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

, an eminent cardinal of the church of Rome, and author of several derotional pieces, was born the 19th of October, 1609, at Mondovi, a little city in Piedmont, of a noble family. Having finished his first studies with great success, he entered himself in a monastery of the order of St. Bernard near Pignerol in July 1625, when he was but fifteen years of age, and was professed there the 2d of August the year following, according to Bertolot, who wrote his Life; though Moroti, in “Cistercii reflorescentis Historia,” places this. in 1627. He was sent that year to Monte Grosso near Asti to study philosophy, and having passed through a course of it, he returned to Pignerol, where he applied himself to divinity without the assistance of any master for two years, and afterwards went to Rome to perfect himself in that science under a professor. Being ordained priest at the proper age, the sentiments of piety which had influenced him in his youth, and which appear through all his writings, were heightened and improved. He had been scarce three years in his course of divinity, when he was sent to Mondovi to teach it there. He had some reluctance against accepting of that post on account of his aversion to disputes; but obedience, which was the rule of all his actions, obliged him to submit to it. He was afterwards made prior of Asti; and eight months after he was nominated abbot of the monastery of St. Mark at Mondovi; but he was so importunate in his solicitations to the general of the congregation to be discharged from that office, that his request was granted. He was sent, therefore, to Turin, where he spent five years in collecting the materials for his book of Psalmody. He was afterwards appointed again prior of Asti, abbot of Mondovi, and general of his order in 1651. While he held the last post, he had occasion to speak with cardinal Fubio Chigf, who entertained a very great esteem for him, of which he afterwards gave him signal proofs. When the time of his being general of the order was expired, he left Rome, and returning to Mondovi in order to profess divinity, cardinal Chigi, who was chosen pope under the name of Alexander VII. appointed our author general of the order again of his own accord, the plague, which then raged in many parts of Italy, preventing any assembly of the general chapter. He made him afterwards consultor of the congregation of the index, and then qualificator of the sacred office; which place he resigned for that of consultor in the same court. The pope, who had a particular friendship for him, and made him his confident in all his secrets, would have raised him to the dignity of a cardinal, if the humility of Bona had not prevented him from accepting it, and he had not made use of his interest with the pope in order to avoid it. But pope Clement IX. his successor, thought himself under an obligation to reward his virtues by making him a cardinal the 29th of November, according to Moroti, or of December, according to Bertolot, in 1669. Upon the death of this pope, cardinal Bona was proposed to be elected his successor; which gave occasion to this pasquinade, Papa Bona sarebbe solecismo, upon which father Daugieres, the Jesuit, wrote an ingenious epigram, which our Latin readers are aware will not bear a translation:

He died at Rome the 20th of October, according to Bertolot, or the 28th of that month, according to Moroti, in 1674, being seventy-four years of age. He directed himself, that he should be interred in the monastery of his own order, called St. Bernard at the Baths, with the following inscription upon his tomb: “D. O. M. Joannes Bona Pedemontanus, Congreg. Sancti Bernardi Monachus et hujus ecclesiae translate hue titulo S. Salvatoris in Lauro, Primus Presbyter Cardinalis, vivens sibi posuit.” Baillet, Labbe, and Sallo, bestow high praises on his principal work, “De Divina Psalmodia, deque variis ritibus omnium ecclesiarum in psallendis Divinis Officiis,” Rome, 1663, 4to, which includes a complete history of church music, and lias been often celebrated and quoted by musical writers. Yet Dr. Burney, an authority of great importance in questions of this kind, informs us that he was constantly disappointed when he had recourse to it for information, as the author “never mounts to the origin of any use that has been made of music in the church, or acquaints us in what it consisted,” and appears to have profited very little by the information which at that time must have been within his reach. His other distinguished work was “Rerum Liturgicarum, Lib. duo,” Rome, 1671, fol. and often reprinted. The best edition is that by Sala, printed at Turin, in 3 vols. 4to, 1747 1753. In 1755 Sala added another volume of Bona’s select epistles with those of his correspondents. The rest of his works are of the ascetic kind. He carried on a controversy for some time with Mabillon concerning the consecration of leavened or unleavened bread.

, a French antiquary and miscellaneous writer, was born at Louvres, in the district of Paris, in 1694, and educated for the ecclesiastical profession; but, devoting himself entirely to literature, he became under-librarian of St. Victor, and distinguished both by the politeness of his manners, and the variety as well as assiduity of his studies. In 1727, he was admitted a member of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, and made many valuable contributions to its memoirs. His papers are characterised by simple but correct language, variety of erudition, clearness of argument, and solidity of criticism. At the instigation of M. Turgot, a place was created of historiographer of Paris, and Bonamy being appointed to occupy it, was led to write various memoirs relative to the history and antiquities of the city; and on occasion of the bequest of a curious library to the city, he was made librarian. From the year 174-7, he conducted the “Journal of Verdun” with the strictest propriety and decorum, and indeed in every thing displayed candour and probity, as well as learning. He died at Paris in 1770.

