, who was so struck with the ingenuity and vast knowledge of Tournefort, that he procured him to be made botanic professor in the king’s garden. Tournefort immediately set himself to furnish it wi.th every thing that was curious and valuable; and, by order of the king, travelled into Spain and Portugal, and afterwards into Holland and England, where he made a prodigious collection of plants. His name was become celebrated abroad as well as at home; and he had the botanic professorship at Leyden offered him, which he did not think proper to accept, though his present salary was but small. He had, however, the profits of his profession, and of a great number of pupils in botany, which, with his own private fortune, supported him very handsomely. In 1692 he was admitted a member of the academy of sciences: he was afterwards made doctor in physic of the faculty of Paris, and maintained a thesis for it, which he dedicated to his friend and patron M. Fagon.

His writings are as follow “Elemens de Botanique: ou, Methode pour connoitre les plantes, avec figures, Paris, 1G94,” 3 tomes in 8vo. He afterwards enlarged this work considerably, and translated it into Latin for the benefit of foreigners, with this title, “Institutiones rei herbarise: sive, Elementa botanices,” Paris, 1700, 3 vols. 4to. The first volume contains the names of the plants, distributed according to his method; the two other the figures of them, very well engraven. This is his great work, and long made him be considered as the oracle of botany. In his system he divided the plants into twenty-two classes, whiqh he determined by the different formation of the flower, and their orders he ascertained by the fruit. He divided all the plants which were known to him from the quality of the flower (corolla) into classes, which his predecessors had limited by the fruit, and these classes he subdivided into orders. He arranged the genera by solid, distinctive marks, which he borrowed of the fruit gave them fixed generic names, and placed the species, with their manifold variations, under the genera. This classification is by no means difficult, and were it not for the imperfect characters of a few of the classes, might certainly be followed; but it yielded at length to the Linnaean method, with which it certainly will not bear a comparison. His next -work was “Histoire des Plantes qui naissent aux environs de Paris, avec leur usage dans la me'decine,” 1698, in 12mo, enlarged by another hand, into 2 vols. 12mo, in an edition of Paris, “l 725. This was translated by Dr. Marty n in 1732, 2 vols. 8vo.” De optima methodo in instituenda re herbaria,“in 1697, 8vo. This is an epistle to our Mr. Ray, who had dissented from Tournefort’s method of classing plants, and ranging them into their several genuses.” Corollarium institutionum rei herbarire, in quo plantse 1356 munificentia Ludovici magni in Orientalibus regionibus observatae recensentur, et ad genera sua revocantur, Paris, 1603,“in 4to. This work is printed in the third volume of Ray’s” Historia Plantarum, 1740,“in folio.” Relation d‘un voyage du Levant, contenant l’histoire ancienne et moderne de plusieurs isles d'Archipel, de Constantinople," &c. Paris, 1717, 2 vols. in 4to, and 3 in 8vo, with figures; reprinted at Amsterdam, 1718, in 2 vols. 4to. This work comprises not only discoveries in botany, but other curious particulars relating to history, geography, and natural philosophy. Besides these larger works, there are several pieces of Tournefort printed in the History of the Academy of Sciences.

In 1763, he commenced author by publishing “A Review of the genuine doctrines of Christianity,” &c. in which he stated his reasons for renouncing the doctrines of Calvin, in which he had been educated, and from which he afterwards departed much farther. In the following year he left Sherborne, came to London, and having taken out his freedom, supported himself by working as a journeyman printer; and having long before this turned his attention to political, as well as religious subjects, he published a pamphlet on libels, which Wilkes and his party had then rendered an interesting topic. In 1765, his late master, Mr. Robert Goadby, formed the design of publishing, periodically, the lives of eminent men of the English series, and employed Mr. Towers as the editor. The first volume appeared accordingly in 1766, 8vo, under the title of “British Biography,” and was continued by him as far as the seventh volume. The remaining three were written by a clergyman in the west of England. This, although the lease known, is by far the best of Mr. Towers’s works. The compilation is every where judicious; his principal authority, indeed, is the “Biographia Britannica,” but he evidently consulted original authorities, studied much among the treasures of the British Museum, and produced a work certainly very creditable to his talents and judgment. He was also at this time far more free from political prejudices than when he became a coadjutor of Dr. Kippis’s in the new edition of the “Biographia Britannica.” As his name, however, was not prefixed to the “British Biography,” he derived no fame from it, although it served to recommend him to his employers.

The above sketch has been taken from the “Account” prefixed by Mr. Churton to “The Works of Dr. Townson,” collected and published by him in 1810, 2 vols. 8vo. The contents of these volumes are: Vol. I. the “Discourses on the Gospels,” to which is subjoined “A Sermon on the manner of our Saviour’s teaching.” The original part of this volume consists of a sermon, entitled “The Quotations in the Old Testament considered,” preached before the university of Oxford, at St. Mary’s Oxford, in 1807, by Mr. Churton, and placed here “in humble hope that it may form no improper introduction to the Discourses of Dr. Townson on the Gospels, by shewing that what is there maintained, in the case of the evangelists, was the known and established practice of revelation, from the days of the first prophets that succeeded Moses.” Prefixed to this excellent discourse, is an introduction of very considerable length, principally in vindication of Dr. Townson from the attack lately made on his work by the author of “ Discursory Considerations on the Hypothesis of Dr. Macknight and others, that St. Luke’s Gospel was the first written.” In handling this controversy, Mr. Churron displays abilities of which it is certainly not too much to say that they place him in the first rank of biblical scholars; but, what is perhaps yet more valuable, they exhibit that uniform candour and calmness of temper, which, if they do not end in conviction, would certainly make many controversies end in peace.

, an eminent botanist, the son of Leonard Targioni, born at Florence Sept. 11, 1722, was sent to the university of Pisa, where he very soon distinguished himself by a thesis on the use of medicine. At the age of nineteen he became acquainted with the famous botanist Micheli, by whom he was protected, with whom he kept up an uninterrupted friendship till 1737, when Micheli died, and whom he succeeded in the care of the famous botanic garden. Of the plants in this garden Micheli had already made a catalogue, which Targioni published after his death, with very considerable additions by himself. In the year 1737, he was made professor of botany in the Studio Fiorentino, a kind of university at Florence, and at the same time member of the academy ofApatisti. In 1738, he became a member of the Collegio Medico, or faculty of Medicine. Much about the same time he was named by government consulting physician in pestilential disorders, aud had the place of fiscal physician (physician to the courts of justice). This last place obliged him to write a great deal, being often consulted on the accidents that became discussions for a court of justice, such as deaths by poison, sudden deaths, unheard-of distempers, and (when, as it sometimes happened, foolish accusations of the kind were brought into court) witchcraft. Some time after, he was named, together with the celebrated Antonio Cocchi, to make a catalogue of the library, begun by P</lagliabecchi and increased by Marni, duke Leopold, and others, which consisted of 40,000 volumes of printed books, and about 1100 volumes of manuscripts. It is to this nomination we are indebted for the five volumes of letters of famous men, as, during his employment in this capacity, he used to make extracts of the curious books which fell into his hands. On Micheli’s death in 1737, Mr. Targioni had inherited his Hortus Siccus, Mss. and collection of natural history, which last, however, he purchased, but at a very cheap rate, with his own money. This seemed to lay him under the necessity of publishing what his master had left behind him, and accordingly he had prepared the second part of the “Nova Plantarum Genera,” but not exactly in the manner in which Micheli himself would have published them; for, though the drawings were too good to be lost, as they have all the accuracy which distinguish the other works of the great naturalist, Targioni could not suffer the work to come forth with the Zoophytes and Keratophytes classed among the plants, asMicheli had intended. Targioni therefore meant to have given the work another form. It was to be divided into two parts, the first of which would have contained the “Fucus’s, Algae, and Confervae;” and the second the “Zoophytes:” the first part was finished a week before Targioni’s death. Many of the plates are from drawings by Ottaviano Targioni, the son of John Targioni, who succeeded his father as reader of botany in the hospital of Sancta Maria Maggiore, a new establishment formed by the grand duke upon a liberal and extensive plan, in which ducal professors of medicine, anatomy, chemistry, physiology, surgery, &c. read gratis on the very spot where examples are at hand to confirm their doctrine. In 1739, Targioni was chosen member of the academy Naturae Curiosorum; and, in 1745, the Crusca gave him a public testimony of the value they set upon his style, by chusing him one of their members. In 1749, he was chosen member of the academy of Etruscans at Cortona, as he was of that of the Sepolti at Volterra in-4749. The academy of Botanophiles made him one of their body in 1757; as did that of practical agriculture at Udino in 1758. In 1771, he was chosen honorary member of the royal academy of sciences and belles lettres at Naples; and, finally, was named corresponding member of the royal society of medicine at Paris in 1780. It is much to be regretted that we cannot give an account of his manuscript works, several of which are known to be very important, as he was one of the most celebrated physicians of this time, and is known to have written a great deal on inoculation (of which he was one of the first promoters in Tuscany), putrid fevers, &c. &c. His printed works are extremely numerous; among the first of them was his “Thesis de prsestantia et usu Plantarum in medicina.” Pisis, 1734,“folio; and the latest, * Notizie degli Aggrandimenti delle Scienze Fisiche accaduti in Toscana nel corso di anni 60, nel secolo 17, Firenze,” 1780, 4 vols. 4to. He had just published the fourth volume of this last great work, on the improvement made in natural knowledge and natural philosophy in Tuscany in sixty years only of the 17th century, when he died of an atrophy in 1780. Mr. Targioni had a large cabinet of natural history, the foundation of which, as has been said, had been laid by Micheli. It consists of the minerals and fossils which are found in Tuscany, and the Zoophytes and Hortus Siccus of Micheli. There is a drawer made at Amboyna, by order of Rumphius, containing all the sorts of wood of that island. Besides this, there is a great suite of animals and shells and petrified animal substances, particularly of the bones of elephants which are found in the environs of Florence.

, a contributor to the study of natural history in this country in the seventeenth century, was by birth a Dutchman, as we are informed by Anthony Wood. On what occasion, and at what period he came into England, is not precisely ascertained, but it may be supposed to have been about the end of queen Elizabeth’s reign, or the beginning of that of James I. as Hollar’s print of him, engraved in 1656, represents him as a person very far advanced in years. He is said to have been for a considerable time in the service of lord treasurer Salisbury and lord Wooton. He travelled several years, and into various parts of Europe; as far eastward as into Russia. In 1620 he was in a fleet that was sent against the Algerines; and mention is made of his collecting plants in Barbary, and in the isles of the Mediterranean. He is said to have brought the trifolium stellatum of Linnseus from the isle of Fermentera; and his name frequently occurs in the second edition of Gerard, by Johnson in Parkinson’s “Theatre of Plants,” and in his “Garden of Flowers,” printed in 1656. But Dr. Pulteney conjectures that Tradescant was not resident in England in the time of Gerard himself, or known to him.

He appears, however, to have been established in England, and his garden founded at Lambeth; and about 1629 he obtained the title of gardener to Charles I. Tradescant was a man of extraordinary curiosity, and the first in this country who made any considerable collection of the subjects of natural history. He had a son of the same name, who took a voyage to Virginia, whence he returned with many new plants, They were the means of introducing a variety of curious species into this kingdom, several of which bore their name. Tradescant’s spiderwort, Tradescant’s aster, are well known to this day; and Linnæus has immortalized them among the botanists by making a new genus, under their name, of the spidcrworfa which had been before called ephemeron. His museum, called “Tradescant’s Ark,” attracted the curiosity of the age, and was much frequented by the great, by whose means it was also considerably enlarged, as appears by the list of his benefactors, printed at the end of his “Museum Tradescantianum;” among whom, after the names of the king and queen, are found those of many of the first nobility, the duke and duchess of Buckingham, archbishop Laud, the earls of Salisbury and Carlisle, &c. &c.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

, an English poet, descended from a family of considerable note in Dorsetshire, was a younger son of Nicholas Turbervile of Whitchurch, and supposed to have been born about 1530. He received hia education at Winchester school, and became fellow of New college, Oxford, in 1561, but left the university without taking a degree, and resided for some time in one of the inns of court. He appears to have accumulated a stock of classical learning, and to have been well acquainted with modern languages. He formed his ideas of poetry partly on the classics, and partly on the study of the Italian school. His poetical pursuits, however, did not interfere with more important business, as his well-known abilities recommended him to the post of secretary to Thomas Randolph, esq. who was appointed queen Elizabeth’s ambassador at the court of Russia. While in this situation, he wrote three poetical epistles to as many friends, Edward Davies, Edmund Spenser (not the poet), and Parker, describing the manners of the Russians. These may be seen, in Hackluyt’s voyages, vol. I. p. 381. After his return, he was much courted as a man of accomplished education and manners; and the first edition of his " Songs and Sonnets/* published in 1567, seems to have added considerably to his fame. A second edition appeared in 1570, with many additions and corrections.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

He began early to write, and when at college, or very soon after, published two pastorals, “Lucy,” inscribed to lord Chesterfield, and “Rosalind,” to earl Grenville. He was also the author of a great deal of vocal poetry, or what he called “sing song,” principally for Vauxhall-gardens; and the satisfactory description ofVauxhall, published in Mr. Nichols’s “History of Lambeth,” was drawriup by him. Having inherited from his father an easy fortune, and from nature an inclination to indulge in learned leisure, he was happily enabled “to see what friends and read what books he pleased.” He was, if any man could be said to be so, most perfectly master of his own time, which he divided at his pleasure between his villa at Ashted, near Epsom, and his apartments in Southampton-street. Indefatigable in reading the newest publications, either of belles lettres or politics, and blest with a retentive memory, he was every where a welcome guest; and, having the agreeable faculty of always repeating the good-natured side of a story, the anecdotes he retailed pretty copiously were rarely found either tedious or disagreeable. In the country he was considered by all the surrounding gentry as a man of profound learning, who had some little peculiarities in his manners, which were amply atoned for by a thousand good qualities both of the head and heart. In London he was in habits of intimacy with many whom the world have agreed to call both great and good. Dr. Johnson loved him, lord Hardwicke esteemed him, and even the mitred Lowth respected him. The literati in general had more regard for him than authors usually have for each other; as Mr. Tyers, though known for many years to have been a writer, was rather considered by them as an amateur than a professor of the art. He was certainly among the number of “gentlemen who wrote with ease;” witness hi* “Rhapsodies” on Pope and Addison; and particularly his Biographical sketches of Johnson, warm from the heart when his friend was scarcely buried, and which have not been exceeded by any one of our great moralist’s biographers. The “Political Conferences” of Mr. Tyers, however, will place him in a higher point of view; in that production, much ingenuity and sound political knowledge are displayed; and the work has received the plaudits it so well deserved, and passed through two editions. One part of Mr. Tyers’s knowledge he would have been happier had he not possessed. He had a turn for the study of medicine, and its operations on the human frame, which gave him somewhat of a propensity to hypochondriasm, and often led from imaginary to real ailments. Hence the least variation of the atmosphere had not unfrequently an effect both on his mind and body. The last year or two of his life were also embittered by the death of several near and dear friends, whose loss made a deep impression on his sensibility, particularly that of a very amiable lady, to whom he was once attached, and that of his only sister, Mrs. Rogers, of Southampton, who died but a few months before him. He died at his house at Ashted, after a lingering illness, Feb. 1, 1787, in his sixty-first year.

, was an eminent mathematician irt Italy, in the end of the sixteenth and early part of the seventeenth century, but no particulars are known of his life, nor when he died. The following occur in catalogues as his works: 1. “Mechanica,” Pis. 1577, fol. and Yen. 1615. 2. “Pianisphaeriorum universalium Theorica,” Pis. 1579, fol. and Col. 1581, 8vo. 3. “Paraphrasis in ArchimedisSquiponderantia,” Pis. 1588, fol. 4. Perspectiva,“ibid. 1600, fol. 5.” Problemata Astronomica,“Ven. 1609, fol. 6.” De Cochlaea," ibid. 1615, fol.

Thus far we have gathered from Walpole’s Anecdotes, who adds, that Ubaldini seems to have been in great favour at court, and is frequently mentioned in the rolls of new years-gifts, which used to be reposited in the jewel-office. There is a notice of this kind as far as 1588, but how much longer he lived is not known. But we find Baretti giving other particulars of Ubaldini. He says he was a nobleman of Florence, who lived many years in England, in the service of Edward VI. The “Lives of Illustrious Ladies” he penned with great gallantry and elegance, and he must certainly have been the favourite of the British (English) belles of his time, having been as handsome in his figure, and as valiant with his sword, as he was able at his pen. Baretti also in forms us that in the preface* to his Life of Charles the Great, he says it was the first Italian book that was printed in London; the date is 1581, printed by Wolf, and consequently the date given above from the Museum catalogue must have been a subsequent edition. Ubaldini adds, that he wrote it, because, “having seen how many fables and dreams the poets have writ of that emperor, he thought it the duty of a man, born to be useful to others, to explode, as much as possible, falsehood from the world, and substitute truth instead.” Baretti informs us that in the Foscarini library at Venice there is a manuscript history of Ubaldini, written with his own hand, of the reign of his master Edward.

, a loyal divine, although of the puritan stamp, was the son of John Udal, an eminent nonconformist of the sixteenth century, and a great sufferer for his nonconformity, being frequently silenced and imprisoned, and at last condemned to die for writing a seditious book called “A Demonstration of Discipline;” but he appears to have been respited, and died in the Marshalsea prison about the end of 1592. He wrote “A Commentary on the Lamentation’s of Jeremiah” “The State of the Church of England laid open in a conference, &c.” and probably the work above-mentioned for which he was condemned b.ut he is better known in the learned world, as the author of the first Hebrew grammar. in English, published onder the title of a “Key to the Holy Tongue,” with a Hebrew Dictionary, which is omitted in the second edition. The first is dated 1593, a year after his death.