, a learned Jesuit, who died at Rome in 1725, at the age of eighty-seven, after having honourably filled different posts in his order, left several works of various kinds, principally relating to natural history, which was his favourite pursuit. He was engaged in 1698 to put in order the celebrated cabinet of father Kircher; and he continued to employ himself in that business and the augmentation of it till his death. The chief of his works are, 1. “Recreatio mentis et oculi in observatione Animalium Testaceorum,” Rome, 1684, 4to, with near 500 figures. He first composed this book in Italian, and it was printed in that language in 1681 in 4to; and translated by the author into Latin for the benefit of foreigners. 2. “History of the Church of the Vatican; with the plans both antient and modern,” Rome, 1696, folio, in Latin. 3. “Collection of the Medals of the popes, from Martin V. to Innocent XII.” Rome, 1699, 2 vols. fol. in Latin. 4. “Catalogue of the Orders, Religious, Military, and Equestrian, with plates representing their several habiliments,” in Latin and in Italian, Korne, 1706, 1707, 1710, and 1711, 4 vols. 4to. The plates in particular render this last work highly interesting and much in request. 5. “Observationes circa viventia in non viventibus,” Rome, 1691, 4to. 6. “Musaeum collegii Romani Kircherianum,” Rome, 1709, fol. 7. “A Treatise on Varnishes,” in Italian, Paris, 1713, 12mo. 8. “Gabinetto armonico,” 1723, 4to.

, was born December 25, 1563, at Urbino, of one of the most ancient and noble families in the city of Ancona, and was sent into France at the age of fifteen, to be educated suitably to his birth and the customs of that time. Bonarelli was but nineteen when he was offered a philosophical professorship of the Sorbonne, in the college of Calvi; but, his father having sent for him home, he was satisfied with having merited that honour, and declined accepting it. He attached himself, for some time, to cardinal Frederick Borromeo (nephew of St. Charles Borromeo) who had a regard for men of letters, and who founded the famous Ambrosian library at Milan. He went afterwards to Modena, to which place his father had removed. After his death, the duke Alphonso, knowing the merit of Bonarelli, employed him in several important embassies, and the success of these negociations proved how well they had been carried on. Bonarelli went to Rome with the hope of recovering the marquisate of Orciano, of which his father had been deprived; but an attack of the gout obliged him to stop at Fano, where he died January 8, 1608, aged forty-five, with the character of an able politician, a distinguished bel esprit, and a good philosopher for the age he lived in. The pastoral poem for which he is best known is entitled “Filli di Sciro,” and was printed first at Ferrara, 1607, 4to, with plates; there have been many editions since, the best of which are that of the Elzevirs, 1678, 4to, those of London, 1725, or 1728, and of Glasgow, 1763, 8vo; but with all its merit it is full of unnatural characters and distorted conceits. His shepherds are courtiers, and his shepherdesses are frequently prudes, whose conversation savours of the toilette. The author was censured for having made Celia, who has so great a share in the piece, nothing more than an episodical personage, but still more for giving her an equally ardent love for two shepherds at once. He attempted to excuse this defect in a tract written on purpose; “Discorsi in difesa del doppio amore della sua Celia,” but this was rather ingenious than conclusive. We have likewise some academical discourses of his.

, a celebrated doctor, cardinal, and saint of the church of Rome, was born at Bagnarea in Tuscany, 1221. He was admitted into the order of St. Francis, about 1243; and studied divinity at the university of Paris under the celebrated Alexander de Hales, with so much success, that at the end of seven years he was thought worthy to read public lectures upon the Sentences. He was created doctor in 1255 along with St. Thomas Aquinas, and the year after appointed general of his order, in which office he governed with so much zeal and prudence, that he perfectly restored the discipline of it, which had been greatly neglected. Pope Clement IV. nominated him to the archbishopric of York in England; but Bonaventure disinterestedly refused it. After the death of Clement the see of Rome lay vacant almost three years, and the cardinals not being able to agree among themselves who should be pope, came at length to a most solemn engagement, to leave the choice to Bonaventure; and to elect whoever he should name, though it should be even himself, which, from his modest character, was not very probable. Accordingly, he named Theobald, archdeacon of Liege, who was at that time in the Holy land, and who took the title of Gregory X. By this pope he was made a cardinal and bishop of Albano; and appointed to assist at a general council, which was held at Lyons soon after. He died there in 1274, and was magnificently and honourably conducted to his grave; the pope and whole council attending, and the cardinal Peter of Tarantais, afterwards pope Innocent V. making his funeral oration. Sixtus IV. canonized him in 1482. He. has had the good fortune to be almost equally praised by popish and protestant writers, Bellarmine has pronounced Bonaventure a person dear to God and men; and Luther calls him “vir prtestantissimus,” a most excellent man. His works were printed at Rome in 1588, in 8 vols. folio. Excepting his commentary upon the master of the Sentences, they are chiefly on pious and mystical subjects, and have gained him the name of the Seraphic doctor. Brucker gives us the following account of his method of philosophizing, from his treatise “De reductione Artium ad Theologiam;” on the “application of Learning to Theology:” Human knowledge he divides into three branches, logical, physical and moral. Each of these he considers as the effect of supernatural illumination, and as communicated to men through the medium of the holy scriptures. The whole doctrine of scripture he reduces to three heads; that which respects the eternal generation and incarnation of Christ, the study of which is the peculiar province of the doctors of the church; that which concerns the conduct of life, which is the subject of preaching; and that which relates to the union of the soul with God, which is peculiar to the monastic and contemplative life. Physical knowledge he applies to the doctrine of scripture emblematically. For example, the production of the idea of any sensible object from its archetype, is a type of the generation of the Logos; the right exercise of the senses typifies the virtuous conduct of life; and the pleasure derived from the senses represents the union of the soul with God. In like manner, logical philosophy furnishes an emblem of the eternal generation and the incarnation of Christ: a word conceived in the mind resembling the eternal generation; its expression in vocal sounds, the incarnation. Thus the multiform wisdom of God, according to this mystical writer, lies concealed through all nature; and all human knowledge may, by the help of allegory and analogy, be spiritualised and transferred to theology. How wide a door this method of philosophising opens to the absurdities of mysticism the reader will easily perceive from this specimen.

, a cardinal, was born in that city June 22, 1332, and descended from a noble and illustrious family. He studied divinity at Paris, where he distinguished himself by his uncommon parts and application, and afterwards taught divinity. He was of the order of St. Augustin, of which he was made general in 1377, on the death of Beauregard. Pope Urban VI. gave him a cardinal’s cap the year after, or as some say, in 1384. This engaging him to stand up for the rights of the church against Francis de Carrario of Padua, that petty tyrant contrived to have him murdered. He was dispatched with the shot of an arrow, as he was passing St. Angelo’s bridge at Rome. This event some place in 1385, others in 1389, 1396, and 1398. The manner of his death gave occasion to the following Latin distich, which cannot be translated so as to be intelligible to an English reader:

He was the author of several works: as, Commentaries upon the Epistles of St. John and St. James, Lives of the Saints, Sermons, &c. Some improperly attribute to him the “Speculum de laudibus B. Maria-,” Nuremberg, 1476; but Fabricius gives it to the preceding cardinal, in whose works it appears, vol. VI. He had a very close and intimate friendship with the celebrated Petrarch, whose funeral oration he pronounced in 1369.

, a distinguished Latin scholar and poet, was born at Perugia in 1555, became a disciple of the celebrated Muretus, and afterwards principal teacher of the schools of Perugia. He appears next to have been professor of eloquence at Bononia, keeper of the Ambrosian library, and professor of rhetoric at Pisa, where he had the misfortune to lose his sight. During his career of teaching, his father, who was a poor shoemaker, having lost his wife, had an inclination to join the society of the Jesuits, and lest he should be rejected for his ignorance of Latin, became one of his son’s scholars, and made very considerable proficiency. Bonciarius died Jan. 9, 1616, leaving many works, which are very scarce, except his Latin Grammar, which, being adopted in the schools, was frequently reprinted. His “Epistolse” were first printed in 1603, 8vo, and reprinted 1604, at Marpurg, of which last edition Freytag gives an analytical account. They are written in an elegant style. His Latin poems are among the “Carmina Poetarum Italorum,” Florence, 1719, vol. II.

, a celebrated commentator and grammarian, was born in Somersetshire in 1550. He was educated at Winchester school, and in 1569 was entered a student at New college in Oxford, where he became highly esteemed for his academical learning. In 1573 he took the degree of B. A. and in 1579 that of M. A. and soon after the warden and fellows of his college appointed him master of the free-school of Taunton in Somersetshire. Here he continued many years, and several of his scholars became eminent both in church and state. Being at length, however, tired with the fatigue of this irksome employment, he turned his thoughts to the study of physic, and practised it with great reputation, although without taking any degree in that faculty. He died at Taunton the 3d of August, 1612, and was buried in the chancel of the church, with the following epitaph over his grave:

Mr. Bond has left “Annotationes in poemata Quiuti Horatii,” Lond. 1606, 8vo. Han. 1621, 8vo, and Ley den, 1653, 8vo. The best edition is that of Amst. 1636, 12mo. His Persius was not printed till two years after his death, in 8vo, under the following. title, “Auli Persii Flacci Satyrae sex, cum posthumis commentariis Johannis Bond,” 1614, 8vo. It was published by Roger Prowse, who had married his daughter Elizabeth, and who, in the dedication to Dr. Montague, bishop of Bath and Wells, informs us, that his father-in-law had not put the last hand to these Commentaries; which may be the reason of those considerable defects in some points of history and philosophy which are to be found in them. Mr. Wood is of opinion that, besides these, he wrote several other pieces, which were never published.