, an eminent schoolmaster of the sixteenth century, styled by Leland, in his “Encomia,” Odovallus, was born in Hampshire in 1506, and was admitted scholar of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, June 18, 1520. He then took the degree of bachelor of arts, and became probationer fellow Sept. 3, 1524; but was prevented taking the degree of master soon afterwards, on account of his inclination to the tenets of Luther. He then obtained the mastership of Eton school, and, in the performance of his duty there, behaved, as Thomas Tusser the poet tells us, with great severity. He proceeded in arts in 1534, but in 15il was near losing his place, being suspected of some concern in a robbery of plate belonging to the college, with two of his scholars. For this fact he was examined by the king’s council, but we do not know the result of their inquiries. The charge probably was discovered to be ill-grounded, as he was at this time in possession of the living of Braintree in Essex, which he did not resign till 1544, and in 1552 was preferred to the rectory of Calbourne in the Isle of Wight. He afterwards was servant to queen Catherine Parr, and, in the beginning of Edward VI. 's time, was promoted to a canonry at Windsor. The time of his death is not known, unless by a manuscript note on a copy of Bale, in which that event is said to have taken place in 1557, and that he was buried at Westminster. In 1555 he had been appointed headmaster of Westminster-school, a circumstance not noticed by Wood. He is said to have written several comedies, and Bale mentions “The Tragedy of Popery.” But none of these now exist. A specimen, however, of his abilities in this wav, niay be seen in a long quotation from a rhiming interlude by him, printed in Wilson’s “Art of Logicke,” 1587, and reprinted in the new edition of Wood’s Athense. His more useful works were, 1. “Flowers for Latin speaking, selected and gathered out of Terence, and the same translated into English,” &c. often printed, particularly in 1533, 1538, 1568, and 1575. Both Leland and Newton wrote encomiastic verses on this book. 2. A translation of the “Apophthegms” of Erasmus, 1542 and 1564, 8vo. 3. “Epistolce et carmina ad Gul. Hormannum et ad Joh. Lelandum.” 4. A translation of Erasmus’s “Paraphrase on the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles,” 1551, fol. 5. A translation of Peter Martyr’s “Treatise on the Sacrament.*' He also drew up” An answer to the sixteen articles of the Commons of Devonshire and Cornwall," a ms. in the royal collection.

, a celebrated Spanish mathematician, and a commander of the order of St. Jago, was born at Seville Jan. 12, 1716. He was brought up in the service of the royal marines, in which he at length obtained the rank of lieutenant-general. In 1735 he was appointed, with Don George Juan, to sail to South America, and accompany the French academicians who were going to Peru to measure a degree of the meridian. On his return home in 1745, in a French ship, he was taken by two English vessels, and after being detained some time at Louisbourg in Cape Breton, was brought to England, where his talents recommended him to Martin Folkes, president of the Royal Society, and he was the same year elected a member of that learned body. On his return to Madrid he published his “Voyage to South America,” which was afterwards translated into German and French. There is also an English translation, in two vols. 8vo, 1758, but miserably garbled and inaccurate. In 1755 he made a second voyage to America, where he collected materials for another work, which however did not appear until 1772, under the title of “Entretenimientos Physico-historicos.” He travelled afterwards over a considerable part of Europe to collect information respecting such improvements in arts and manufactures as might be serviceable to Spain, and was the means of introducing many which had not before been known in Spain, or very imperfectly carried on. He died on July 5, 1795. There are a few of his papers in the “Philosophical Transactions.”

, or Gulphilas, a Gothic bishop, and the first translator of a part of the Bible into that language, flourished in the fourth century, and during the reign of Valens, obtained leave of that emperor that the Goths should reside in Thrace, on condition of his, the bishop’s, embracing the Arian faith. Little else is known of this prelate, unless that he translated the Evangelists, and perhaps some other books of the New Testament, into the Gothic language, which he achieved by inventing a new alphabet of twenty-six letters. This translation is now in the library of Upsal, and there have been three editions of it, the best by Mr. Lye, printed at Oxford in 1750. Many disputes have been carried on by the learned both as to the antiquity and authenticity of this version. Of later years, however, another fragment of Ulphilas’s translation was discovered in the library at Wolfenbuttle, containing a portion of the Epistle to the Romans. This has been published by Knitel, archdeacon of Wolfenbuttle, who seems of opinion that Ulphilas translated the whole Bible.

, a classical scholar and editor, was the fourth son of a gentleman of Cheshire, and born at Wimslow, in that county, December 10, 1670. He was educated at Eton, and became a fellow of King’s college, Cambridge, where he proceeded B. A. 1697, and M. A. 1701. He afterwards, at the request of Dr. Newborough, the head master, returned to Eton, where he was tutor to the famous sir William Wyndham, and was an assistant teacher at the school. He married the daughter of Mr. Proctor, who kept a boarding-house at Eton, but afterwards removed to Ilminster, in Somersetshire, upon the invitation of several gentlemen of the county, and particularly of the earl Powlett, to whom he was afterwards chaplain, and aii whose sons were under his tuition at Taunton. He remained a few years at Ihninster, and taught the learned languages there till he was elected to the care of the free grammarschool in Taunton: which he conducted with the highest reputation, and raised to be the largest provincial school at that time ever known in England. The number of his pupils amounted to more than 200; and many of them were from the first families in the West of England. He served for many years the church of Bishop’s-Hull, in which parish the school is situated. So early as 1711 he was in possession of the rectory of Brimpton, near Yeovil, in the presentation of the Sydenham family. In 1712 he was presented by sir Philip Sydenham to the rectory of Alonksilver, 14 miles from Taunton. He died August 13, 1749, aged seventy-nine.

Having continued five years under these excellent masters, of whom he ever afterwards spoke with honour, and having made a progress far beyond his age, he was admitted into the college of Dublin, which was finished that very year, 1593. He was one of the first three students who were admitted; and his name stands to this day in the first line of the roll. Dr. Bernard seems to hint that he was the first graduate, fellow, and proctor, which we doubt, at least as to the fellowship, his uncle being first fellow, and his tutor at this time senior fellow, according to Harris. Here he learned logic, and the philosophy of Aristotle, under Mr. Hamilton, his tutor, and though, as we are told, his love of poetry and cards retarded his studies for some time, yet he soon recovered himself from these habits, applied to books again with great vigour, and at the same time acquired that pious turn which was ever afterwards a distinguishing; feature in his character. He is said to hare been wonderfully affected with that passage in Cicero, “Nescire quid antea quam natus sis accident, id est semper esse puerum” that is, “to know nothing of what happened before you were born is to be always a boy.” About this time, from meeting with Sleidan’s little book “De quatuor imperiis,” he contracted an extreme fondness for the study of history, which he afterwards pursued with equal depth and preciseness. At fourteen years of age he began to make extracts from all the historical books he could meet with, in order to fix the facts more firmly in his memory; and, between fifteen or sixteen, he had made such a proficiency in chronology, that he had drawn up in Latin an exact chronicle of the Bible, as far as the book of Kings, not much differing from his “Annals,” which have since been published. The difference chiefly consists in the addition of observations and the parallel chronofcugy of the heathens. Before he was full sixteen, he had entered upon theological studies, and perused the most able writers, on both sides, on the Romish controversy. Among the Romanists, he read Stapleton’s “Fortress of Faith;” and, finding that author confident in asserting antiquity for the tenets of Popery, and in taxing our church with novelty in. what it dissented from theirs, he kept his mind in suspense, till he could examine how the truth stood in that particular. He took it for granted, as his historian says, that the ancient doctrines must needs be the right, as the nearer the fountain the purer the stream; and that errors sprang up as the ages succeeded, according to that known saying of Tertullian, “Verum quodcunque primum, adulterum quodcunque posterius.” Bishop Jewel had adopted the same principle before him; and too much deference to the authority of the fathers prevailed in their days and long after. Yet they were far from being ignorant, as has been absurdly imputed to them, that the question concerning doctrines is not how ancient, but how true those doctrines are. The dispute was purely historical. Stapleton quoted the fathers as holding the doctrines of popery. Usher thought this impossible, and rather believed that Stapleton had misquoted them, at least had wrested and tortured them to his own sense. This made him then take up a firm resolution, that in due time (if God gave him life) he would himself read all the fathers, and trust none but his own eyes in searching out their sense: which great work he afterwards began at twenty years of age, and finished at thirty-eight; strictly confining himself to read a certain portion every day, from which he suffered no occasion to divert him.

Being now settled to his liking, and freed from worldly connexions and cares, he devoted himself entirely to the pursuit of every species of literature, human and divine; He was admitted fellow of the college, and acknowledged to be a model of piety, modesty, and learning. About this time, the learned Jesuit Fitz-simons (See Fitz-Simons), then a prisoner in Dublin-castle, sent out a challenge , defying the ablest champion that should come against him, to dispute with him about the points in controversy between the Roman and the Protestant churches. Usher, though but in his nineteenth year, accepted the challenge; and when they met, the Jesuit despised him as but a boy; yet, after a conference or two, was so very sensible of the quickness of his wit, the strength of his arguments, and his skill in disputation, as to decline any farther contest with him. This appears from the following letter of Usher, which Dr. Parr has inserted in his life; and which serves also to confute those who have supposed that there was not any actual dispute between them. “I was not purposed, Mr. Fitz-simons, to write unto you, before you had first written to me, concerning some chief points of your religion, as at our last meeting you promised; s but, seeing you have deferred the same, for reasons best known to yourself, I thought it not amiss to inquire farther of your mind, concerning the continuation of the conference begun betwixt us. And to this I am the rather moved, because I am credibly informed of certain reports, which I could hardly be persuaded should proceed from him, who in my presence pretended so great love and affection unto me. If I am a boy, as it hath pleased you very contemptuously to name me, I give thanks to the Lord, that my carriage towards you hath been such as could minister unto you no just occasion to despise my youth. Your spear belike is in your own conceit a weaver’s beam, and your abilities such, that you desire to encounter with the stoutest champion in the host of Israel; and therefore, like the Philistine, you contemn me as being a boy. Yet this I would fain have you know, that I neither came then, nor now do come unto you, in any confidence of any learning that is in me; in which respect, notwithstanding, I thank God I am what I am: but I come in the name of the Lord of Hosts, whose companies you have reproached, being certainly persuaded, that even out of the mouths of babes and sucklings he was able to shew forth his own praises. For the farther manifestation thereof, I do again earnestly request you, that, setting aside all vain comparisons of persons, we may go plainly forward in examining the matters that rest in controversy between us; otherwise I hope you will not be displeased, if, as for your part you have begun, so 1 also for my own part may be bold, for the clearing of myself and the truth which I profess, freely to make known what hath already passed concerning this matter. Thus intreating you in a few lines to make known unto me your purpose in this behalf, I end; praying the Lord, that both this and all other enterprises that we take in hand may be so ordered as may most make for the advancement of his own glory and the kingdom of his son Jesus Christ.” Tuus ad Aras usque,

The same year, 1612, upon his return to Ireland, he married Phoebe, only daughter of Dr. Luke Challoner, who died this year April the 12th, and in his last will recommended our author to his daughter for a husband, if she was inclined to marry. In 1615 there was a parliament held at Dublin, and a convocation of the clergy, in which were composed certain articles relating to the doctrine and discipline of the church. These articles were drawn up by Usher, and signed by archbishop Jones, then lord chancellor of Ireland, and speaker of the house of bishops in convocation, by order from James I, in his majesty’s name. Among these articles, which amount to the number of one hundred and four, besides asserting the doctrine of predestination and reprobation in the strongest terms, one of them professes that there is but one catholic church, out of which there is no salvation; and another maintains thut the sabbath-day ought to be kept holy. Upon these accounts Dr. Heylin called the passing of these articles an absolute plot of the Sabbatarians and Calvinists in England to make themselves so strong a party in Ireland as to obtain what they pleased in this convocation. Our author was well known to be a strong asserter of the predestinarian principles; and being besides of opinion that episcopacy was not a distinct order, but only a different degree from that of presbyters, he certainly cannot be exculpated from the charge of puritanism. However, as he always warmly asserted the king’s supremacy, and the episcopal form of church government established, and all the discipline of it, it has been said that all the objections to him, as inclined to puritanism, were the effect of party, the church beginning about this time to be divided between the Calvinistic and Arminiau principles upon the quinquarticular controversy. Dr. Parr tells us, his enemies were of no great repute for learning and worth; and that our author, hearing of their attempts to deprive him of his majesty’s favour, procured a letter from the lord deputy and council of Ireland to the privy council in England, in defence of his principles, which he brought over to England in 1619, and satisfied his majesty so well upon that point, that in 1620 he promoted him to the bishopric of Meath. In November 1622 he made a speech in the castle-chamber at Dublin upon the censuring of certain officers, concerning the lawfulness of taking, and the danger of refusing, the oath of supremacy; which pleased king James so well that he wrote him a letter of thanks for it. In 1623 he was constituted a privy counsellor of Ireland, and made another voyage to England, in order to collect materials for a work concerning the antiquities of the churches of England, Scotland, and Ireland, which the king himself had employed him to write and soon afterhis return to Ireland was engaged in answering the challenge of Malone, an Irish Jesuit of the college of Louvain.

, a learned botanist, was born in the parish of St. Margaret, Westminster, May 25, 1642; educated at Westminster school under Dr. Busby; whence he was elected to Trinity college, Cambridge; B. A. 1662; M. A. 1666; LL. D. Com. Reg. 1682; and was master of the grammar school at Enfield about 1670. He resided in the old manor-house in that town called Queen Elizabeth’s Palace; and, being much attached to the study of botany, had a very curious garden there; and planted, among other trees, a cedar of Libanus, which (till within these few years) was one of the finest in the kingdom, measuring (in October 1793) 12 feet in the girth. In an account of the most remarkable gardens, near London in 1691, by J. Gibson, printed in the Archaeologia, vol. XII. p. 188, Dr. Uvedale is said to have “the greatest and choicest collection of exotics that perhaps was any where in this land.” Dr. Pulteney, hi his brief memoirs of Dr. Leonard Plukenet, says, “I regret that I cannot collect any material anecdotes relating to his friend and fellow collegian Dr. Uvedale, of whom Plukenet ever speaks in a style which indicates that he held him in great esteem.” “The garden which he cultivated at Enfield appears to have been rich in exotic productions; and though he is not known among those who advanced the indigenous botany of Britain, yet his merit as a botanist, or his patronage of the society at large, was considerable enough to incline Petiver to apply his name to a new plant, which Miller retained in his Dictionary, but which has since passed into the genus Polymnia, of the Linnsean system; the author of which has nevertheless retained Uvedalia, as the trivial name.” In the British Museum (Bibl. Sloan. 4064, Plut. 28 F.) are fifteen letters from him to sir Hans Sloane; also letters from him to Dr. Sherard, and Mr. James Petiver. Dryden, Dr. Uredale, and other learned men, having agreed to translate Plutarch’s Lives from the original Greek, Dr. Uvedale translated the Life of Dion, and the work was published in 1684. A whole length portrait of him, and another of his wife, were in the possession of the late admiral Uvedale, of Bosmere-house, Suffolk.

, in German Von Watte, one of the most learned men of his nation or time, was born at St. Gal, Nov. 29, 1484, of which city his father, Joachim Von Watte, was a senator. After some education at home he was sent to Vienna to pursue the higher studies, but for some time entered more into the gaieties of the place, and was distinguished particularly for his quarrels and his duels, until by the sensible and affectionate remonstrances of a merchant of that city, to whose care his father had confided him, he was induced to devote his whole time and attention to books, and never relapsed into his former follies. When he had acquired a competent share of learning he wished to relieve his father from any farther expence, and with that honourable view taught a school at Villach, in Carinthia; but finding this place too remote from literary society, he returned to Vienna, and in a short time was chosen professor of the belles lettres, and acquitted himself with such credit, and gained such reputation by some poetry which he published, that the emperor Maximilian I. honoured him with the laurel crown at Lintz in 1514. After some hesitation between law and physic, both of which he had studied, he determined in favour of the latter, as a profession, and took his doctor’s degree at Vienna in 1518. He appears to have practised in that city, and afterwards at St. Gal, until the controversies arose respecting the reformation. After examining the arguments of the contending parties, he embraced the cause of the reformers; and besides many writings in favour of their principles, befriended them in his rank of senator, to which he had been raised. In 1526 he was farther promoted to the dignity of consul of St. Gal, the duties of which he performed so much to the satisfaction of his constituents that he was re-elected to the same office seven times. He died April 6, 1551, in his sixty-sixth year. He bequeathed his books to the senate of St. Gal, which were ordered to be placed in the public library of the city, with an inscription, honourable both to his character and talents. The latter were very extensive, for he was well versed and wrote well on mathematics, geography, philosophy, and medicine. He was also a good Latin poet, and, above all, a sound divine and an able controversial writer. Joseph Scaliger places him among the most learned men of Germany. He was intimate with our illustrious prelate, archbishop Cranmer, but preceded him in some of the doctrines of the reformation. About 1536 he wrote a book entitled “Aphorismorum libri sex de consideratione Eucharistiae,” &c. which was levelled at the popish doctrine of the corporal presence, and thinking it a proper work for the archbishop to patronize, presented it to him; but Cranmer had not yet considered the question in that view, and therefore informed Vadian that his book had not made a convert of him, and that he was hurt with the idea of being thought the patron of such unscriptural opinions. Vadian therefore pursued the subject at home, and wrote two more volumes on it. The only medical work he published was his “Consilium contra Pestem, Basil, 1546, 4to. Those by which he is best known in the learned world, are, 1. A collection of remarks on various Latin authors, in his” Epistola responsoria ad Rudulphi Agricolas epistolam,“ibid. 1515, 4to. 2. His edition of” Pomponius Mela,“first printed at Vienna in 1518, fol. and often reprinted. 3.” Scholia qoaedam in C. Plinii de Nat. Hist, librum secundum,“Basil, 153 1, fol. 4.” Chronologia Ablmtum Monasterii St.Galli“”De obscuris verborum significationibus epistola;“” Farrago antiquitatum Alamannicarum,“&c. and some other treatises, which are inserted in Goldnst’s” Alamanniae Scnptores."