, LL. D. was the son of Dennis Bond, esq. of Dorchester, a violent adherent of the republican party in the seventeenth century, and at whose death, a little before that of the protector, the wits said Oliver Cromwell had given the devil Bond for his appearance. Our author was educated under John White, commonly called the patriarch of Dorchester, and was afterwards entered, not of St. John’s college, Cambridge, as Wood reports, but of Catherine-hall, of which he was afterwards chosen fellow, and took the degree of B. A. in 163 1, commenced M. A. in 1635, was nominated LL. D. in 1645, and completed the year following, while he was yet a member of that society. But, although he took his doctor’s degree in law, he was by profession a divine, and had before this preached for some years, first as a lecturer in Exeter, and frequently afterwards before the long parliament at Westminster. In 1643, both he and his tutor, Mr. White, were chosen of the assembly of divines; and when Mr. White took the rectory of Lambeth, Dr. Bond succeeded him as minister of the Savoy, and on Dec. 11, 1645, hfc was made master of the Savoy hospital under the great seal. On the decease of Dr. Eden, master of Trinity-hall, Cambridge, the fellows made choice of the celebrated Selden, and the choice was confirmed by parliament, but he declining the office, Dr. Bond was chosen, chiefly by the authority or interference of parliament, March, 1646. In 1649 he was chosen law professor of Gresham college, and in 1654 was made assistant to the commissioners of Middlesex and Wesminster, for the ejection of scandalous and ignorant ministers; and in 1658 served as vice-chancellor of Cambridge. He held his mastership and law professorship until the restoration, when he was ejected from both for his adherence to the politics by which he had obtained them. He then retired into Dorsetshire, and died at Sandwich in the isle of Purbeck, July 1676. Wood, who has committed several mistakes in his life, corrected by Dr. Ward, gives a list of his works, which are few: 1. “A Door of Hope,” Lond. 1641, 4to. 2. “Holy and Loyal Activity,” Lond. 1641, 4to, and some sermons preached before the long parliament, to whose measures he adhered with great zeal. He appears, however, to have been a man of real learning. Calamy, we know not why, has mentioned his name, without one word of life.

, a native of Suffolk, translated Buchanan’s history, and was concerned with Aaron Hill in the “Plain Dealer,” a periodical paper of inferior merit. Hill appears to have had a friendship for him, and devoted the profits of his tragedy of Zara to his use. Bond himself played the character of Lusignan, but only for one night, being seized with a fit on the stage, which terminated his life the following morning, some time in 1735.

, an eminent physician and medical writer, was born at Geneva, March 5, 1620, and following the steps of his father and grandfather, early attached himself to the practice of physic. After visiting several foreign academies, he was admitted doctor in medicine at Bologna, in 1643, and was soon after made physician to the duke de Longueville. Though he soon attained to high credit in his profession, and had a large share of practice, he dedicated a considerable portion of his time to reading, and to dissecting such subjects as the hospital afforded him, with a view of discovering the seats of diseases, minuting every deviation he observed from the natural structure of the viscera, or other parts of the body, and thus opening a new road for improving the science he cultivated. He also appears to have made extracts of every thing he deemed worthy of notice, from the various works he read. His hearing from some accident becoming defective, he withdrew from practice, and employed the last ten or twelve years of his life in arranging the materials he had collected. The first fruit of his labour, which he gave to the public in 1668, was “Pharos Medicoru in,” 2 vols. 12mo. This was printed again, much improved and enlarged, in 1679, in 4to, under the title of “Labyrinthi Medici, extricati,” &c. compiled principally from Bellonius and Septalius. In 1675, “Prodromus Anatomise practicas, sive de abditis morborum causis,” fol.; the precursor of his principal work, “Sepulchretum, seu Anatome practica, ex cadaveribus morbo denatis proponens historias et observationes,” &c. Genev. 1679, 2 vols. fol. which far exceeded the expectation raised by the Prodromus. It was enlarged by nearly a third part, and republished by Manget, 1700, 2 vols. fol. and was afterwards taken by Morgagni, as the basis of his work, “De sedibus et causis Morborum,” by which the “Sepulchretum” is in a great measure superseded. The author begins with observations on the appearances of the brain and other parts of the head; then of the contents of the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis; and lastly, of the extremities; forming an immense body of dissections, which he has illustrated by many pertinent and ingenious observations. “Cours de medicine, et de la chirurgie,” 1679, 2 vols. 4to. An epitome of the art of surgery, with some sections relating to the practice of medicine selected from the most accredited authors of the age. “Medicina septentrionalis, collectitia,” 1684, 2 vols. fol. shewing how largely the practitioners of the northern parts of Europe, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Holland, and England, have contributed to the improvement of anatomy, surgery, and medicine, by extracts and accounts of the works of the principal writers of those countries. *“Mercurius compilatitius, seu index medico-practicus,” 1682, fol. A most useful work, shewing under the name of every disease or affection where cases or observations may be found, and what authors have written upon them. Such an index continued to the present time, though very voluminous, would be highly useful. Bonet also published “Epitome operum Sennerti,” 1685, fol. “J. D. Turqueti de Mayerne, de Arthritide,” 1671, 12mo, and “Rohaulti tractatus physicus, e Gallico in Latinam versus,” 1675, 8vo. He died of a dropsy, March 3, 1689.

, an elegant Italian scholar of the sixteenth century, was born at Gorzano in the Brescian territory, but in what year is not known. He was three years secretary to cardinal Bari at Rome; but lost the fruits of his services by the death of his master. He then served cardinal Glinucci in the same capacity; but long sickness made him incapable of that employment. When he was recovered, he found himself so disgusted with the court, that he resolved to seek his fortune by other means. He continued a good while in the kingdom of Naples, then went to Padua, and to Genoa; where he read public lectures on Aristotle’s politics. He was ordered to read some likewise upon his rhetoric, which he did with great success to a numerous auditory. His reputation increasing daily, the republic of Genoa made him their historiographer, and assigned him a handsome pension for that office. He now applied himself laboriously to compose the annals of that state, and published the five first books; but by speaking too freely and satirically of some families, he created himself enemies who resolved to ruin him, by a prosecution for an unnatural crime, and being convicted, he was condemned to be first beheaded, and then burnt, or as some say, sentence of burning was changed into that of beheading. Some have attributed this prosecution to the freedom of his pen; but the generality of writers have agreed that Bonfadio was guilty, yet are of opinion, that he had never been accused, if he had not given offence by something else. He was executed in 1560. Upon the day of his execution he wrote a note to John Baptist Grimaldi, to testify his gratitude to the persons who had endeavoured to serve him, and recommended to them his nephew Bonfadio, who is perhaps the Peter Bonfadio, author of some verses extant in the “Gareggiamento poetico del confuso accademico ordito,” a collection of verses, divided into eight parts, and printed at Venice in 1611. The first five books of Bonfadio’s history of Genoa were printed at Padua, 1586, 4to, under the title “I. Bonfadii annales Genuensium ab anno 1528, ubi desinit Folieta, ad annum 1550,” and was in 1597 published in Italian. He also published an Italian and very elegant translation of Cicero’s oration for Milo, an edition of which was published at Bologna in 1744, with his letters and miscellaneous works, “Lettere famigliari, &c.” 8vo, dedicated to pope Benedict XIV. with a life of the unfortunate author, and a curious Latin poem by Paul Manutius, in honour of those persons who used their interest to save Bonfadio from punishment.

, an historian of the fifteenth century, was born at Ascoli in Italy. Mathias Corvinus, king of Hungary, having heard of his abilities and learning, sent for him to his court, and Bonfinius paid his respects to him at Rees, a few days before that prince made his public entry into Vienna. At his first audience, as he himself tells us, he presented him with his translations of Hermogenes and Herodian, and his genealogy of the Corvini, which he dedicated to his majesty; and two other works addressed to the queen, one of which treated of virginity and conjugal chastity, and the other was a history of Ascoli. He had dedicated also a small collection of epigrams to the young prince John Corvinus, to which there is added a preface. The king read his pieces with great pleasure, distributed them among his courtiers in high terms of approbation, and would not allow him to return to Italy, but granting him a good pension, was desirous that he should follow him in his army. He employed him to write the history of the Huns, and Bonfinius accordingly set about it before the death of this prince; but it was by order of king Uladislaus that he wrote the general history of Hungary, and carried it down to 1495. The original of this work was deposited in the library of Buda. In 1543 Martin Brenner published thirty books from an imperfect copy, which Sambucus republished in 1568, in a more correct state, and with the addition of fifteen more books, a seventh edition of which was printed at Leipsic, in 1771, fol. Sambucus also published in 1572 Bonfinius’s “Symposion Beatricis, seu dialog, de fide conjugali et virginitate, lib. III.” Bonfinius wrote a history of the taking of Belgrade by Mahomet II. in 1456, which is printed in the “Syndromus rerum Turcico-Pannonicarum,” Francfort, 1627, 4to; and, as already noticed, translated the works of Philostratus, Hermogenes, and Herodian. His Latin style was much admired, as a successful imitation of the ancients. The time of his death has not been ascertained.

, a learned Jesuit and commentator, was born at Dinau in Liege, 1573. He was admitted into the society of Jesuits in 1592, and taught at Doway, philosophy, divinity, and the Hebrew tongue, which, as well as Greek, he understood critically. He died at Tournay, May 9, 1643. Dupin says that of all the Jesuits who have been commentators on the scriptures, there is no one superior in learning, and clearness of method, to Bonfrerius. His “Commentary on the Pentateuch” was published at Antwerp in 1625, and his “Onomasticon” of the places and cities mentioned in the Bible, composed by Eusebius, and translated by Jerome, with learned notes, was published along with his “Commentaries on Joshua, Judges, and Ruth,” at Paris in 1631, but the most complete edition of his works appeared in 1736.