Being called to Paris about business, he paid a visit to Mr. Seguin, who had a fine cabinet of medals, and was also greatly attached to this study. Seguin, from their conferences, soon perceived the superior genius of Vaillaiu, which seemed to him to promise much in a science yet in its infancy; and pressed him to make himself a little more known. He accordingly visited some antiquaries of reputation in medailic science; till at length, falling under the notice of the minister Colbert, he received a commission to travel through Italy, Sicily, and Greece, in quest of medals proper for the king’s cabinet; and after spending some years in this pursuit, returned with as many medals as made the king’s cabinet superior to any one in Europe, though great additions have been made to it since. Colbert engaged him to travel a second time; and accordingly, in 1674, he went and embarked at Marseilles with several other gentlemen, who proposed, as well as himself, to be at Rome at the approaching jubilee. But unfortunately, on the second day of their sailing, they were captured by an Algerine corsair; and it was not until a slavery of near five months, that Vaillant was permitted to return to France, and strong remonstrances having been made by the French court, he recovered at the same time twenty gold medals which had been taken from him. He then embarked in a vessel bound for Marseilles, and was carried on with a favourable wind for two days, when another corsair appeared, which, in spite of all the sail they could make, bore down upon them within the reach of cannonshot. Vaillant, dreading the miseries of a fresh slavery, resolved, however, to secure the medals which he had received at Algiers, and had recourse to the strange expedient of swallowing them. But a sudden turn of the wind freed them from this adversary, and cast them upon the coasts of Catalonia; where, after expecting to run aground every moment, they at length fell among the sands at the mouth of the Rhone. Vailiant got on shore in a skiff, but felt himself extremely incommoded with the medals he had swallowed, of which, however, nature afterwards relieved him.

Those who make him a native of Erfurt tell us likewise that he was a Benedictine monk, and that after making some experiments on the stibium of the ancients, he threw a quantity of it to the hogs, whom it first purged and afterwards fattened. This suggested to him that it might be useful in order to give a little of the embonpoint to his brother monks, who had become lean by fasting and mortification. He accordingly prescribed it, and they all died, whence the medicine was afterwards known by the name of antimony, quasi anti-monk. It is added that his works were not known for a long time after his death, until on opening one of the pillars of the church of Erfurt, they were miraculously discovered. But unfortunately for these stories, Boerhaave has proved that there never was a monastery of Benedictines at Erfurt, and we have already proved that the books published under the name of Basil Valentine could not have been written in the beginning of the fifteenth century. It appears, however, whatever their date, that they were originally written in Dutch, and that a part only have been translated into Latin, and probably have received additions from other hands. All that have been published are still in considerable request, and are become scarce. Among them are; 1. “De microcosmo, deque magno mundi ministerio et medicina hominis,” Marpurg, 1609, 8vo. 2. “Azoth, sive Aureliae philosophorum,” Francfort, 1613, 4to. 3. “Practice, una cum duodecim clavibus et appendice,” ibid. 1618, 4to. 4. “Apocalypsis chymica,” Erfurt, 1624, 8vo. 5. “Manifestatio artificiorum,” Erfurt, 1624, 4to. 6. “Currus triumphalis antimonii,” Leip. 1624, 8vo, reprinted at Amsterdam, 1671, 12mo, “cum commentariis Theod. Kerkringii.” 7. “Tractatus chimicophilosophus de rebus naturalibus et praeternaftiralibus metallorum et mineralium,” Francfort, 1676, 8vo. 8. “HaKographia, de praeparatione, usu, ac virtutibus omnium salium mineralium, animalium, ac vegetabiliuni, ex manuscriptis Basilii Valentini collecta ab Ant. Salimncio,” Bologna, 1644, 8vo. There are editions of these in Dutch, and translations into French, English, and other languages of most of them. Whoever Basil was, his experiments are always to be depended on, and his style is clear and precise, unless where he talks of his arcana and the philosopher’s stone, on which he is as obscure as any of his brethren. After every preparation, he gives its medicinal uses, and it has been said that Van Helmont, Lemery, the father, and other moderns, are under greater obligations to his works than they have thought proper to acknowledge. He was the first who recommended the internal use of antimony, and he has enriched the pharmacopoeia with various preparations of that metal, particularly the empyreumatic carbonate of antimony, of which Sylvius Deleboe claimed the discovery.

, a botanical and medical writer, was born at Giessen in Germany, Nov. 26, 1657, and having studied medicine, became a professor of the science in his native place, where he died March 13, 1726. He wrote a great many works on the subject of his profession, but is thought to have succeeded best in those which concern botany. Among his writings of both kinds are, 1. “Historia simplicimn reformata, Francfort, 1716, fol. 1726, both with plates. 2.” Amphitheatrurn Zootomicum,“ibid. 1720, fol. This was Becker’s translation from the original, published in German in 1704 1714, 3 vols. fol. and subjoined is a life of Valentinus, written in verse by himself. 3.” Medicina nova-antiqua,“ibid. 1713, 4to. 4.” Cynosura materiiE medicse,“Strasburgh, 1726, 3 vols. 5.” Viridarium reformatum,“Francfort, 1720, fol. with fine plates. 6.” Corpus juris medicolegale,“ibid. 1722, fol.; but this appears to be a second edition of his” Novellaj Medico-legales,“printed in 1711, 4to, and contains many curious cases and questions which illustrate the state of medical jurisprudence at a time when it was not much freed from superstition and credulity. Valentinus published also a” Praxis medicinae infallibilis,“in which he describes the filtering-stone now so well known; and another work, giving a history of philosophy,” Armamentarium Naturae systematic am, seu Introductio ad philosophiam modernorum naturalem,“Giessen, 4to. To this he adds an abridgment of the most remarkable papers on natural history from the transactions of the society” Naturae Curiosorum."

, a learned prelate, was born April 7, 1531, at Venice, descended from one of the best families in that city. After having made a rapid progress in his studies, he was admitted among the Savii deir Ordini, a small society of five 5'oung men of the highest rank at Venice, who had access to the college where affairs relative to the republic were debated, that they might be trained up to the science of government. Valerio took a doctor’s degree in divinity and in canon law, became professor of philosophy at Venice, 1558, and having afterwards chosen the ecclesiastical profession, was appointed bishop of Verona, on the resignation of his uncle, cardinal Bernardo Naugerio, 1565. He discharged the duties of the episcopal station with great prudence, and to the edification of his diocese, and formed a friendship with St. Charles Borromeo. Pope Gregory XIII. created him cardinal, 1583, invited him to Rome, and placed him at the head of several congregations. Valerio acquired universal esteem by his skill in public affairs, his learning and virtue. He died at Rome, May 24, 1606, aged 75, and although so advanced, his death is supposed to have been hastened by chagrin, occasioned by the interdiction under which pope Paul V. had laid the republic of Venice. This learned bishop left several excellent works: the most known are, “The Rhetoric of a Preacher,” “De Rhetoric* Ecclesiastica libri tres,” Venice, 1574, 8vo, composed by the advice and according to the plan of his intimate friend, St. Charles Borromeo. This was so popular as to be printed eight times in the author’s life, besides being translated into French, of which there is an edition so late as 1750, 12mo, nor, say the French writers, can the study of it be too strongly recommended to young ecclesiastics. His other works are on subjects of philosophy and history. In 1719, appeared in 4to, a work entitled “De cautione adhibenda in edendis Libris,” which contains a complete list of Augustine Valerio’s other works both printed and ms.

From the sixteenth century, the method of resolving equations of the four first degrees has been known, and since that time the general theory of equations has received great improvements. In spite, however, of the recent labours of many great geometricians, the solutions of equations of the fifth degree had in vain been attempted. Vandermonde wished to consolidate his labours with those of other illustrious analysts; and he proposed a new theory of equations, in which he seems to have made it particularly his business to simplify the methods of calculation, and to contract the length of theformufac, which he considered as one of the greatest difficulties of the subject.

This work was quickly followed by another, on the problems called by geometricians, '“problems of situation.” Leibnitz was of opinion, that the analysis made use of in his time, by the geometricians, was not applicable to all questions in the physical sciences; and that a new geometry should be invented, to calculate the relations of positions of different bodies, in space; this he called “geometry of situation.” Excepting, however, one application, made by Leibnitz himself, to the i game of solitaire, and which, under the appearance of an object of curiosity, scarcely worthy the sublimity and usefulness of geometry, is an example for solving the most elevated and important questions, Euler was almost the only one who had practised this geometry of situation. He had resorted to it for the solution of a problem called the cavalier, which, also, appeared very familiar at first sight, and was also pregnant with useful and important applications. This problem, with the vulgar, consisted merely in running through all the cases of the chess-board, with the knight of the game of chess; to the profound geometrician, however, it was a precedent for tracing the route which every body must follow, whose course is submitted to a known law, by conforming to certain required conditions, through all the points disposed over a space, in a prescribed order. Vandermonde was chiefly anxious to find in this species or analysis, a simple notation, likely to facilitate the making of calculations; and he gave an example of this, in a short and easy solution "of the same problem of the cavalier, which Euler had rendered famous.

Upon the breaking out of the rebellion he adhered to the interest of the parliament with enthusiastic zeal. He began with carrying to the House of Peers the articles of impeachment against archbishop Laud; and was nominated one of the ]ay members of the assembly of divines. In 1643 he was appointed one of the commissioners sent by parliament to invite the Scots to their assistance. Under this character he distinguished himself as the “great contriver and promoter of the solemn league and covenant;” though, even at that time, he was known to have an equal aversion to it and to presbytery, which he demonstrated afterwards upon all occasions, being a zealous independent. In 1644, he was the grand instrument of carrying the famous self-denying ordinance, a delusive trick, which for a time gave life and spirit to the independent cause; and in his speech, upon introducing the debate on that subject, observed, that, though he had been possessed of the treasurership of the navy before the beginning of the troubles, without owing it to the favour of the parliament, yet he was ready to resign it to them; and desired that the profits of it might be applied towards the support of the war. He was likewise one of the commissioners at the treaty of Uxbridge, in Jan. 1644-5, and of that of the Isle of Wight in 1648; in which last, as he was now determined to procure, if possible, a change in the government, he used all his efforts to retard any conclusion with his majesty till the army could be brought to London; and for that purpose amused the king’s party by the offer of a toleration for the common prayer and the episcopal clergy. Like many others, however, he did not foresee the consequences of his favourite measures, and therefore did not approve of the force put upon the parliament by the army, nor of the execution of the king; withdrawing for some time from the scene while these things were acted. But, upon the establishment of the commonwealth, 1648-9, he was appointed one of the council of state, in which post he was continued till the memorable dissolution of the parliament by Cromwell in 1643. On this occasion Cromwell, who treated individual members with personal insolence, took hold of sir Henry Vane by the cloak, saying, “Thou art a juggling fellow.” Vane, however, was too much of a republican to submit to his, or any authority, and was therefore, in 1656, summoned by Cromwell to appear before him in council. On his appearance Cromwell charged him with disaffection to his government, which appeared in a late publication of his called “A healing question proposed and resolved.” Vane acknowledged the publication, and avowed his displeasure with the present state of affairs. Cromwell therefore ordered him to give security for his good behaviour; but instead of this, which such a man as sir Henry Vane might probably find very difficult, he delivered to Cromwell a justification of his conduct; and this not being satisfactory, he was imprisoned in Carisbrooke castle, the spot on which he had so recently contributed to injure the cause of his legitimate sovereign. About four months after, he was released, and Cromwell tried to bring down his spirit by threatening to deprive him of some of his estates by legal process, that is, by such perversion of the law as he might find some of his creatures capable of attempting; intimating at the same time, that all this should drop, and he be gratified with, what he pleased, provided he would comply with the present government. But he remained inflexible, as well during Cromwell’s life, as during the short reign of Richard, against whom many meetings of the republicans were held at his house near Charing Cross.

, a writer who has generally been distinguished by the title of Atheist, was born at Tourosano, in the kingdom of Naples, in 1585; and was the son of John Baptist Vanini, steward to Don Francis de Castro, duke of Tourosano, and viceroy of Naples. His Christian name was Lucilio: but it was customary with him to assume different names in different countries. In Gascony, he called himself Pompeio; in Holland, Julius Ceesar, which name he placed in the title-pages of his books; and, at Toulouse, when he was tried, he was called Lucilio. He had an early taste for literature, and his father sent him to Rome to study philosophy and divinity, and on his return to Naples, he continued his studies in philosophy, and applied himself some time to physic. Astronomy likewise employed him much, which insensibly threw him into the reveries of astrology: but he bestowed the principal part of his time upon divinity. The title of “Doctor in utroque Jure,” which he assumes in the title-page of his dialogues, may indicate that he had applied himself to the civil and canon law; and from his writings, it certainly appears that he understood both. He finished his studies at Padua, where he resided some years, and procured himself to be ordained priest, and became a preacher, with what success is not known. His mind appears to have been perverted or confused by the reading of Aristotle, Averroes, Cardan, and Pomponatius, who became his favourite guides. His admiration of Aristotle was such, that he calls him “the god of philosophers, the dictator of human nature, and the sovereign pontiff of the sages.” The system of Averroes, which is but a branch of that of Aristotle, was so highly approved of by him, that he recommended it to his scholars at their first entrance upon the study of philosophy. He styles Pomponatius his “divine master,” and bestows great encomiums upon his works. He studied Cardan very much, and gives him the character of “a man of great sense, and not at all affected with superstition.” It is supposed that he derived from these authors those infidel doctrines which he afterwards endeavoured to propagate. Father Mersene assures us, that Vanini, before he was executed at Toulouse, confessed to the parliament, that at Naples he had agreed with thirteen of his friends to travel throughout Europe, for the sake of propagating atheism, and that France had fallen to his share: but this is very improbable, as the president Gramond, who was upon the spot, says nothing of such a scheme in his account of Vanini’s trial and execution. It is more probable, that his inclination to travelling, or perhaps the hopes of procuring an agreeable settlement, led him to the several places through which he passed; and that he spread his singular sentiments according as he had opportunity.

, a portrait-painter, brother to Carlo Vanloo, was born at Aix, in Provence, about 1684. He distinguished himself eminently in historic and portrait painting, both which he studied at Rome, and became painter to the king of Sardinia, in whose service he realized a considerable fortune; but lost it all in the Mississippi, going to Paris in the year of that bubble. In 1737 he came to England with his son. His first works were the portraits of Gibber and Mac Swinney; the latter, whose long silver grey hairs were very picturesque, contributed much to- give the new painter reputation, and he very soon bore away the chief business of London from every other painter, and introduced a better style than was then known. He died at Provence, whither he had retired for the benefit of the air, in April 1746. Louis Michael Vanloo, first painter to the king of Spain, and Charles Philip Vanloo, painter to the king of Prussia, were sons and pupils of the above-mentioned, and have with eclat supported the name.

, a Dutch physician, is known in literary history as the author of a “System of Universal Geography,” which was accounted an excellent and comprehensive work, and was written originally in Latin, and printed at Amsterdam in 1650. It was re-published at Cambridge in 1672, with great improvements, by sir Isaac Newton; and in 1712, on the recommendation of Dr. Bentley, by Dr. Jurin. It was afterwards translated into English by Dr. Shaw, and illustrated with additional notes and copper-plates, 2 vols. 8vo; and in this form has gone through several editions. We have besides a curious description of Japan and the kingdom of Siam, in Latin, by this author, printed at Cambridge, 1673, 8vo. Varenius died in 1660, but we have no particulars of his life.

, a celebrated French mathematician and priest, was born at Caen in 1654. He was the son of an architect in middling circumstances, but had a college education, being intended for the church. Having accidentally met with a copy of Euclid’s Elements, he was inclined to study it, and this led him to the works of Des Cartes, which confirmed his taste for geometry, and he even abridged himself of the necessaries of life to purchase books which treated on this science. What contributed to heighten this passion in him was, that he studied in private: for his relations observing that the books he studied were not such as were commonly used by others, strongly opposed his application to them; and as there was a necessity for his being an ecclesiastic, he continued his theological studies, yet not entirely sacrificing his favourite subject to them. At this time the Abbé St. Pierre, who studied philosophy in the same college, became acquainted with him. A taste in common for rational subjects, whether physics or metaphysics, and continued disputations, formed the bonds of their friendship, and they became mutually serviceable to each other in their studies. The abbe, to enjoy Varignon’s company with greater ease, lodged in the same house with him; and being in time more sensible of his merit, he resolved to give him a fortune, that he might fully pursue his inclination. Out of only 18 hundred livres a year, which he had himself, he conferred 300 of them upon Varignon; and when determined to go to Paris to study philosophy, he settled there in 1686, with M. Varignon, in the suburbs of St. Jacques. There each studied in his own way; the abbé applying himself to the study of men, manners, and the principles of government whilst Varignon was wholly occupied with the mathematics. Fontenelie, who was their countryman, often went to see them, sometimes spending two or three days with them. They had also room for a couple of visitors, who came from the same province. “We joined together,” says Fontenelle, “with the greatest pleasure. We were young, full of the first ardour for knowledge, strongly united, and, what we were not then perhaps disposed to think so great a happiness, little known. Varignon, who had a strong constitution, at least in his youth, spent whole days in study, without any amusement or recreation, except walking sometimes in fine weather. I' have heard him say, that in studying after supper, as he usually did, he was often surprised to hear the clock strike two in the morning; and was much pleased that four hours rest were sufficient to refresh him. He did not leave his studies with that heaviness which they usually create; nor with that weariness that a long application might occasion. He left off gay and lively, filled with pleasure, and impatient to renew it. In speaking of mathematics, he would laugh so freely, that it seemed as if he had studied for diversion. No condition was so much to be envied as his; his life was a continual enjoyment, delighting in quietness.” In the solitary suburb of St. Jacques, he formed however a connection with many other learned men; as Du Hamel, Du Verney, De la Hire, &c. Du Verney often asked his assistance in those parts of anatomy connected with mechanics: they examined together the positions of the muscles, and their directions; hence Varignon learned a good deal of anatomy from Du Verney, which he repaid by the application of mathematical reasoning to that subject. At length, in 1687, Varignon made himself known to the public by a “Treatise on New Mechanics,” dedicated to the Academy of Sciences. His thoughts on this subject were, in effect, quite new. He discovered truths, and laid open their sources. In this work, he demonstrated the necessity of an equilibrium, in such cases as it happens in, though the cause of it is not exactly known. This discovery Varignon made by the theory of compound motions, and his treatise was greatly admired by the mathematicians, and procured the author two considerable places, the one of geometrician in the Academy of Sciences, the other of professor of mathematics in the college of Mazarine, to which he was the first person raised.

, a French writer, more known than esteemed for several historical works, was descended from a good family, and born at Gueret in 1624. After a liberal education, of which he made the proper advantage, he became a private tutor to some young persons of quality; and then went to Paris, where he was well received as a man of letters, and had access to the Dupuy’s, whose house was the common rendezvous of the learned. He obtained afterwards a place in the kings’ library, by his interest with Nicolas Colbert, who was made librarian after the death of James Dupuy in 1655. Mr. Colbert, afterwards minister of state, commissioned his brother Nicolas to find out a man capable of collating certain manuscripts. Varillzte was recommended, and had the abbe" of St. Real for his coadjutor; and handsome pensions were settled upon both. But whether Varillas was negligent and careless, or had not a turn for this employment, he did not give satisfaction, and was therefore dismissed from his employment in 1662; yet had his pension continued till 1670. He then retired from the royal library, and spent the remainder of his days in study, refusing, it is said, several advantageous offers. He lived frugally and with oeconomy, and yet not through necessity, for his circumstances were easy. St. Come was the seat of his retirement; where he died June 9, 1696, aged seventy-two.

, an artist, though better known as the biographer of his profession, was born at Arezzo, in 1512, and was taught the rudiments of drawing by his father, and the first principles of painting by William of Marseilles, a Frenchman, and a painter on glass; but being taken to Florence by cardinal da Cortona, he improved himself under Michael Angelo, Andrea del Sarto, and other eminent masters. By the cardinal he was introduced into the Medici family, but in 1527, when they were driven from Florence, he returned to his native city. Finding an epidemic disease prevailing there, he spent his time in the surrounding country, improving himself by painting subjects of devotion for the farmers. His father unfortunately died of the contagion, and left a young family unprovided for. Vasari, to contribute more effectually to their support, quitted the uncertain profession of a painter, and applied himself to the more lucrative trade of a goldsmith. In 1529, the civil war, which then existed at Florence, obliged the goldsmiths’ company to remove to Pisa: and there, receiving commissions to paint some pictures both in oil and in fresco, he was induced to resume his former profession, and afterwards through life met with encouragement, that left him neither motive nor desire to change. The dukes of Florence and other distinguished persons were his liberal patrons, and he was constantly employed in works both profitable and honourable to himself.

an eminent publicist, was the son of a clergyman of Neufchatel, where he was born April 25, 1714. After completing his studies, he went to Berlin, where he became acquainted with some of the literati of that city, and thence to Dresden, and was introduced to the king of Poland and the elector of Saxony, who received him with great kindness, and some years after he was appointed privy- councillor to the elector. He was residing at Dresden in 1765 when his health began to decline, which obliged him to try the air of his native country; but this proved ineffectual, and he died at Neufehatel in 1767, in the fifty-third year of his age. He owed his literary reputation first to some publications, which, we believe, are not much known in this country, as a “Defence of Leibnitz’s philosophy against M. de Crousaz,” published in 1741, and dedicated to Frederick the Great, king of Prussia; and “Pieces diverses de morale et d'amusement,” published at Paris in 1746. But he became known to all Europe by his “Droit des gens, ou Principes de la Loi Naturelle,” published at Neufchatel in 1758, and translated into most European languages, and often reprinted. We have at least two editions of it in English, under the title of “The Law of Nations; or, principles of the Law of Nature: applied to the conduct and affairs of nations and sovereigns,” 1760, 4to, and 1793, 8vo. What particularlyrecommended this work to the favour of the English, was their finding the opinions of their countrymen generally adopted, and England brought as a proof of a wise and happy constitution. The opinions of Milton and Harrington are frequently confirmed, while the maxims of Puffendorf and Grotius, who often adapted their opinions to the states in which they lived, are refuted with strength and perspicuity. In general Vattel takes Wolff, the celebrated Saxon philosopher, for his guide; but in many places be differs totally from him, and this produced a controversy between them. The points on which they differ may be seen in a publication by Vattel, which appeared in 1762, entitled “Questions sur le Droit Naturel: et Observations sur le Traite du Droit de la Nature de M. le Baron de Wolff.” In the mean time Vattel’s “Law of Nations” became more and more the favourite of men who study such subjects, and has for many years been quoted as a work of high authority, and as in many respects preferable to Grotius and Puffendorf, being more methodical, more comprehensive, and more simple than either.

, marechal of France, commissioner-general of fortifications, and the greatest engineer which France has produced, was the son of Urban le Prestre, seigneur de Vauban, a descendant of an ancient and noble family of Nivernois. He was born May 1, 1633, and was in the army at the early age of seventeen, where his uncommon talents and genius for fortification soon became known, and were eminently displayed at the sieges of St. Menehould, 1652 and 1653, of Stenay 1654, and of several other places in the following years. He consequently rose to the highest military ranks by his merit and services: and was made governor of the citadel of Lisle in 1668, and commissioner-general of fortifications in 1678. He took Luxemburg in 1684, and, being appointed lieutenant-general in 1688, was present, the same year, at the siege and capture of Philipsburg, Manheim, and Frankendal, under the dauphin. This prince, as a reward for his services, gave him four pieces of cannon, which he was permitted to chuse from the arsenals of these three towns, and place in his castle at Bazoche; an honour afterwards granted to the famous marechal Saxe. M. de Vauban commanded on the coast of Flanders in 1689, and was made marechal of France, Jan. 14, 1703. His dignity was expensive to him, but the king would not permit him to serve as an inferior officer, though he offered it in a very handsome manner. He died at Paris, March 30, 1707, aged seventy-four. He was a man of high and independent spirit, of great humanity, and entirely devoted to the good of his country. As an engineer, he carried the art of fortifying, attacking, and defending towns, to a degree of perfection unknown before his time. He fortified above 300 ancient citadels, erected thirty- three new ones, and had the principal management and direction of fifty-three sieges, and was present at one hundred and forty engagements. But his countrymen tell us that it was unnecessary for him to exert his skill in defending a fort; for the enemies of France never attacked those in which he was stationed. His works are, a treatise entitled “La Dixme Roïale,” 1707, 4to and 12mo, which displays some patriotic principles, but the plan is considered as impracticable. A vast collection of Mss. in 12 vols. which he calls his “Oisivetés,” contain his ideas, reflections, and projects, for the advantage of France. The three following works are also attributed to him, but whether he wrote them, or whether they have been compiled from his Memoirs, and adapted to his ideas, is uncertain: “Maniere de fortifier,” 8vo and 12mo, printed also at Paris by Michalet, 8vo, under the title of “L'Ingéieur François.” M. Hebert, professor of mathematics, and the abbe“du Fay, have written notes on this treatise, which is esteemed, and is said to have been revised by the chevalier de Cambrai, and reprinted at Amsterdam, 1702 and 1727, 2 vols. 4to; 2.” Nouveau Traite de l'Attaque et de la Défense des Places, suivant le Systeme de M. de Vauban, par M. Desprez de Saint Savin,“1736, 8vo, much esteemed; 3.” Essais sur la Fortification, par M. de Vauban,“1740, 12mo. As to the” Political Testament" ascribed to him, it was written by Peter le Pesant, sieur de Boïs Guillebert, lieutenant-general of the bailiwic of Rouen, who died 1714. M. de Vauban’s second cousin, Anthony de Prestre, known by the name of Puy Vauban, was also a very eminent engineer. He died lieutenant-general of the king’s forces, and governor of Bethune, April 10, 1731, aged seventy-seven.

, a French writer of considerable talents, was the son of John Vauvilliers, professor of rhetoric in the university of Paris, and of Greek in the royal college, who is known to the learned world by several Latin dissertations, particularly one “De praestantia Grsecarum literarum,” &c. He was born about 1736, and applied so diligently to his studies that he was able to assist his father in his rhetorical lectures. In 1767 he was appointed assistant to Vatry, the Greek professor in the royal college, and succeeding him, held that office for twenty years. On the commencement of the revolution he joined the revolutionists, and was for some time president of the first commune of Paris, and lieutenant to the mayor. In this office he had the care of furnishing Paris with'provisions, which he performed with great skill and success; but finding the mob gaining the superiority, resigned his office, and not only refused to sit in the constituent assembly, to which he was called, but published an opinion on the constitution of the clergy, which was so much in hostility to the measures then pursuing, that he was obliged for a time to conceal himself. He survived the worst period of the revolution, however, and in 1797 was chosen a member of the council of 500, but having joined the party of Clichy, was sentenced to transportation. On this he disappeared again, and found a refuge in St. Petersburgh, where the emperor Paul appointed him a member of the academy of sciences. The climate, however, and the sufferings he had been subjected to at home, did not permit him a long enjoyment of his present tranquillity. He died at St. Petersburg, July 23, 1800, in the sixtyfourth year of his age. He is characterised as a man of great simplicity of manners, joined to a tolerant and enlightened piety, and a contempt of riches. All his property, when confiscated at Paris, did not produce more than 1800 livres, and in Russia he scarcely left enough to pay for his funeral.

, or Lope-Felix de Vega Carpio, a celebrated Spanish poet, was born at Madrid, Nov. 25, 1562. He informs us that his father was a poet, but what he was besides, or the time of his death, is not known. It appears that he was an orphan when at school, about thirteen or fourteen years old, and was then impelled by so restless a desire of seeing the world, that he resolved to escape; and having concerted his project with a schoolfellow, they actually put it in execution, but were soon brought back to Madrid. Before this time, according to his own account, he had not only written verses, but composed dramas in four acts, which, as he tells us, was then the custom. Upon his return to Madrid, however, he abandoned this mode of composition, and ingratiated himself with the bishop of Avila by several pastorals, and a comedy in three acts, called “La Pastoral de Jacinto,” which is said to have formed an epoch in the annals of the theatre, and a prelude to the reform which Lope was destined to introduce.

He shortly after studied philosophy at Alcala, and ingratiated himself with the duke of Alva, at whose instance he wrote his “Arcadia,” a mixture of prose and verse, romance and poetry, pastoral and heroic, the design of which was avowedly taken from Sannazarius, and which contains nearly as many deformities as beauties. Soon, after this he left the duke of Alva’s service, and married, but continued to cultivate his favourite studies, until, being involved in a duel, he wounded his antagonist so dangerously as to be obliged to leave Madrid, and his newly established family. He fixed upon Valencia as the place of his retreat, but returned to Madrid in a few years, when all apprehensions of evil consequences from his duel were allayed. He was probably soothing his imagination with prospects of domestic happiness, which his late absence had suspended, when he had the misfortune to lose his wife. The residence of Madrid, which he had so lately regarded as the summit of his wishes, now became insupportable; and scenes which had long been associated in his mind with ideas of present comfort and future reputation, served only to remind him of their loss. To fly from such painful recollections he hastily embarked on board the memorable Armada, which was then fitting out to invade England. The fate of this expedition is well known; and Lope, in addition to his share in the difficulties and dangers of the voyage, saw his brother, to whose society he had run for refuge in his late calamity, expire in his arms. During the voyage, however, his muse was not idle, for he composed the “Hermosura de Angelica,” a poem, which professes to take up the story of that princess where Ariosto had dropped it. When he published this poem in 1602, he added another, the “Dragontea,” an epic on the death of sir Francis Drake, who is abused by every coarse epithet, as indeed was his royal mistress Elizabeth, whose tyranny, cruelty, and above all, her heresy, are th_e perpetual objects of Lope’s poetical invective.

In 1590 he returned a second time to Madrid, and soon after married again. In 1598, on the canonization of St. Isidore, a native of Madrid, he entered the lists with several authors, and overpowered them all with the number if not with the merit of his performances. Prizes had been assigned for every style of poetry, but above one could not be obtained by the same person. Lope succeeded in the hymns; but his fertile muse, not content with producing a poem of ten cantos in short verse, as well as innumerable sonnets and romances, and two comedies on the subject, celebrated by an act of supererogation both the saint and the poetical competition of the day, in a volume of sprightly poems under the feigned name of Tom6 de Burguiilos. This success raised him, no doubt, in the estimation of the public, to whom he was already known by the number and excellence of his- dramatic writings and this was probably the most fortunate period of his life, and that in which he derived most satisfaction from his pursuits. About this time, however, we must fix the short date of his domestic comforts. Of three persons who formed his family, the son died at eight years, and was soon followed by his mother; the daughter alone survived our poet. He now resolved to seek consolation in the exercises of devotion; and, having been secretary to the Inquisition, he shortly after became a priest, and in 1609 an honorary member of the brotherhood of St. Francis.

The sensation produced by his death was, if possible, more astonishing than the reverence in which he was held while living. The splendour of his funeral, which was conducted at the charge of the most munificent of his patrons, the duke of Sesa, the number and language of the sermons on that occasion, the competition of poets of all countries in celebrating his genius and lamenting his loss, are unparalleled in the annals of poetry, and perhaps scarcel) equalled in those of royalty itself. The ceremonies attending his interment continued for nine days. His biographers, however, have been less careful to convey a just idea of this extraordinary man to posterity, and there is little in them that can throw any light upon his character as a man, or his history as an author. His intimate friend Montalvan praises him in general as a person of a mild and amiable disposition, of very temperate habits, of great erudition, singular charity, and extreme good breeding. His temper, he adds, was never ruffled but with those who took snuff before company; with the grey who dyed their locks; with men who, born of women, spoke ill of the sex; with priests who believed in gypsies; and with persons who, without intentions of marriage, asked others their age. These antipathies, which are rather quaint sallies of wit, than traits of character, are the only peculiarities which his intimate friend has t' >ught proper to communicate. We have already noticed his unreasonable complaints of illusage, neglect, and even poverty, which appear to have constituted the greatest blemish in his character. As an author, he is most known, as indeed he is most wonderful, for the prodigious number of his writings. Twenty-one million three hundred thousand of his lines are said to he actually printed; and no less than eighteen hundred plays of his composition to have been acted on the stage. Lord Holland has calculated that according to these accounts, allowing him to begin his compositions at the age of thirteen, we must believe that upon an average he wrote more than nine hundred lines a day; a fertility of imagination, and a celerity of pen, which, when we “consider the occupations of his life as a soldier, a secretary, a master of a family, and a priest; his acquirements in Latin, Italian, and Portuguese; and his reputation for erudition, become not only improhable, but absolutely* and, one may almost say, physically impossible. Yet although there does not now exist the fourth part of the works which he and his admirers mention, enough remains to render him one of the most voluminous authors that ever put pen to paper. Such was his facility, that he informs us himself, that more than an hundred times he composed a play and produced it on the stage in twentyfour hours. To this evidence we may add tins of Montalvan, that he wrote a comedy in two days, which it would not be very easy for the most expeditious amanuensis to copy out in the time. At Toledo he wrote fifteen acts in fifteen days, which, Montalvan adds, make five comedies. He also asserts that Lope wrote 1800 plays and 400 autos sacramentales, a species of dramatic composition” resembling' our old mysteries. That in all this there must be some exaggeration, cannot be doubted.

, an ancient Latin writer, lived in the fourth century, under the reign of Valentinian, to whom he dedicates a work, entitled “Epitome iflstitutorum rei militaris.” This is a compilation from many authors: yet the subject is treated with much method and exactness, and the Latinity, all things considered, exceedingly pure. Of the author little is known; he probably was a military man, and has the title of Conies. His work was first published without date or place, supposed at Utrecht, about 1473. The best editions since, are that of Schwebelius, 1767, 4to of Valart, Paris, 1762; and of Strasburgh, 1806, 8vo. It was also published, with other writers upon “Tactics,” Frontinus, Ælian, and Mnezs, at Leyden, 1644, in 12mo; and afterwards “Vesaliae Clivorum,” 1670, 8vo. There are also extant, under Vegetius’s name, if indeed the same Vegetius, of which Fabricius doubts, “Artis Veterinarise sive Mulomedidnae libri quatuor,” Basil, 1524, 4to; and afterwards, 1574, 4to.

a Dutch painter of great eminence, was descended of a considerable family in Leyden, and born in 1556. He was carefully educated by his parents in the belles lettres, and at the same time learned to design of Isaac Nicolas. In his fifteenth year, when the civil wars obliged him to leave his country, he retired to Liege, finished his studies, and there gave the first proofs of his talents. He was particularly known to cardinal Groosbeck, who gave him letters of recommendation when he went to Rome, where he was entertained by cardinal Maduccio. His genius was so active, that he at once applied himself to philosophy, poetry, mathematics, and painting, the latter under Frederico Zuchero. He acquired an excellence in all the parts of painting, especially in the knowledge of the chiar-oscuro, and he was the first who explained to the Flemish artists the principles of lights and shadows, which his disciple Rubens afterwards carried to so great a degree of perfection. He lived at Rome seven years, during which time he executed several fine pictures; and then, passing into Germany, was received into the emperor’s service. After this the duke of Bavaria and the elector of Cologn employed him: but all the advantages he got from the courts of foreign princes could not detain him there. He had a desire to return into the Low Countries, of which Alexander Farnese, prince of Parma, was then governor. He drew the prince’s picture in armour, which confirmed his reputation in the Netherlands. After the death of that prince, Venius returned to Antwerp, where he adorned the principal churches with his paintings. The archduke Albert, who succeeded the prince of Parma in the government of the Low Countries, sent for him to Brussels, and made him master of the mint, a place which took up much of his time; yet he found spare hours for the exercise of his profession. He drew the archduke and the infanta Isabella’s portraits at large, which were sent to James L of Great Britain: and, to shew his knowledge of polite learning, as well as of painting, he published several treatises, which he embellished with cuts of his own designing. Among these are, 1. “Horatii Emblemata,” Antwerp, 1607, 4to, often reprinted, but this edition has the best plates. 2. “Amoris divini emblemata,” Antwerp, 1615, 4to. 3. “Amorum emblemata,” ibid. 1608, 4to. 4. “Batavorum cum Romanis bellum, &c.” ibid. 1612, 4to, &c. Venius died at Brussels, 1634, in his seventy-eighth year. He had two brothers; Gilbert, who was an engraver; and Peter, a painter; but his greatest honour was his having Rubens for a pupil.