, an able classical scholar and negociator, was born at Orleans of a protestant family in 1554; and studied at Strasburg in 1571, but in 1516, he studied the civil law under the celebrated Cujacius. During this time he applied much to critical learning; and though, says Bayle, he went not so far as the Lipsiuses and Casaubons, yet he acquired great reputation, and perhaps would have equalled them if he had not been engaged in political affairs. He was employed near thirty years in the most important negociations of Henry IV. for whom he was several times resident with the princes of Germany, and afterwards ambassador, but however published his edition of Justin at Paris, 1581, in 8vo. He had a critical and extensive knowledge of books, both manuscript and printed; and made a very great collection of them, some of which came afterwards to the library of Berne in Swisserland, and some, with his manuscripts, to the Vatican. Besides an edition of Justin, he was the author of other works; which, if they did not shew his learning so much, have spread his fame a great deal more. Thuanus highly commends an answer, which he published in Germany, to a piece wherein the bad success of the expedition of 1587 was imputed to the French, who accompanied the Germans; and the world is indebted to him for the publication of several authors, who wrote the history of the expeditions into Palestine. That work is entitled “Gesta Dei per Francos;” and was printed at Hanau in 1611, in two volumes, folio. He published also in 1600, at Francfort, “Rerum Hungaricarum Scriptores,” fol. There are letters of Bongars, written during his employments, which are much esteemed; and upon which Mr. Bayle remarks, that though he did not, like Bembo and Manucius, reject all terms that are not in the best Roman authors, yet his style is elegant. His letters were translated, when the dauphin began to learn the Latin language; and it appears by the epistle dedicatory to that young prince, and by the translator’s preface, that nothing was then thought more proper for a scholar of quality, than to read this work of Bongars. Bongars died at Paris in 1612, when he was 58 years of age: and the learned Casaubon, whose letters shew that he esteemed him much, laments in one of them, that “the funeral honours, which were due to his great merit, and which he would infallibly have received from the learned in Germany, were not yet paid him at Paris.” Mr. Bayle thinks that Bongars was never married: yet tells us, that he was engaged in 1597, to a French lady, who had the misfortune to die upon the very day appointed for the wedding, after a courtship of near six years. This Bongars speaks of in his letters, and appears to have been exceedingly afflicted at it. His Latin letters were published at Leyden in 1647, and the French translation above mentioned in 1668, along with the originals, 2 vols. 12mo, but that of the Hague in 1695 is the most correct. His edition of Justin is rare and valuable. It was printed from eight manuscripts, accompanied with learned notes, various readings, and chronological tables; but the Bipont editors seem to think he sometimes took unwarranted liberties with the text.

, a celebrated saint of the eighth century, and usually styled the Apostle of Germany, was an Englishman, named Wilfrid, and born at C red ton or Kirton in Devonshire, about the year 680. He was educated from the age of thirteen in the monastery of Escancester or Exeter, and about three years after removed to Nutcell, in the diocese of Winchester, a monastery which was afterwards destroyed by the Danes, and was never rebuilt. Here he was instructed in the sacred and secular learning of the times; and at the age of thirty, was ordained priest, and became a zealous preacher. The same zeal prompted him to undertake the functions of a missionary among the pagans and with that view he went with two monks into Friezeland, about the year 716; but a war which broke out between Charles Martel, mayor of the French palace, and Radbod, king of Friezeland, rendering it impracticable to preach the gospel at that time, he returned to England with his companions. Still, however, zealously intent on the conversion of the pagans, he refused being elected abbot of Nutcell, on a vacancy which happened on his return; and having received recommendatory letters from the bishop of Winchester, went to Rome, and presented himself to the pope Gregory II. who encouraged his design, and gave him a commission for the conversion of the infidels, in the year 719. With this he went into Bavaria and Thuringia, and had considerable success: and Radbod, king of Friezeland, being now dead, he had an opportunity of visiting that country, where he co-Operated with Willibrod, another famous missionary, who would have appointed him his successor, which Wilfrid rt fused, because the pope had particularly enjoined him to preach in the eastern parts of Germany. Through Hesse, or a considerable part of it, even to the confines of Saxony, he extended his pious labours, and had considerable success, although he suffered many hardships, and was often exposed to danger from the rage of the infidels.

After some time he returned to Rome, where Gregory II. consecrated him bishop of the new German churches, by the name of Boniface, a Roman name, which Gregory probably thought might procure from the German converts more respect to the pope, than an English one. Solicitous also to preserve his dignity, Gregory exacted from Boniface an oath of subjection to the papal authority, drawn up in very strong terms. Boniface then returned to the scenes of his mission, and had great success in Hesse, encouraged now by Charles Martel, the dominion of the French extending at this time a considerable way into Germany. We do not, however, find that he derived any other assistance from the civil authority, than personal protection, which doubtless was of great importance. If he complied with the instructions sent from England, he employed no means but what became a true missionary. These, instructions, or rather advice sent to him by Daniel, bishop of Winchester, about the year 723, afford too striking an instance of good sense and liberality in that dark age, to be omitted. Daniel’s method of dealing with idolaters was conceived in these words, “Do not contradict in a direct manner their accounts of the genealogy of their gods; allow that they were born from one another in the same way that mankind are: this concession will give you the advantage of proving, that there was a time when they had no existence. Ask them who governed the world before the birth of their gods, and if these gods have ceased to propagate? If they have not, shew them the consequence; namely, that the gods must be infinite in number, and that no man can rationally be at ease in worshipping any of them, lest he should, by that means, offend one, who is more powerful. Argue thus with them, not in the way of insult, but with temper and moderation: and take opportunities to contrast these absurdities with the Christian doctrine: let the pagans be rather ashamed than incensed by your oblique mode of stating these subjects. Shew them the insufficiency of their plea of antiquity; inform them that idolatry did anciently prevail over the world, but that Jesus Christ was manifested, in order to reconcile men to God by his grace.” From this same prelate he received other instructions respecting reforming the church, and exercising discipline 'with the refractory and scandalous priests, who occasioned much obstruction to his mission. In the mean time, the report of his success induced many of his countrymen to join him, who dispersed themselves and preached in the villages of Hesse and Thuringia.

In the year 732, he received the title of archbishop from Gregory II f. who supported his mission with the same spirit as his predecessor Gregory II.; and under this encouragement he proceeded to erect new churches, and extend Christianity. At this time, he found the Bavarian churches disturbed by one Eremvolf, who would have seduced the people into idolatry, but whom he condemned, according to the canons, and restored the discipline of the church. In the year 738, he again visited Rome; and after some stay, he induced several Englishmen who resided there, to join with him in his German mission. Returning into Bavaria, he established three new bishoprics, at Salczburgh, Frisinghen, and Ratisbon. At length he was fixed at Mentz, in the year 745, and although afterwards many other churches in Germany have been raised to the dignity of archbishoprics, Mentz has always retained the primacy, in honour of St. Boniface. He also founded a monastery at Fridislar, another at Hamenburgh, and one at Ordorfe, in all which the monks gained their livelihood by the labour of their hands. In the year 746, he laid the foundation of the great abbey of Fulda, which continued long the most renowned seminary of religion and learning in all that part of the world. The abbot is now a prince of the empire. In the mean time his connection with England was constantly preserved; and it is in the epistolary correspondence with his own country, that the most striking evidence of his pious views appears. Still intent on his original design, although now advanced in years, he determined to return into Friezeland, and before his departure, acted as if he had a strong presentiment of what was to happen. He appointed Lullus, an Englishman, his successor as archbishop of Mentz, a privilege which the pope had granted him, and ordained him with the consent of king Pepin. He went by the Rhine to Friezeland, where, assisted by Eoban, whom he had ordained bishop of Utrecht, he brought great numbers of pagans into the pale of the church. He had appointed a day to confirm those whom he had baptized; and in waiting for them, encamped with his followers on the banks of the Bordue, a river which then divided East and West Friezeland. His intention was to confirm, by imposition of hands, the converts in the plains of Dockum. On the appointed day, he beheld, in the morning, not the new converts whom he expected, but a troop of enraged pagans, armed with shields and lances. The servants went out to resist; but Boniface, with calm intrepidity, said to his followers, “Children, forbear to fight; the scripture forbids us to render evil for evil. The day which I have long waited for is come; hope in God, and he will save your souls.” The pagans immediately attacked them furiously, and killed the whole company, fifty-two in number, besides Boniface himself. This happened on June 5, 755, in the fortieth year after his arrival in Germany. His body was interred in the abbey of Fulda, and was long regarded as the greatest treasure of that monastery. Boniface’s character has been strangely misrepresented by Mosheim, and by his transcribers, but ably vindicated by Milner, who has examined the evidence on both sides with great precision. His works, principally sermons and correspondence, were published under the title “S. Bonifacii Opera, a Nicolao Serrario,” Mogunt. 1605, 4to.

, the son of a lawyer of the same name, was born at Crema, in the Venetian state about 1584. In his thirtieth year he went to study at Padua, and made such proficiency as to be created doctor of laws at the age of eighteen. About two years after he was appointed law professor in the college of Rovigo, where he first lectured on the institutes of Justinian. He afterwards accompanied the pope’s nuncio Jerome Portia, as secretary, and was himself employed in some affairs of importance. On his return to Venice, he had several preferments, and among others that of archpriest of Rovigo. In Oct. 1619, he was elected Greek and Latin professor at Padua, but declined accepting the office. In 1620, he assisted at Venice, in the establishment of an academy for the education of the young nobility, and gave lectures on the civil law. Pope Urban VIII. bestowed on him the archdeaconry of Trevisa, which he held, with the office of grand vicar of that diocese, under four successive bishops. He assisted also very essentially in founding a new academy at Padua for the Venetian nobility, in 1636, and was the first director or president of it, and founded a similar establishment at Trevisa. In 1653 he was appointed bishop of Capo d'Istria, which he held until his death in 165i). He was a man of various learning, as appears by his “Historia Trevigiena,” 4to, his “Historia Ludicra,” 1656, 4to, a collection of singular narratives from authors of every description. He published also some “Latin poems” in 1619, 12mo. “De Romanae Historian Scriptoribus excerpta ex Bodino, Vossio et aliis,” Venice, 1627, 4to.