, one of the most prolific authors in the French series, deserves some notice as having been often mistaken for Claude Du Verdier, and even for Antony, who was dead long before this Gilbert was born. It is not known to what part of France he belonged. It appears that he was historiographer of France, and that after all his numerous publications, he was obliged in 1676 to apply for an asylum, for himself and his wife, in the hospital of Salpetriere, where he died in 1636. Bayle has a very superficial article on him. Joly allows him to have been the author of the historical works attributed to him, but doubts whether the romances under the name of Duverdier are not by another hand, and his reason is, that it is difficult to conceive a man’s continuing to write and publish for the long space of sixty years. This, however, is not absolutely decisive. Thirteen historical works are ascribed to Duverdier, all published in 12mo, in one, two, or more volumes each, consisting of histories of France, Turkey, Spain, England, Rome, and some lives. His romances amount to fourteen, but seem to be quite forgotten in his own country, and will not easily be revived in this by any list we can give. Some of them seem to be translations.

, a writer who did not want either genius or learning, was born at Urbino, in Italy, in the fifteenth century; but the year is not named, nor have we any account of his early history. He was first known in the literary world by “A Collection of Proverbs,” 1498, and this being the first work of the kind, it occasioned some jealousy between him and Erasmus. When Erasmus afterwards published his “Adagia,” and did not take notice of his work, Vergil reproached him in terms not civil, in the preface to his book “De llerum Inventoribus.” Their friendship, however, does not seem to have been interrupted by it; and Vergil, at the instigation of Erasmus, left the passage out in the later editions. These “Adagia” of Polydore Vergil were printed three or four times in a very short space; and this success encouraged him to undertake a more difficult work, his book “De Rerum Inventoribus,” printed in 1499. At the end of the 4th edition at Basil, 1536, 12mo, is subjoined a short commentary of his upon the Lord’s prayer. After this, he was sent into England by pope Alexander VI. to collect the papal tribute, called Peter-pence, and was the last collector of that oppressive tax. He recommended himself in this country so effectually to the powers in being, and was so well pleased with' it, that, having obtained the rectory of Church Langton in Leicestershire, he resolved to spend the remainder of his life in England. In 1507 he was presented to the archdeaconry of Wells, and prebend of Nonnington, in the church of Hereford; and was the same year collated to the prebehd of Scamelsby in the church of Lincoln, which he resigned in 1513 for the prebend of Oxgate in that of St. Paul’s. In 1517 he published at London a new edition of his work “De Rerum Inventoribus,” then consisting of six books, with a prefatory address to his brother John Matthew Vergil. About 1521 he undertook a considerable work at the command of Henry VIII.; upon which he spent above twelve years. It was a “History of England,” which he published and dedicated in 1533 to his royal patron. The purity of his language is generally allowed, and he excelled most of the writers of this age for elegance and clearness of style, but his work is chargeable with great partiality, and even falsehood, and this charge has been advanced by sir Henry Savile and Humphrey Lloyd, who reproaches him in very severe terms. Caius, in his book “De Antiquitatibus Cantabrigiae,” mentions it as a thing “not only reported, but even certainly known, that Polydore Vergil, to prevent the discovery of the faults in his history, most wickedly committed as many of our ancient and manuscript histories to the flames as a waggon could hold.” For this, however, we have no direct authority. His greatest fault is, that he gives a very unfair account of the reformation, and of the conduct of the protestants. Yet his work has been printed several times, and very much read; and is necessary to supply a chasm of almost seventy years in our history, including particularly the lives of Edward IV. and Edward V. which period is hardly to be found in Latin in any other author.

, count de Tressan, a lively French writer, was born at Mons, Nov. 4, 1705, of a noble family originally from Languedoc, one branch of which had been protestants, and fought on that side in the civil wars preceding the massacre. He came early in life to Paris, and attached himself to Voltaire and Fontenelle, who initiated him in the belles lettres, and in those principles which afterwards made him be ranked among the philosophers of France. He served afterwards in the French army, and attained the rank of lieutenant-general. In 1750 he was admitted a free associate of the French academy, and contributed a memoir on Electricity, a subject then not much known, and written with so much ability that it was supposed he might have acquired no small fame in pursuing scientific subjects. This, however, was not agreeable to his disposition. After the battle of Fontenoy, in 1741, in which he served as aide-de-camp to Louis XV. he went to the court of Stanislaus, king of Poland, at Luneville, where he recommended himself by the sprightliness of his temper, and by the freedom of his remarks, but at the same time made some enemies by his satirical and epigrammatic productions. On the death of Stanislaus, he retired from active life, and devoted his time to the composition of a variety of works, particularly romances. Some of which were however translations, and others abridgments. These fill 12 octavo volumes published in 1791. His translation of Ariosto seems to have done him most credit. A light, trifling spirit never deserted him, but still sported even in his grey-hairs, until death put a serious end to it, Oct. 31, 1782, in his seventy-seventh year. Almost up to this period he was abridging Amadis de Gaul, and writing tales of chivalry, after having begun his career with the grave and abstruse parts of science. While in this latter employment he was, in 1749, chosen a member of our Royal Society.

Having stayed a competent time, eagerly employed in the contemplation of the finest models of antiquity, he returned to France, and his first designs were views of some of the principal sea-ports on the coast. These being shewn to his late majesty of France, procured him the appointment of marine painter to the king, with a competent salary, and every assistance that he requested to go through his plan of giving a view of every sea' port in the kingdom. This he completed, and under royal and national patronage the views have been engraved and the prints, which are in general most exquisitely performed, have been disseminated through all Europe. Many of these engravings were by Balechon; one of them, well known to collectors by the name of “The Storm,” was much admired for the fluidity of the water, and the spirit of the figures. One hundred of the prints were consigned to an engraver in London, and part of them sold; but some persons objecting to the very clumsy style in which a long dedication, inscribed under the print, was written, Balechon said he would soon remedy that, and with his graver drew a number of black lines upon the copper, over the dedication, so as in a degree to obliterate the words, and sent 100 impressions to England. These our connoisseurs soon found to be “the second impression,” and eagerly bought up the first; but a print with the lines no man of taste would look at. This mortified the English printseller, who wrote to the French engraver, and complained that he could not sell the second set for half price. “Morbleu” cries the Frenchman, “How whimsical are these English Virtuosi! They must be satisfied, however.” To work he sets with his punch and hammer, and, repairing the letters, sends out the print, with the inscription apparently in its first state. A few of these were sold; but the imposition was soon discovered by the faintness of the impressions; and then those who did not possess the first impressions, were glad to have the plate in the second, rather than the third state; so that nearly all the third set lay upon the hands of the printseller. This produced a complaint; and the complaisant Frenchman, ever eager to satisfy his English customers, again punched out the lines, and brought the inscription to its second state.

, principally known as an antiquary, was the grandson of Richard Roland Verstegan, of an ancient family in the duchy of Guelderland, who being driven out of his own country by the confusions of war, came to England in the time of Henry VII. Here he married, and dying soon after, left an infant son, who was afterwards put apprentice to a cooper, and was father to the subject of this article. Richard was born in St. Catherine’s parish, near the Tower of London, and after receiving the rudiments of education, was sent to Oxford, where he was generally called Roland. It does not appear what college he belonged to, cr whether he is to be considered as a regular member of any, but he seems to have distinguished himself in Saxon literature, then very little studied. He was, however, a zealous Roman catholic, and finding no encouragement in his studies without taking oaths adverse to his principles, he quitted the university, and settled at Antwerp, and practised drawing and painting. About 1592 he published a work, now very rare, entitled “Theatrum crudelitatum Hsereticorum nostri temporis,” a thin quarto, with curious cuts representing the deaths of the Jesuits, and other missionaries who were hanged or otherwise put to death for their machinations against the church and state. This effort of zeal does not appear to have been in all respects agreeable to some of his own party; and either his fears on this account, or some other causes, induced him to leave Antwerp for Paris. There being complained of by the English ambassador as a calumniator of his royal mistress, he was thrown into prison by the French king’s orders. How long he was confined is not known, but when released he returned to Antwerp, and resumed his studies, which produced his “Restitution of decayed Antiquities,” 1605, 4to, several times reprinted, a work of very considerable merit and judicious research; but, the principal subjects on English antiquities having been since more accurately investigated and treated, Verstegan’s work is rather a curious than a necessary addition to the historical library. When he published it he seems to have been in better humour with England, and dedicated it very respectfully to James I. He corresponded much with sir Robert Cotton, and other antiquaries of the time. It is uncertain when he died, but some place that event soon after 1634. Verstegan wrote also “The successive regal Governments of England,” Antwerp, 1620, in one sheet, with cuts; “A Dialogue on Dying well,” a translation from the Italian; and a collection of very indifferent poetry, entitled “Odes; in imitation of the seven penitential Psalmes. With sundry other poems and ditties, tending to devotion and pietie,” imprinted 1601, 8vo, probably at Antwerp.

Afterwards he went to Paris, and studied physic under James Sylvius; but applied himself chiefly to anatomy, which was then a science very little known. For, though dissections had been made formerly, yet they had long been discontinued as an unlawful and impious usage; and Charles V. had a consultation of divines at Salamanca, to know, if, in good conscience, a human body might be dissected for the sake of comprehending its structure. He perfected himself in this science very early, as we may know from his work “De Humani Corporis Fabrica:” which, though then the best book of anatomy in the world, and what justly gave him the title of “the Father of Anatomy,” was yet composed by him at eighteen years of age. Afterwards he went to Louvain, and began to communicate the knowledge he had acquired: then he travelled into Italy, read lectures, and made anatomical demonstrations at Pisa, Bologna, and several other cities there. About 1537, the republic of Venice made him professor in the university of Padua, where he taught anatomy seven years, and was the first anatomist to whom a salary was given; and Charles V. called him to be his physician, as he was also to Philip II. king of Spain. He acquired a prodigious reputation at those courts by his sagacity and skill in his profession, of which Thuanus has recorded this very singular proof. He tells us, that Maximilian d'Egmont, count of Buren, grand general, and a favourite of the emperor, being ill, Vesalius declared to him, that he could not recover; and also told him, that he could not hold out beyond such a day and hour. The count, firmly persuaded that the event would answer the prediction, invited all his friends to a grand entertainment at the time after which he made them presents, took a final leave of them, and then expired precisely at the moment Vesalius had mentioned. If this account be not true, it shews at least the vast reputation Vesalius must have risen to, where such stories were invented to do him honour.

Americus remained in Portugal until 1506, the time of Columbus’s death, when the Spanish court wishing to repair the loss occasioned by that event, recalled Americus into their service, who again sailed, in 1507, in a Spanish fleet, with the title of first pilot, and it was during this voyage that the new world took its name from him. Thus, says the abbe kaynal, the moment America became known from the rest of the world, it was distinguished by an act of injustice. Americus jived a considerable time afterwards to enjoy this usurped honour, and is said to hare often visited the continent which bore his name. He died in 1516, at which time he was again in the service of Portugal. Emanuel, in order to do honour to his memory, caused the remains of his ship to be deposited in the cathedral of Lisbon, and Florence bestowed honours on his family.

The following publications of his are also in great request: “Monumenta aliquot antiquorum ex gemmis et cameis incisa,” Rom. fol. “Omnium Cacsarum verissimaj imagines ex antiquis numismatibus desumptae,” 15*4, 4to '; and “Augustarum imagines formis expressa?, vitae quoque earumdem breviter enarratae,” &c. Venice, 1558, 4to, the two last edited by P. Manutius. The time of his birth or death is not known.

Mr. Roscoe, whom we have hitherto principally followed, observes, that of all the writers of Latin poetry at the period in which he lived, Vida has been the most generally known beyond the limits of Italy. This is to be attributed, Mr. Roscoe adds, not only to the fortunate choice of his subjects, but to his admirable talent of uniting a considerable portion of elegance, and often of dignity, with the utmost facility and clearness of style; insomuch that the most complex descriptions or abstruse illustrations are rendered by him perfectly easy and familiar to the reader. Dr. Warton is of opinion that the merits of Vida seem not to have been particularly attended to in England, till Pope introduced him in these lines:

, a physician and anatomist, was born in 1641, at the village of Rovergue, and after studying and taking his degrees in medicine at Montpellier, settled there as a practitioner. In 1671, he was appointed physician to the hospital of St. Eloy, where from frequent opportunities of anatomical dissection, he was led to pay particular attention to the subject of neurology, which, notwithstanding what the celebrated Dr. Willis had published, was a part of the animal economy very little known. After ten years study of the nerves, he published the work which has redounded most to his honour, “Neurologia universalis, hoc est, omnium huniani corporis nervorum, simul ac cerebri, medullaeque spinalis, descriptio anatomica,” Leyden, 1685, fol. Even of this work, however, the anatomical part is the most valuable, for what respects the physiology, which forms a considerable part of the volume, deserves very little regard, as being founded on wrong principles. He afterwards published other anatomical works, but does not appear to have advanced his reputation by them. Astruc and Senac have given a very unfavourable account of his genius and judgment, yet neither can deny that his anatomical researches have been of service. In 1690 he was sent for to be physician to mademoiselle de Montpensier, but at her death returned to Montpellier, where he died in 1716.

, grandson of the preceding historian, was born in 1606, at Blois. He was bred a protestant, and became bailiff“of Baugency; but having afterwards abjured the Protestant religion, he entered the congregation of the Oratory, in which he distinguished himself by his learning. He understood Greek, Hebrew, and Chaldee, cultivated the belles lettres with success, and had a talent for Latin poetry, as appears from his paraphrases of some Psalms. He died November 14, 1661, at Paris, aged fiftysix. He left several works: among the principal are,” La Genealogie des Seigneurs d'Alsace,“1649, fol.; a very useful supplement to St. Augustine’s works, of which he found some Mss. at Clairvaux that had never been published.” A Harmony of the Gospels,“in French;” Stemma Austriacum,“1650, fol.; and” La Genéalogie des Comtes de Champagne.“He meant to have published a treatise, written by St. Fulgentius against Faustus, but was prevented by death, nor is it known what became of this treatise. Vignier found an ancient ms. at Metz, containing a relation of events in that city, and in which there was a long account of the famous Joan d‘Arc, better known by the name of the Maid of Orleans. According to this it appear,ed that she had been married to the Sire des Amboises, or D’Hermoises, descended from an illustrious house, and of the ancient knighthood. He also found in the treasury of Messrs, des Amboises, the contract of the above marriage, which imports” that in 1436, Robert des Amboises married Joan d'Arc, called the Maid of Orleans." But this fact is very generally doubted.

, an eminent architect and writer on the subject, was the son of Clement Barozzio, of one of the best families of Milan, but who being ruined by the civil wars, retired to Vignola, a small town in the marquisate of that name, situated in the territory of Bologna. It was there that his son, the subject of this article, was born, Oct. 1, 1507, and became afterwards generally known by the name of his native place. His father dying when he was almost in his infancy, and leaving him little provision, he wished to have recourse to painting; and having some knowledge of the first principles of the art, he went to Bologna to be farther instructed, but soon changed his mind, and determined to confine himself to architecture and perspective. He was no sooner known in this profession, than several persons applied to him for designs for buildings, and he executed some for the governor of Bologna, which were very much admired. On such occasions, in order to see the effect of what he laid down, he had models made in wood by Damien de Bergamo, a Dominican, who excelled in that species of ingenuity, and used to express, by means of coloured woods, every kind of material to be used in the building.

, a learned chronologist, was born Oct. 29, 1649, at the castle of Aubais, in Languedoc, of a very ancient family, and received a liberal education. His preparatory studies being finished, he passed a year at Geneva, and heard a course of lectures ou divinity. His father had intended him for the army, but was unwilling to put any restraint upon his inclinations, and therefore permitted him to go to Saumur, and afterwards to England, to complete his divinity studies. In 1675 he returned to Aubais, and was appointed minister of that church, which he afterwards resigned for that of Cailar, and while he performed the functions of his order with great zeal, found leisure at the same time to indulge his taste for chronological researches. On the revocation of the edict of Nantz he returned to Geneva, and afterwards to Berlin, where he was appointed pastor of the church of Schwedt. When his merit became better known, he had the choice of many churches of more emolument, but ^ave the preference to that of Brandenburgh, on account of its vicinity to the metropolis, where he might enjoy opportunities of study. In the mean time he began to form an intimacy with many eminent men, as Lenfant, La Croze, Kirck, &c. and distinguished himself by some learned papers inserted in the iiterary journals. When the royal society of Berlin was founded in 1701, he was chosen one of the members, and at the suggestion of Leibnitz was invited to settle in Berlin, that the new society might profit by his communications. With this he appears to have complied, and on the formation of the society of the Anonymi was chosen their secretary. In 1711 he became one of the editors of the “Bibliotheque Germanique,” which he enriched with many valuable criticisms, and analyses of books. Amidst all these employments he did not neglect the duties of his profession, but was a very frequent preacher, and having obtained the cure of Copenick, near Berlin, he passed his summers there, and there composed his great chronological work, the plan of which he published in 1721, but the whole did not appear until some years afterwards. Its success did not answer the expectation of the author, or of his friends, and although one of the best which had appeared on the subject, sold so slowly, that tKe bookseller was obliged more than once to have recourse to the trick of a new title-page. Vignoles, however, satisfied with a moderate competence, a stranger to worldly ambition and passions, lived quietly and happily among his books, with the occasional conversation of a few agreeable and steady friends. His wife died in child-bed, and none of the children she brought survived him. He was, in his old age, on the point of losing his sight by two cataracts, the one of which was dissipated naturally, and the other removed by an operation, the particulars of which he published in the “Miscellanea Berolinensia,” vol. IV. The king and queen shewed him many marks of kindness. The latter, it appears from the dedication of his chronology, had at one time ordered the eve of his birth-day to be kept by an entertainment, at which her proxy expressed her royal wishes forthe continuance of his life. He died at Berlin, July 24, 1744, aged upwards of ninety-four. His principal work, already noticed, was published under the title of “Chronologic de l‘historie sainte et des histoires etrangeres depuis la sortie d’Egypte jusqu'a la captivite de Babylone,” Berlin, 1738, 2 vols. 4to, a work unquestionably of vast labour and extent, and consequently cannot be supposed altogether free from imperfections.

In this fatal conjuncture, and while the war with Spain was yet kept up, anew war was precipitately declared against France; for which no reasonable cause could ever be assigned. It has been said, that the king was hurried into this war, purely from a private motive of resentment in the duke of Buckingham, who, having bfeen in France to bring over the queen, had the confidence to make overtures of love to Anne of Austria, the consort of Lewis XIII.; and that his high spirit was so fired at the repulse he met with on this extraordinary occasion, as to be appeased with nothing less than a war between the two nations. Whatever was the cause, the fleet, which had been designed to have surprised Cadiz, was no sooner returned without success and with much damage, than it was repaired, and the army reinforced for the invasion of France. Here the duke was general himself, and made that unfortunate descent upon the Isle of Rhee, in which the flower of the army was lost. Having returned to England, and repaired the fleet and the army, he was about to sail to the relief of Rochelle, which was then closely besieged by the cardinal Richelieu; and to relieve which the duke was the more obliged, because at the Isle of Rhee he had received great supplies of victuals and some men from that town, the want of both which he laboured under at this time. He was at Portsmouth for this purpose, when he was assassinated by one Felton, on the 23d of August, 1628, in the thirty-sixth year of his age. The particulars of this assassination are well known, being related, at large by lord Clarendon, to whom we refer the reader; but we may subjoin another account, as being circumstantial and curious, and less known. This is given by sir Simonds D'Ewes, in a manuscript life of himself: “August the 23d, being Saturday, the duke having eaten his breakfast between eight and nine o‘clock in the morning, in one Mr. Mason-’ s house in Portsmouth, he was then hasting away to the king, who lay at Reswicke, about five miles distant, to have some speedy conference with him. Being come to the farthef part of the entry leading out of the parlour into the hall of the house, he had there some conference with sir Thomas Frier, a colonel; and stooping down in taking his leave of him, John Felton, gentleman, having watched his opportunity, thrust a long knife, with a white helfc, he had secretly ahout him, with great strength and violence, into his breast, under his left pap, cutting the diaphragm* and lungs, and piercing the very heart itself. The duke having received the stroke, and instantly clapping his right-hand on his sword-hilt, cried out ` God’s wounds! the villain hath killed me.‘ Some report his last words otherwise, little differing for substance from these; and it might have been wished, that his end had not been so sudden, nor his last words mixed with so impious an expression. He was attended by many noblemen and leaders, yet none could see to prevent the stroke. His duchess, and the countess of Anglesey (the wife of Christopher Villiers, earl of Anglesey, his younger brother), being in an upper room, and hearing a noise in the hall, into which they had carried the duke, ran presently into a gallery, that looked down into it $ and there beholding the duke’s blood gush out abundantly from his breast, nose, and mouth (with which his speech, after those his first words, had been immediately stopped), they brake into pitiful outcries, and raised great lamentation. He pulled out the knife himself; and being carried by his servants unto the table, tha,t stood in the same hall, having struggled with death near upon a quarter of an hour, at length he gave up the ghost, about ten o’clock, and lay a long time after he was dead upon the table.”

As to the character of this great man, Clarendon says, he was “of a noble and generous disposition, and of such other endowments as made him very capable of being a great favourite with a great king. He understood the arts of a court, and all the learning that is possessed there, exactly well. By long practice in business, under a master that discoursed excellently, and surely knew all things wonderfully, and took much delight in indoctrinating his young unexperienced favourite, who (he knew) would always be looked upon as the workmanship of his own hands, he bad obtained a quick conception and apprehension of business, and had the habit of speaking very gracefully anci pertinently. He was of a most flowing courtesy and affability to all men who made any address to him, and so desirous to oblige them that he did not enough consider the value of the obligation, or the merit of the person he chose to oblige; from which much of his misfortune resulted. He was of a courage not to be daunted, which was manifested in all his actions, and in his contests with particular persons of the greatest reputation; and especially in his whole demeanour at the Isle of Rhee, both at the landing and upon the retreat; in both which no man was more fearless, or more ready to expose himself to the highest dangers. His kindness and affection to his friends was so vehement, that they were as so many marriages for better or worse, and so many leagues offensive and defensive: as if he thought himself obliged to love all his friends, and to make war upon all they were angry with, let the cause be what it would. And it cannot be denied, that he was an enemy in the same excess $ and prosecuted those he looked upon as enemies with the utmost rigour and animosity, and was not easily induced to a reconciliation. His single misfortune was, which was indeed productive of many greater, that he had never made a noble and a worthy friendship with a man so near his equal, that he would frankly advise him for his honour and true interest against the current, or rather the torrent, of his passions; and it may reasonably be believed, that, if he had been blessed with one faithful friend, who had been qualified with wisdom and integrity, he would have committed as few faults, and done as transcendant worthy actions, as any man who shined in such a sphere in that age in Europe; for he was of an excellent disposition, and of a mind very capable of advice and counsel; he was in his nature just and candid, liberal, generous, and bountiful; nor was it ever known, that the temptation of money swayed him to do an unjust or unkind thing. If he had an immoderate ambition, with which he was charged, it doth not appear that it was in his nature, or that he brought it with him to the court, but rather found it there. He needed no ambition, who was so seated in the hearts of two such masters.” This is the character which the earl of Clarendon has thought fit to give the duke; and if other historians have not drawn him in colours quite so favourable, yet they have not varied from him in the principal features.

The story of George Villiers, the duke’s father, appearing to an officer in the king’s wardrobe at Windsor castle, and predicting the duke’s death, is so very well known, that it does not seem necessary to enter into any detail about it. If the reader thinks it worthy of any credit, and is curious to examine farther into it, he may find it at large in the first hook of Clarendon’s “History of the Rebellion.”

Besides “The Rehearsal,” the duke was the author of some other dramatic pieces; as “The Chances,” a comedy altered from Fletcher; “The Restauration, or Right will take place,” a tragi-comedy; “The Battle of Sedgmoor,”' a farce; “The Militant Couple, or the Husband may thank himself,” a fragment. He was the author of some prose pieces, among which were “An Essay upon Reason and Religion,” in a letter to Nevile Pain, esq.; “On Human Reason,” addressed to Martin Clifford, esq.; “An account of a Conference between the duke and father Fitzgerald, whom king James’sent to convert his grace in his sickness;” and, “A short Discourse upon the reasonableness of men’s having a religion or worship of God.” This last was printed in 1685, and passed through three editions. The duke wrote also several small poems complimentary and satirical. One is entitled “The lost mistress, a complaint against the countess of” Shrewsbury, as is supposed; whose lord he killed in a duel on her account, and who is said to have held the duke’s horse, disguised like a page, during the combat. The loves of this tender pair are touched by Pope, in some well-known lines. Pope informed Spence, “that the duke’s duel with lord Shrewsbury was concerted between him and lady Shrewsbury. All that morning she was trembling for her gallant, and wishing for the death of her husband; and after his fall, 'tis said the duke lay with her in his bloody shirt.” The following account of this infamous affair, which Mr. Malone copied from a ms letter dated Whitehall, Jan. 10, 1673-4, affords but a sorry idea of the profligate reign in which such a tragedy could be acted vrith impunity.

But neither his amusements nor his studies were ever suffered to interfere with his public or professional duties. In the church, in the school^ among his parishioners, or among his boys, he was always active and assiduous: fully prepared for the task of the day, whether to preach or teach; to illustrate the classics, or expound the Scriptures. His mode of instructing the boys on the foundation at Westminster, is admirably described by a well-informed writer in the Gent. Mag. 1815. “The under-master,” he says, “has the care of the college; and in his hands are the preservation of its discipline, the guardianship of its morals, and the charge of its religious instruction. With a steadiness and fidelity rarely equalled Dr. Vincent discharged these difficult functions; but perhaps there never existed a man who rivalled him in the art of attracting from boys attention to his lectures. Four times a year, each week preparatory to receiving the sacrament, Dr. V. explained the nature of that religious rite; its institution, its importance, and its benefits. And we believe, such was his happy mode of imparting instruction, that there never was known an instance of any boy treating the disquisition with levity, or not shewing an eagerness to be present at, and to profit by, the lesson. A clear sonorous voice, a fluent, easy, yet correct delivery, an expression at once familiar and impressive, rendered him a delightful speaker. These advantages he possessed in common conversation, but he displayed them more especially on. public occasions, and never to greater advantage than in the pulpit.”

At length, on the death of Dr. Smith in 1788, Dr. Vincent (who had taken his doctor’s degree in 1776), was nominated to succeed him r.s head-master an appointment which gave great satisfaction to the friends of the school, though the whole extent and force of his talents were far from being completely known. Particular attention seems to have been first paid to a sermon he preached at St. Margaret’s, Westminster, for a charity-school. This was in 1792, a period of great political turbulence and danger; and this sermon, being remarkable for the clear and powerful statement of principles favourable to social order, and for explaining the necessity of the gradations of rich and poor, was welcomed on its publication by all the zealous friends of the Britisu constitution, and to render it more serviceable, the patriotic association against republicans and levellers obtained leave from the author to reprint the principal part of it, for circulation among the people; and twenty thousand copies were thus distributed in London, and throughout the country, probably with excellent effect. We have seen already that the first publication of Dr. Vincent, though anonymous, was a defence of sound principles, against factious measures and artifices: and, as that tract was never afterwards owned, there cannot be any possible suspicion that the author wrote it with a view to praise or emolument; or otherwise than from the honest impulse of his heart, and the clear conviction of his mind. The principles which he there discovered, remained unaltered through life; and were felt with particular force when the movements of faction called for opposition. It cannot be floubted, therefore, that he must have felt the liveliest satisfaction in having his discourse thus circulated, in a, more attractive form than a sermon might have borne, for the general instruction of the people.

Dr. Vincent had long been diligently employed upon a much more arduous task, and more connected with the studies, to which he was by preference attached. In 1797, he published the result of those labours r in his celebrated commentary on Arrian’s “Voyage of Nearchus,” which formed the basis of our author’s reputation. On a work so well known, it is not necessary that we should expatiate at any great length. Nearchus’s voyage is related by Arrian of Nicomedia (See Arrian), and is comprised in his “ludica,” or general account of India, and is professedly taken from the journal of Nearchus himself. The authenticity of the narrative had indeed been questioned by some learned men; but it is so victoriously defended by Dr. Vincent, in the concluding section of his preliminary Disquisitions, that Schmieder, the latest editor of Arrian, has translated the whole of his arguments into Latin; and has subjoined them to the objections of Dodwell, as a complete and satisfactory refutation. So strongly was Schmieder himself of the same opinion, that in his preface to the Indica he says, that “they who deny the genuineness of this account are hardly worth refuting.”

The principal works of Dean Vincent have now been distinctly enumerated; as forming an important part of his history, as a literary man; but he wrote occasionally in periodical works, in which he had no other interest, but such as arose from the general wish to promote the progress of sound literature, both sacred and profane; or to benefit the editors of works whose design was of that nature. His communications to the “Classical Journal” were not many, but va|uable, and regularly signed with his name. They were these 1. On Ancient Commerce No. v. p. 60. 2. On China, as known to Classic Authors No. xiii. p. 32. 3. On Theophilus, an African Bishop No. xiv. p. 382. 4. On the Geography of Susiana; Suppl. to No. xviii. p. 449. 5. Correction of an Error in the Periplus; No. xx. p. 322. The contributions of Dr. Vincent to the “British Critic” commenced at a very early period of that publication, and were never entirely discontinued till the close of the first series. The friendship with which he honoured the original editor of that work, together with his entire approbation of the design and principles, with which it was undertaken and conducted, made him at all times ready to give his aid to it, when his other occupations and studies would permit. As he was always completely a volunteer, so the choice of his subjects, as well as of his opportunities, was left entirely to himself. These communications were not marked with his name, because it was not suitable to the practice of the Review, but he had no particular wish to be concealed, and his biographer has accordingly given a list of his articles, with useful remarks, for which, on account of its length, we must refer to our authority.

The fourth period of this great man’s lift* terminates likewise the career of his art. Lionardo appears to have bid farewell to painting about his sixty-third year. When in 1515 Francis I. had failed in the attempt of having the picture of the last supper sawed from the walls of the refectory, for its transportation to France, he attempted to possess’himself of the author. He invited him to his court, and Vinci accepted the invitation without much regret at leaving Florence, where, since his return from Rome, he had met in young Buonarroti with a rival already preferred to him in the disposal of commissions; because, if we believe Vasari, he gave works where Lionardo gave often only words. It is known that there was anger between them, and Vjnci, consulting his own quiet, passed over to France, where, before he had touched pencil, he died in the arms of Francis I.

the most excellent of all the ancient Roman poets, was born Oct. 15, U. C. 684, B. C. 70, in the consulship of Pompey and Crassus, at a village called Andes, not far from Mantua. His father was undoubtedly a man of low birth and mean circumstances; but by his industry so much recommended himself to his master, that he gave him his daughter, named Maia, in marriage, as a reward of his fidelity. Our poet, discovering early marks of a very fine genius, was sent at twelve years old to study at Cremona, where he continued till his seventeenth year. He was then removed to Milan, and from thence to Naples, then the residence of several teachers in philosophy and polite learning; and applied himself heartily to the study of the best Greek and Roman writers. But physic and mathematics were his favourite sciences, which he cultivated with much care; and to this early tincture of geometrical learning were owing probably that regularity of thought, propriety of expression, and exactness in conducting all subjects, for which he is so remarkable. He learned the Epicurean philosophy under the celebrated Syro, of whom Cicero speaks twice with the greatest encomiums both of his learning and virtue: his acquaintance with Varus, his first patron, commenced by his being fellow-student with him under this philosopher. After Virgil had completed his studies at Naples, Donatus affirms, that he made a journey to Rome; and relates some marvellous circumstances concerning his being made known to Augustus, which, like many other particulars in his account of this poet, breathe very much the air of fable. The truth is, we have no certain knowledge of the time and occasion of Virgil’s going to Rome, how his connexions with the wits and men of quality began, nor how he was introduced to the court of Augustus.

We cannot however imagine, that such an extraordinary gemus could lie long inactive and unexerted. It is related that, in the warmth of early youth, he formed a noble design of writing an heroic poem, “On the wars of Rome;” but, after some attempts, was discouraged from proceeding by the roughness and asperity of the old Roman names, which not only disgusted his delicate ear, but, as Horace expresses it, “quse versu dicere non est.” He turned himself, therefore, to pastoral; and, being captivated with the beauty and sweetness of Theocritus, was ambitious to introduce this new species of poetry among the Romans. His first performance in this way is supposed to have been written the year before the death of Julius Caesar, when the poet was in his twenty-fifth year: it is entitled “Alexis.” Possibly “Palaemon” was his second, which is a close imitation of the fourth and fifth Idylls of Theocritus. Dr. Warton places “Silenus” next: which is said to have been publicly recited on the stage by Cytheris, a celebrated comedian. Cicero, having heard this eclogue, cried out in an extasy of admiration, that the author of it was “magna3 spes altera Romae;” esteeming himself, say the commentators, to be the first. But the words may be understood in a very different sense, and more honourable to Cicero. The subject of this eclogue, we should remember, was an account of the Epicurean philosophy, both natural and moral, which had been but lately illustrated by Lucretius, an author, of whom Cicero was so eminently fond, as to revise and publish his work. Upon hearing therefore the beautiful verses of Virgil upon the same subject, Cicero exclaimed to this purpose: “Behold another great genius rising up among us, who will prove a second Lucretius.” Dr. Warton at least has suggested this very ingenious and natural interpretation. Virgil’s fifth eclogue is composed in allusion to the death and deification of Cassar. The battle of Philippi, in the year 7 12, having put an end to the Roman liberty, the veteran soldiers began to murmur for their pay; and Augustus, to reward them, distributed among them the lands of Mantua and Cremona. Virgil was involved in this common calamity, and applied to Varus and Pollio, who warmly recommended him to Augustus, and procured for him his patrimony again. Full of gratitude to Augustus, he composed the “Tityrus,” in which he introduces two shepherds; one of them complaining of the distraction of the times, and of the h.avock the soldiers made among the Mantuan farmers; the other, rejoicing for the recovery of his estate, and promising to honour the person who restored it to him as a god. But our poet’s joy was not of long continuance: for we are told, that, when he returned to take possession of his farm, he was violently assaulted by the intruder, and would certainly have been killed by him, if he had not escaped by swimming hastily over the Mincio. Upon this unexpected disappointment, melancholy and dejected, he returned to Rome, to renew his petition; and, during his journey, seems to have composed his ninth eclogue. The celebrated eclogue, entitled “Pollio,” was composed in the year 714, upon the following occasion. The consul Pollio on the part of Antony, and Maecenas on the part of Caesar, iiad made up the differences between them; by agreeing, that Octavia, half sister to Caesar, should be given in marriage to Antony. This agreement caused an universal joy; and Virgil, in this eclogue, testified his. Octavia was with child by her late husband Marcellus at the time of this marriage; and, as the Sibylline oracles had foretold, that a child was to be born about this time who should rule the world and establish perpetual peace, the poet ingeniously supposes the child in Octavia’s womb to be the glorious infant, under whose reign mankind was to be happy, the golden age to return from heaven, and fraud and violence to be no more. In this celebrated poem, the author with great delicacy at the same time pays his court to both the chiefs, to his patron Pollio, to Octavia, and to the unborn infant. It is dedicated to Pollio by name, who was at that time consul, and therefore we are sure of the date of this eclogue, as it is known he enjoyed that high office in the year 714. In the year 715, Pollio was sent against the Parthini, a people of Illyricum; and during this expedition Virgil addressed to him a beautiful eclogue, called “Pharmaceutria.” His tentti and last eclogue is addressed to Gallus. These were our poet’s first productions; and we have been the more circumstantial in our account of some of them, as many particulars of his life are intimately connected with them.

The genuine and undisputed works of this poet are, ten “Eclogues, or Bucolics,” four books of “Georgics,” and the “Æneid,” in twelve books. The “Culex,” the “Ciris,” and some smaller pieces, called “Catalecta,” are subjoined to some editions of his works; particularly to that of Masvicius, with the notes of Servius, at JLeewarden, 1717, in 2 vols. 4to; which is, perhaps, the best edition of Virgil, although that of Burman, at Amsterdam, 1746, in 4 vols. 4 to., bears a higher price. There are, besides these 4 several good ones; as the “Elzevir” in 1636, 12mo; “Da la Cerdu’s” in 1642, folio; that “in Usum Delphini a Ruæo, 1675,” 4to; the “Variorum” edition at Leyden, 1680, 3 vols. 8vo and the edition of Heyne, republished in London in 1793. The versions of, and commentaries upon, his works are innumerable; those into our own lair* guage by Ogilby, Dryden, and Trapp, are well known: but Dr. Warton’s edition in Latin and English, referred to above, is preferable to any of these, not on account of th translation only, but because the Latin text is correctly printed with it. The “Bucolics” and “Georgics” have also been published by Dr. John Martyn, F. R. S. professor of botany in Cambridge, with an English version in prose, and with useful and curious notes.

, was a celebrated Roman architect, of whom however nothing is known but what is to be collected from his ten books “Do Ardiitectura,” still extant. In the preface to the sixth book he informs us that he was carefully educated by his parents, and instructed in the whole circle of arts and sciences; a circumstance which he speaks of with much gratitude, laying it down as certain, that no man can be a complete arr chitect, without some knowledge and skill in everyone of" them. And in the preface to the first book he informs us that he was known to Julius Cicsar that he was afterwards recommended by Octavia to her brother Augustus Cæsar, and that he was so favoured and provided for by this emperor, as to be out of all fear of poverty as long as he might live.

It is supposed that Vitruvius was born either at Rome or Verona; but it is not known which. His books of architecture are addressed to Augustus Csesar, and not only shew consummate skill in that particular science, but also very uncommon genius and natural abilities. Cardan, in his 16th book “De Subtilitate,” ranks Vitruvius as one of the twelve persons, whom he supposes to have excelled all men in the force of genius and invention; and would not have scrupled to have given him the first place, if it could be imagined that he had delivered nothing but his own discoveries. These twelve persons were, Euclid, Archimedes, Apollonius Pergaeus, Aristotle, Archytas of Tarentum, Vitruvius, Achindus, Mahomet Ibn Moses the inventor or improver of Algebra, Duns Scotus, John Suisset surnamed the Calculator, Galen, and Heber of Spain.

, the greatest literary character which France produced in the last century, was born at Paris, February 20, 1694. His father, Francis Arouet, was “ancien notaire du Chatelet,” and treasurer of the chamber of accounts; his mother, MaryMargaret Daumart. At the birth of this extraordinary man, who lived to the age of eighty-five years and some months, there was little probability of his being ‘reared, and for a considerable time he continued remarkably feeble. In his earliest years he displayed a ready wit and a sprightly imagination: and, as he said of himself, made verses before he was out of his cradle. He was educated under Father Por6, in the college of Louis the Great; and such was his proficiency, that many of his essays are now existing, which, though written when he was between twelve and fourteen, shew no marks of infancy. The famous Ninon de l’Enclos, to whom this ingenious boy was introduced, left him a legacy of 2000 livres to buy him a library. Having been sent to the equity-schools on his quitting college, he was so disgusted with the dryness of the law, that he devoted himself entirely to the Muses. He was admitted into the company of the abb< Chaulieu, the marquis de la Fare, the duke de Sully, the grand prior of Vendo;ne, marshal Villars, and the chevalier du Bouillon; and caught from them that easy taste and delicate humour which distinguished the court of Louis XIV. Voltaire had early imbibed a turn for satire; and, for some philippics against the government, was imprisoned almost a year in the Bastile. He had before this period produced the tragedy of “Oedipus,” which was represented in 1718 with great success; and the duke of Orleans, happening to see it performed, was so delighted, that he obtained his release from prison. The poet waiting on the duke to return thanks: “Be wise,” said the duke, “and I will take care of you.” “I am infinitely obliged,” replied the young man; “but I intreat your royal highness not to trouble yourself any farther about my lodging or board.” His father, whose ardent wish it was that the son should have been an advocate, was present at one of the representations of the new tragedy: he was affected, even to tears, embraced his son amidst the felicitations of the ladies of the court, and never more, from that time, expressed a wish that he should become a lawyer. About 1720, he went to Brussels with Madam de Rupelmonde. The celebrated Rousseau being then in that city, the two poets met, and soon conceived an unconquerable aversion for each other. Voltaire said one day to Rousseau, who was shewing him “An Ode to Posterity,” “This is a letter which will never reach the place of its address.” Another time, Voltaire, having read a satire which Rousseau thought very indifferent, was advised to suppress it, lest it should be imagined that he “had lost his abilities, and preserved only his virulence.” Such mutual reproaches soon inflamed two hearts already sufficiently estranged. Voltaire, on his return to Paris, produced, in 1722, his tragedy of “Mariamne,” without success. His “Artemira” had experienced the same fate in 1720, though it had charmed the discerning by the excellence of the poetry. These mortifications, joined to those which were occasioned by his principles of imprudence, his sentiments on religion, and the warmth of his temper, induced him to visit England, where he printed his “Henriade.” King George I. and particularly the princess of Wales (afterwards queen Caroline) distinguished him by their protection, and obtained for him a great number of subscriptions. This laid the foundation of a fortune, which was afterwards considerably increased by the sale of his writings, by the munificence of princes, by commerce, by a habit of regularity, and by an ceconomy bordering on avarice, which he did not shake off till near the end of his life. On his return to France, in 1728, he placed the money he carried with him from England into a lottery established by M. Desforts, comptroller-general of the finances; he engaged deeply, and was successful. The speculations of finance, however, did not check his attachment to the belles lettres, his darling passion. In 1730, he published “Brutus,” the most nervous of all his tragedies, which was more applauded by the judges of good writing than by the spectators. The first wits of the time, Fontenelle, La Motte, and others, advised him to give up the drama, as not being his proper forte. He answered them by publishing “Zara,” the most affecting, perhaps, of all his tragedies. His “Lettres Philosophiques,” abounding in bold expressions and indecent witticisms against religion, having been burnt by a decree of the parliament of Paris, and a warrant being issued for apprehending the author in 1733, Voltaire very prudently withdrew; and was sheltered by the marchioness du Chatelet, in her castle of Cirey, on the borders of Champagne and Lorraine, who entered with him on the study of the “System” of Leibnitz, and the “Principia” of Newton. A gallery was built, in which Voltaire formed a good collection of natural history, and made a great many experiments on light and electricity. He laboured in the mean time on his “Elements of the Newtonian Philosophy,” then totally unknown in France, and which the numerous admirers of Des Cartes were very little desirous should be known. In the midst of these philosophic pursuits, he produced the tragedy of “Alzira.” He was now in the meridian of his age and genius, as was evident from the tragedy of “Mahomet,” first acted in, 174-1 but it was represented to the “procureur general” as a performance offensive to religion and the author, by order of cardinal Fleury, withdrew it from the stage. “Merope,” played two years after, 1743, gave an idea of a species of tragedy, of which few models have existed. It was at the representation of this tragedy that the pit and boxes were clamorous for a sight of the author; yet it was severely criticised when it came from the press. He now became a favourite at court, through the interest of madam d'Etoile, afterwards marchioness of Pompadour. Being employed in preparing the festivities that were celebrated on the marriage of the dauphin, he attained additional honours by composing “The Princess of Navarre.” He was appointed a gentleman of the bed-chamber in ordinary, and historiographer of France. The latter office had, till his time, been almost a sinecure; but Voltaire, who had written, under the direction of the count d'Argenson, the “History of the War of 1741,” was employed by that minister in many important negociations from 1745 to 1747; the project of invading England in 1746 was attributed to him and he drew up the king ofFrance’s manifesto in favour of the pretender. He had frequently attempted to gain admittance into the academy of sciences, but could not obtain his wish till 1746 , when he was the first who broke through the absurd custom of filling an inaugural speech with the fulsome adulation of Richelieu; an example soon followed by other academicians. From, the satires occasioned by this innovation he felt so much uneasiness, that he was glad to retire with the marchioness du Chateletto Luneville, in the neighbourhood of king Stanislaus. The marchioness dying in 1749, Voltaire returned to Paris, where his stay was but short* Though he had many admirers, he was perpetually complaining of a cabal combined to filch from him that glory of which he was insatiable. “The jealousy and manoeuvres of a court,” he would say, “are the subject of conversation; there is more of them among the literati.” His friends and relations endeavoured in vain to relieve his anxiety, by lavishing commendations on him, and by exaggerating his success. He imagined he should find in a foreign country a greater degree of applause, tranquillity, and reward, and augment at the same time both his fortune and reputation, which were already very considerable. The king of Prussia, who had repeatedly invited him to his court, and who would have given any thing to have got him away from Silesia, attached him at last to his person by a pension of 22,000 livres, and the hope of farther favour . From the particular respect that was paid to him, his time was now spent in the most agreeable manner; his apartments were under those of the king, whom he was allowed to visit at stated hours, to read with him the best works of either ancient or modern authors, and to assist his majesty in the literary productions by which he relieved the cares of government. But this happiness was soon at an end; and Voltaire saw, to his mortification, when it was too late, that, where a man is sufficiently rich to be master of himself, neither his liberty, his family, nor his country, should be sacrificed for a pension. A dispute which our poet had with Manpertuis, the president of the academy at Berlin, was followed by disgrace . It has been said that the king of Prussia dismissed him with this reproof: “I do not drive you away, because I called you hither; I do not take away your pension, because I have given it to you; I only forbid you my presence.” Not a word of this is true; the fact is, that he sent to the king the key of his office as chamberlain, and the cross of the order of merit, with these verses:

, whose family name was Ricciarelli, but who is better known by the name of his birth-place, Volterra, where he was born in 1509, was the reputed pupil of Peruzzi and Razzi at Siena, and the assistant of Perino del Vaga at Rome. He acquired the best part of his celebrity from a decided adherence to the principles, style, and subsequent patronage and assistance, of Michael Angelo, who accelerated his progress, enriched him with designs, and made him his substitute in the works of the Vatican. For proofs of actual assistance we need not recur to his frequent attendance on Daniele whilst he painted in the Farnesina, and the tale of the colossal head which he is said to have drawn with a coal on the wall during his absence, and which is still left to exhibit its questionable lines; the best evidence of that assistance was the fresco of the Trinita del Monte, now a ruin of the revolution: if that wonderful performance, the first of the three that were considered as the master- pieces of the art in Rome, evinced in composition and style the supenntendance, advice, and corrections, of Michael Angelo, its principal parts could only be considered as the work of his own hand; that master-hand alone could embody the weight of death in the sinking figure of the Saviour, and point the darts of woe that pierced the mother’s breast in the face and dereliction of the Madonna, without destroying the superhuman beauty of either. The remainder emulates, but arrives not at the same degree of perfection. The male assistants have more labour than energy, and, though with propriety subordinate, proportions scarcely equal to the task. In the female group, so beautifully contrasted, gesture seems to prevail over sentiment; even the figure of St. John, with all its characteristic excellence, by the fear it expresses, rather interrupts than assists the sublime pathos and sacred silence of the scene.

, a man of great parts and learning, was the son of Gerard John Vossius, and born of his second wife at Leyden, in 1618. The particulars of his life will be comprised in a short compass: he had no master but his father in any thing; and his whole life was spent in studying. His merit having recommended him to the notice of Christina of Sweden, the queen submitted to correspond with him by letters, and employed him in some literary commissions. He even made several journeys into Sweden by her order, and had the honour of teaching her majesty the Greek language: but, being there in 1662 with M. Huet and Bochart, she refused to see him, because she had heard that he intended to write against Salmasius, for whom she had at that time a particular regard. In 1663, he received a handsome present of money from Lewis XIV. of France, and at the same time the following obliging letter from Mons. Colbert. “Sir, Though the king be not your sovereign, he is willing nevertheless to be your benefactor; and has commanded me to send you the bill of exchange, hereunto annexed, as a mark of his esteem, and as a pledge of his protection. Every one knows, that you worthily follow the example of the famous Vossius your father; and that, having received from him a name which hath rendered him illustrious by his writings, you will preserve the glory of it by yours. These things being known to his majesty, it is with pleasure that he makes this acknowledgment of your merit,” &c. After the death of his father, he was offered the history-professorship, but refused it; preferring a studious retirement to any honours. In 1670 he came over to England, and was that year created doctor of laws at Oxford; “after he had been,” says Wood, “with great humanity and friendship entertained by some of the chief heads of colleges, as his father had been before in 1629.” In 1673, Charles II. made him canon of Windsor, assigning him lodgings in the castle, where he died Feb. the 10th, 1638. He left behind him the best private library, as it was then supposed, in the world; which, to the shame and reproach of England, was suffered to be purchased and carried away by the university of Leyden.

M. des Maizeaux, in his life of St. Evremond, has recorded several particulars relative to the life and character of Isaac Vossius, which are certainly not of a very favourable cast. St. Evremond, he tells us, used to spend the summers with the court at Windsor, and there often saw Vossius; who, as St. Evremond described him, understood almost all the languages in Europe, without being able to speak one of them well; who knew to the very bottom the genius and customs of antiquity, yet was an utter stranger to the manners of his own times. He expressed himself in conversation as a man would have done in a commentary upon Juvenal or Petronius. He published books to prove, that the Septuagint version was divinely inspired; yet discovered, in private conversation, that he believed no revelation at all: and his manner of dying, which was far from being exemplary, shewed that he did not. Yet, to see the frailty of the human understanding, he was in other respects the weakest and most credulous man alive, and ready to swallow, without chewing, any extraordinary and wonderful thing, though ever so fabulous and impossible. This is the idea which St. Evremond, who knew him well, has given of him. If any more proofs of his unbelief are wanting, Des Maizeaux has given us them, in a note upon the foregoing account of St. Evremond. He relates, that Dr. Hascard, dean of Windsor, with one of the canons, visited Vossius upon his death-bed, and pressed him to receive the sacrament; but could not prevail, though they begged of him at last, that, “if he would not do it for the love of God, he would at least do it for the honour of the chapter.” Des Maizeaux relates another fact concerning Vossius, which he received from good authority; namely, that, when Dr. Hascard pressed him to take the sacrament, he replied, “I wish you would instruct me how to oblige the farmers to pay me what they owe me: this is what I would have you do for me at present.” Such sort of replies are said to have been common with him; and that once, when a brother of his mother was sick, and a minister was for giving him the communion, he opposed it, saying, “this is a pretty custom enough for sinners; but my uncle, far from being a sinner, is a man without vices.” As to his credulity and propensity to believe in the most implicit manner any thing singular and extraordinary, Mons. Renaudot, in his dissertations added to “Anciennes Relations des Indes & de la Chine,” relates, that Vossius, having had frequent conferences with the father Martini, during that Jesuit’s residence in Holland for the printing his “Atlas Chinois,” made no scruple of believing all which he told him concerning the wonderful things in China; and that he even went farther than Martini, and maintained as a certain fact the antiquity of the Chinese accounts above that of the books of Moses. Charles II. who knew his character well, used to call him the strangest man in the world for “there is nothing,” the king would say, “which he refuses to believe, except the Bible;” and it is probable, that the noble author of the “Characteristics” had him in his eye while he was writing the following paragraph. “It must certainly be something else than incredulity, which fashions the taste and judgment of many gentlemen, whom we hear censured as Atheists, for attempting to philosophize after a newer manner than any known of late. I have ever thought this sort of men to be in general more credulous, though after another manner, than the mere vulgar. Besides what I have observed in conversation with the men of this character, I can produce many anathematized authors, who, if they want a true Israelitish faith, can make amends by a Chinese or Indian, one. If they are short in Syria or the Palestine, they have their full measure in America or Japan. Histories of Incas or Iroquois, written by friers and missionaries, pirates and renegadoes, sea-captains and trusty travellers, pass for authentic records, and are canonical with the virtuosos of this sort. Though Christian miracles may not so well satisfy them, they dwell with the greatest contentment on the prodigies of Moorish and Pagan countries.” This perfectly corresponds with the nature and character of Isaac Vossius, although lord Shaftesbury might have more than one in his eye when he wrote it.

, esq. of Edge and Merrifield, in Somersetshire, in which county he was born, the founder of Waclham-college, Oxford, was a descendant of the ancient family of YVadhams of Devonshire; but the period of his birth is not known, nor have we many particulars of his personal history. According to Wood, he was a gentleman-commoner either of Christ-church, or CorpusChrist! college, where he is supposed to have been admitted about 1548. He inherited an estate which he increased to more than 3000l. a-year, and accumulated about 14,000^. in money. A large portion of this property he resolved to devote to some foundation of public utility. His first intention is said to have been to found a college at Venice for such Englishmen of the Roman catholic persuasion as might wish to enjoy their education and religion, now no longer tolerated in England. From this it may be inferred, that he was himself attached to popery; but his adherence could not be inflexible, as he was soon persuaded by his friend Mr. Grange to erect a college in Oxford, in imitation of the others, where the established religion was now cultivated with zeal. His, or rather his wife’s, appointing, that the warden should not be married, may be thought a part of the old persuasion; but it must be remembered, that the marriage of the clergy was one of the last changes of opinion to which the nation was completely reconciled. Queen Elizabeth was always against it; and it was prohibited by the statutes of Jesus-college. A more ridiculous reason has been traditionally assigned for Mrs. Dorothy Wadham’s injunction against marriage; she is said to have been refused by the first warden; but she was at this time seventy-five years old, and he considerably advanced, which renders this story highly improbable. As Mr. Wadham died before this design could be carried into execution, he bequeathed the management of it to his wife, the daughter of siv William Petre, secretary of state, who so often occurs as a benefactor to the university of Oxford. This lady, assisted by trustees, and with a zeal proportioned to her husband’s spirited design, completed the necessary purchases, buildings, and endowment. She survived her husdand nine years, died May 16, 1618, aged eighty-four, and was buried with her husband in the north transept of the church of Ilminster in Somersetshire, under a stately monument of alabaster, on which are their figures on brass plates; but the whole is considerably decayed.

While in France he is said to have made a considerable figure in the learned world, and was applied to by Dr., now bishop Fell, to procure the collation of some valuable Greek Mss. of the New Testament at Paris, for the use of Dr. Mill, whose edition Dr. Fell patronised. In the beginning of the reign of James II. he returned home with lord Preston, and was soon after chosen preacher to the honourable society of Gray’s Inn. This, it would appear, was against the wish of the king, who, on the death of his predecessor, Dr. Claget, sent a message to the society, desiring them not to proceed to an election until they heard from him, but they returned an answer that they bad already chosen Dr. Wake. During his residence in France an incident occurred which occasioned his first appearance as an author, and his being known as an able writer both at home and abroad. Bossuet, the bishop of Meaux (See Bossuet) had now published his very artful “Exposition of the Roman Catholic Faith,” a copy of which came into the hands of Mr. Wake, who, in the preface to his Answer, gives a very curious account of the different alterations the work had undergone, in order to answer the real purposes for which it was written. He observes, that “the first design of monsieur de Meaux’s book was either to satisfy or to seduce the late mareschal de Turenne. How far it contributed thereunto I am not able to say, but am willing to believe that the change that honourable person made of his religion was upon somewhat better grounds than the bare Exposition of a few articles of the Roman faith; and that the author supplied either in his personal conferences with him, or by some other papers to us unknown, what was wanting to the first draught, which we have seen of this. The manuscript copy which then appeared, and for about four years together passed up and down in private hands with great applause, wanted all those chapters of the Eucharist, Tradition, the Authority of the Church and Pope, which now make up the most considerable part of it; and in the other points which it handled, seemed so loosely and favourably to propose the opinions of the church of Rome, that not only many undesigning persons of that communion were offended at it, but the protestants, who saw it, generally believed that monsieur de Meaux durst not publicly own what in his Exposition he privately pretended to be their doctrine. And the event shewed that they were not altogether mistaken. For in the beginning of 1671 the Exposition being with great care, and after the consideration of many years, reduced into the form in which we now see it, and to secure all, fortified with the approbation of the archbishop of Rheims, and nine otheV bishops, who profess that ‘ having examined it with all the care which the importance of the matter required, they found it conformable to the doctrine of the church, and as such recommended it to the people which God had committed to their conduct,’ it was sent to the press. The impression being finished and just ready to come abroad, the author, who desired to appear with all advantage to himself and his cause that was possible, sent it to some of the doctors of the Sorbonne for their approbation to he joined to that of the bishops, that so no authority, ordinary or extraordinary, might be wanting to assert the* doctrine contained in it to be so far from the suspicion the Protestants had conceived of it, that it was truly and without disguise Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman. But, to the great surprise of monsieur de Meaux, and those who had so much cried up his treatise before, the doctors of the Sorbonne, to whom it was communicated, instead of the approbation that was expected, confirmed what the Protestants had said of it; and, as became their faculty, marked several of the most considerable parts of it, wherein the Exposition by the too great desire of palliating had absolutely perverted the doctrine of their church. To prevent the open scandal, which such a censure might have caused, with great industry and all the secrecy possible the whole edition was suppressed, and the several places, which the doctors had marked, changed; and the copy so speedily sent back to the press again, that in the end of the same year another much altered was publicly exposed, as the first impression that had at all been made of it. Yet this could not be so privately carried on, but that it soon came to a public knowledge; insomuch that one of the first answers that was made to it, charged monsieur de Meaux with this change. I do not hear, that he has ever yet thought fit to deny the relation, either in the advertisement prefixed to the later editions of his book, wherein yet he replies to some other passages of the same treatise, or in any other vindication: whether it be that such an imputation was not considerable enough to be taken notice of, or that it was too true to be denied, let the reader judge. But certainly it appears to us not only to give a clear account of the design and genius of the whole book, but to be a plain demonstration, how improbable soever monsieur de Meaux would represent it, * that it is not impossible for a bishop of the Church of Rome, either not to be sufficiently instructed in his religion to know what is the doctrine of it; or not sufficiently sincere, as without disguise to represent it.' And since a copy of that very book so marked, as has been said, by the doctors of the Sorbonne, is fallen into my hands, I shall gratify the reader’s curiosity with a particular view of the changes that have been made, that so he may judge whether of the two was the cause of those great advances which the author in that first edition had thought fit to make towards us.” Such was part of the preface to Mr. Wake’s “Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England,” 1686, 4to, which he was induced to undertake, by having observed that the French catholics with whom he had conversed, had, from ignorance, or the misrepresentations of their instructors, entertained very false notions of the points in controversy between the Churches of Rome and England.

In 1701, two years before the publication of the lastmentioned work, he was installed dean of Exeter, whence in 1705, he was promoted to the bishopric of Lincoln. In the House of Peers he first distinguished himself by a long and learned speech in favour of a comprehension with the dissenters, a measure which other well-meaning divines of the church had fondly adopted; and expressed himself with equal zeal against the intemperate writings of Sacheverell. In Jan. 1715-16, on the death of archbishop Tenison, he was translated to the metropolitan see, and as he had lived to see the folly of giving way to the enemies of the hierarchy by way of reconciling them to it, he both voted and spoke in the House of Lords against the repeal of the schism and conformity bill in 1718. Among other things, he remarked, that “the acts, which by this bill were to be repealed, were the main bulwark and supporters of the established church; that he had all imaginable tenderness for all the well-meaning conscientious dissenters; but he could not forbear saying, that some amongst them made a wrong use of the favour and indulgence that was shewn them upon the revolution, though they had the least share in that event.” From the same experience he was led to oppose the design entered into by some very powerful persons, the year following, to repeal the corporation and test acts. It was well known that Hoadly was at the bottom of this design, and that his famous sermon on “The nature of Christ’s kingdom” was a preparatory step. The archbishop therefore thought it proper to declare his dislike of the measure, as Hoadly had proposed it, in an indirect way, and wrote a Latin letter addressed to the superintendant of Zurich, which was published there under the title of “Oratio historica de beneficiis in ecclesiam Tigurinum collatis.” In this he took occasion to remark, that “The church of England, broken in pieces with divisions, and rent with schisms, is distracted with so many and such various sorts of separatists from her communion, that they want proper names to distinguish themselves from one another, and to describe themselves to other men. And I wish this was our greatest matter of complaint. But that which the spirit of God foretold should come to pass, must be fulfilled,” Even among ourselves men have arisen, speaking perverse things,“But why do I say men? Even pastors and bishops themselves pull down with their own hands the church, in which they minister, and to whose doctrine they have more than once subscribed. They, to whom the preservation of the church is committed, and whose duty it is to watch against her enemies, and to reprove, restrain, and punish them according to their demerits; even these endeavour to overthrow the authority of that church, for which they ought not only to contend, but upon occasion even to lay down their lives. What the pleas and tenets of these innovators are, you may in some measure know from two pamphlets lately written in the French tongue. Let it here suffice to s.ay in a word, that these men are highly displeased with all confessions of faith, and with all subscriptions to articles; and would have a liberty, or rather a license granted for all men, not only to believe^ but to speak, write, and preach, whatsoever they think fit, though the grace of the holy spirit, the divinity of Christ, and all other fundamental articles of our religion should thereby be overturned. What Christian is not amazed, that those things should be said of any men that bear but the name of Christians? Who can but lament, that those grievous wolves are not only not driven away from the sheepfold, but received even within the walls of the church, and admitted to her honours, offices, and government? But so it is, that while we regard only the things of this world, we wholly forget those that concern another. And because by the toleration and advancement of such men, some (who have nothing more at heart than to keep themselves in their places and power) hope to ingratiate themselves with the populace, they are not at all solicitous what becomes of the church, of the faith, of religion, or in short of Jesus Christ himself and his truth. Pardon me, most worthy sir, that giving way to a just grief, I express rny resentment against these enemies of our religion more sharply than my manner is. 1 should think myself guilty of betraying the faith, if I did not, whenever occasion serves, anathematize these heretics.”

“Further, in the progress of his speculations, he had been led to form notions concerning the expediency and propriety of public worship, extremely different from those of every body of Christians, whether in sects or establishments; and as he was incapable of thinking one thing and practising another, he had sufficiently made known his sentiments on this subject, as well in conversation, as by abstaining from attendance upon every place of religious assembly. They who were well acquainted with him, knew that in his own breast piety was one of the most predominant affections; but the assembling for social worship had for so many ages been regarded as the most powerful instrument for the support of general religion, that to discourage it was considered as of dangerous example, especially in a person engaged in the education of youth. Notwithstanding, therefore, his classical instructions in the college were received by the students almost with enthusiastical admiration, and conferred high credit on the institution, a dissolution of his connection with it took place in the summer of 1791.”

Whilst he remained at Oxford with his majesty, the university conferred upon him the degree of master of arts, November 1, 1644. He received the honour of knighthood, February 2, 1644-5, in that city. In 1648, he sent a letter to the parliament, during the conference for peace, requesting more persons might be permitted to attend upon the king; but the House declined doing any thing in it, unless his maje’sty, or their commissioners, wrote for that purpose. As he had been true to the father, so he was equally faithful to the son, whoso court he joined at Brussels. He attended his royal master into Scotland, in 1651: but the covenanters refused their permission for him to come near the person of his sovereign. After the unfortunate event of that expedition, and Charles’s subsequeat escape to the continent, he again joined the exiled monarch, serving him in the same capacities he had the late king. He was so odious to the commonwealth and the protectors, that he was accounted, on this side the channel, “a pernicious man.” His abilities, and the office he filled, made him so great an object of jealousy, that he had spies placed over his conduct. From these wretches we learn, that June '26, 1654, he was at Amsterdam, probably upon some public service: in 1656, he was at Bergen, within six leagues of Calais, mustering the king’s little arrny, which did not amount to 700 men. These, however, were with difficulty kept together, mutinies happening every day; nor can it be wondered at, the privates having only four, the gentlemen no more than six stivers a day. As garter king at arms, in which he succeeded sir William Dusfdale, after holding other offices in the heralds’ college, we must suppose he had not much employment during the usurpation; but as the only herald in Charles’s little court, he was sometimes applied to as such. In 1658, he granted an honourable augmentation to the arms of Stephen Fox, esq. afterwards knighted.- Sir Stephen is well known for his distinguished abilities as a statesman, for his longevity, and as progenitor of the Foxes earls of llchester and barons Holland. At the restoration he received the reward of his distinguished loyalty, and was, among other promotions, made one of the clerks of the privy council. He died suddenly, at Whitehall, February 19, 1676-7, deservedly lamented as a man of tried integrity and very considerable abilities. He published “Iter Carolinum, being a succinct account of the necessitated niarches, retreats, and sufferings of his majesty, king Charles I. from January 10, 1641, to the time of his deatli in 1618, collected by a daily attendant upon his sacred majesty during all that time.” Much of this work may be made more useful by comparing it with Oudart’s diary in Peck’s “Desiderata,” which supplies sir Edward’s omissions. His “Military Discoveries” were printed in 1705, in folio. He assisted lord Clarendon in that part of his History of the Rebellion which relates to military transactions. He was buried in the chapel of the blessed Virgin, in Stratford upon Avon church, where is an inscription to his memory.

, author of some valuable and popular works on the English language, was born March 18, 1732, at Colney-hatch, a hamlet in the parish of Friern-Barnet. Of his parents little is known, and it does not appear that he was enabled to receive a liberal education. He was intended for some trade, but had a reluctance to every effort of that kind, and went when young upon the stage, on which he had some, although no brilliant success. He continued, however, to accept various theatrical engagements until 1768, when he finally quitted the stage; and in January 1767 joined Mr. James Usher (see Usher) in forming a school at Kensington Gravel-pits, but their partnership lasted only about two years, after which Mr. Walker began to give those instructions on elocution, which formed the principal employment of his future life, and procured him a very just fame. About the same time he instituted his inquiries into the structure of language, and the rationale of grammar, and particularly directed his attention to the orthoepy of the English language, in which he endeavoured, by tracing it to its principles, to form a consistent and analogical theory. The unwearied attention he bestowed upon the subject, enabled him to accomplish this end, and to demonstrate the errors, inconsistencies, and affectations which had crept into pronunciation, and which had been propagated, rather than corrected, By many or' those who had hitherto professed to teach it. He therefore resolved to make the public participators in the result of his researches; and in 1772 he published, by way of prospectus, a quarto pamphlet entitled, “A general idea of a Pronouncing Dictionary of the English language,” a work which, though an imperfect attempt had been made by Dr. Kenrick, in his “Rhetorical Dictionary,” might yet be considered as a desideratum. But as he found it impossible to proceed on tiiis without farther encouragement than was then offered, he compiled an English Dictionary on a smaller scale, and on a plan not hitherto attempted, in which the words should be arranged according to their terminations; a mode of arrangement which, though not calculated for general use, possesses many peculiar advantages. This he published in 1775, under the title of “A Dictionary of the English language, answering at once the purposes of rhyming, spelling, and pronouncing;” it has since been republisheu under the shorter title of “A Rhyming Dictionary.”

In the mean time he visited Scotland and Ireland, for the purpose of reading lectures on elocution, and every where met with great respect and success, particularly at Oxford, where the heads of houses inviiecl him. to give private lectures in that university. In 1781 he produced his “Elements of Elocution,” a work which has the merit of beingthe first practical treatise that had yet been composed on the art of speaking, in which its principles are at once unfolded, simplified, and methodized into a system. In 1782 he published a pamphlet, called “Hints for improvement in the Art of Reading,” consisting of a number of observations that had suggested themselves to him, in the course of teaching, thrown together, as the title imports, rather in a detached than a systematical form. The most useful parts of this pamphlet he afterwards introduced into his “Rhetorical Grammar,” which he published in 1785, and which was followed by his “English Classics abridged” “The melody of speaJdng delineated,” and his “Academic Speaker,” all soon introduced into our principal seminaries, and too well known to require any farther notice here. In 1791 he published his “Critical PronouncingDictionary and Expositor of the English language,” the reputation of which was soon fixed, as the statute book of English orthoepy. A work of great utility afterwards came from his pen, under the title of a “Key to the classical pronunciation of Greek, Latin, and Scripture proper names.” To this is prefixed his portrait, a very striking likeness. His last publications were, the “Teacher’s assistant,” and the “Outlines of English grammar,” which was puhlished in May 1805. After this, as age advanced, he became very debilitated; and in July 1807 was attacked by a severe illness, which proved fatal Aug. 1, in the, seventy-sixth year of his age.

While these repeated offers of the mastership show in what estimation he was held by the college on account of his learning, it seems rather singular that the change in his principles should be either not known, or disregarded, for at this time, we are told, ^he was assistant to his tutor Abraham Woodhead, who kept a popish seminary at Hoxton. It was not long, however, before his conduct attracted the notice of parliament, partly on account of his assisting in this popish seminary at Hoxton, and partly on account of the “Life of Alfred,” then published, by which he evidently appeared to be popishly affected. We do not find that any proceedings followed this notice of his conduct, and when king James II. came to the throne, and measures were openly taking for the establishment of popery, Walker thought it no longer necessary to conceal his sentiments, but went to London in July 1685, in order to be consulted, and employed in such changes as it was hoped might be brought about in the university. On his return to college, he absented himself from the chapel^and in the beginning of March following, openly declared himself a Roman catholic, which exposed him to every kind of insult, popery being at this time, as ^lagdalen college soon shewed, the utter aversion of the university. Disregarding this, he had mass privately in his lodgings, until he could fit up a chapel within the limits of the college. Ii 1687, by virtue of letters patent from king James, he set up a press, for the avowed purpose of printing books against die reformed religion. The patent specifies the names of the books (many of which were written by his friend Abraham Woodhead), and exempts him from any penalties to which he might be subject by the statutes against popery. The number of copies to be published of each work is limited to 20,000 within the year. He procured also other letters patent, by which he, and some fellows of his college, were excused from attending the public service of the church. Under this authority he opened his new chapel for mass. This, says Smith, he did by seizing “the lower half of a side of the quadrangle, next adjoining to the college chapel, by which he deprived us of two low rooms, their studies and their bed-chambers: and after all the partitions were removed, it was some way or other consecrated, as we suppose, to divine services: for they had mass there every day, and sermons at least in the afternoon on the Lord’s days.” He also procured a mandate from rhe king to sequester the revenue of a fellowship towards the maintenance of his priest. He put up a statue of James II. over the inside of the gate, and when the king came to Oxford, he entertained him at vespers in this new chapel.

The next poem is supposed by Fenton to be the address “To the Queen” on her arrival but this is doubtful, and we have no date of any other poetical production before that which the murder of the duke of Buckingham occasioned. Neither of these pieces that seem to carry their own dates could have been the sudden effusion of fancy. In the verses on the prince’s escape, the prediction of his marriage with the princess of France must have been written after the event; in the other, the promises of the king’s kindness to the descendants of Buckingham, which could not be properly praised till it had appeared by its effects:, shew that time was taken fqr revision and improvement. It is not known that they were published till they appeared long afterwards with other poems.

Being too young to resist beauty, and probably too vain to think himself resistible, he fixed his heart, perhaps half fondly and half ambitiously, upon the lady Dorothea Sidney, eldest daughter of the earl of Leicester, whom he courted by all the poetry in which Sacharissa is celebrated; and describes her as a sublime predominating beauty, of lofty charms, and imperious influence; but she, it is said, rejected his addresses with disdain. She married, in 1639, the earl of Sunderland, who died at Newbury in the royal cause; and, in her old age, meeting somewhere with Waller, aske<l him, when he would again write such verses upon her “When you are as young, madam,” said he, “and as handsome, as you were then.” In this part of his life it was that he was known to Clarendon, among the rest of the men who were eminent in that age for genius and literature. From the verses written at Penshurst, it has been collected that he diverted his rejection by Sacharissa by a voyage; and his biographers, from his poem on the Whales, think it not improbable that he visited the Bermudas; but it seems much more likely that he should amuse himself with forming an imaginary scene, than that so important an incident, as a visit to America, should have been left floating in conjectural probability. Aubrey gives us a report that some time between the age of twenty-three and thirty, “he grew mad,” but did not remain long in this unhappy state; and he seems to think that the above disappointment might have been the cause. It'is remarkable that Clarendon insinuates something of this kind as having happened to him, when taken up for the plot hereafter to be mentioned. The historian’s words are, “After Waller had, with incredible dissimulation, acted such a remorse of conscience, his trial was put off out of Christian compassion, till he might recover his understanding.” Neither of these perhaps is decisive as to the fact, but the coincidence is striking.