, an eminent Italian lawyer, poet, and historian, was born in 1547, at Rovigo in the state of Venice, and educated at Padua, where, during his lawstudies, he composed some pieces for the theatre which were much approved. After marrying at Trevisa, or Trevigni, Elizabeth Martinagi, the daughter and heiress of Marc Antonio, he settled in that place, of which he wrote the history, and acquired so much reputation that the republic of Venice bestowed on him the office of judge’s counsellor or assessor, the duties of which he executed with great probity; and during his holding it wrote his law tracts. In 1588, he published his commentary on the feudal law of Venice. After the death of his wife, he married a lady of Padua, where he was admitted to the rank of citizenship, and where he resided for the remainder of his life. He died June 23, 1635, at a very advanced age, and was buried in the church of St. James, with a modest inscription written by himself in 1630. His principal writings are, 1. “Storia Trevigiana,” Trevisi, 1591, 4to, but a better edition, Venice, 1744, 4to. 2. “Letiere Famigliari,” Rovigo, 1624, 4to. 3. “Orazione &c. per dirizzare una Statua a Celio Ricchiero Rodigino,” ibid. 1624, 4to. 4. “Lezione sopra im Sonetto del Petrarca,” ibid. 1624, 4to. 5. “Lezione sopra un altro Sonetto del Petrarca,” ibid. 1625, 4to. 6. “L'arte de Cenni,” Vicenza, 1616, 4to, one of the earliest attempts to instruct the deaf and dumb. 7. “Discorso del modo di ben formare a questo tempo una Tragedia,” Padua, 1624, 4to. 8. “Discorso sopra la sua Impresa neli' Accademia Filarmonica,” ibid. 1624, 4to. 9. “La Re^ publica delle Api, con la quale si dimostra il modo di ben formare un nuovo Governo Democratico,” Rovigo, 1627, 4to. 10. “Comentario sopra la legge dell' Senato Veneta, &c.” ibid. 1624, 4to. Freher also mentions “Comment, de Furtis, et de componendis Epitaphiis,” but without giving the exact titles or dates.

, a learned Augustin, was born at Toulouse in 1670; and at Rome, whither he was sent for by cardinal Norris in 1695, he became distinguished by his learning and piety. He was employed by pope Clement XI. in several matters of importance, and particularly in the examination of the Gregorian calendar. Bonjour had also the superintendence of the seminary established by cardinal Barbarigo at Montefiascone, and denominated the academy of sacred letters. He was acquainted with almost all the oriental tongues, and especially with the Coptic, or ancient Egyptian. Actuated by a zeal for acquiring knowledge, and for propagating the gospel, he visited China, where he died in February 1714, whilst he was employed in forming a map of that empire, which he undertook to conciliate the favour of the emperor, and thereby promote the objects of his mission. He published, 1. “Dissertatio de nomine patriarch! Joseph! a Pharaone imposito, in defensionem vulgatoe editionis, et patrum qui Josephum in Serapide adumbratuni tradiderunt,” &c. Rome, 1696, fol. 2. “Select dissertationes in Sac. Scripturam,” Rome, 1705, fol. which prove his acquaintance with the oriental languages, and with ancient history and chronology. 3. “In monumenta Coptica, seu Ægyptiacæ bibliothecæ Vatican brevis exercitatio,” ibid. 1699, fol. 4. “Calendarium Romanum chronologorum causa constructum, &c.” ibid. 1701.

, or Bonnefonius, a Latin poet, was born in 1554, at Clermont in Auvergne, and rilled the post of lieutenant-general of Bar-sur-Seine. His “Paricharis,” in the style of Catullus, is of all modern performances, the nearest to the graces, the easy pencil, the delicacy and softness of that ancient poet. La Bergerie has translated the Pancharis into French verse, very inferior to the Latin. The poems of Bonnefons are at the end of those of Beza, in the edition of that author given at Paris by Barbou, 1757, 12mo. There is also one of London, 1720 and 1727, 12mo. Bonnefons died in 1614, leaving a son, who likewise cultivated Latin poetry, but his performances, enumerated by Moreri, are in less request.

, a man celebrated for piety and virtue, was born at Genoa, Nov. 14, 1653, being the son of Samuel Bonnell, merchant, who resided some time at Genoa, and of Rebecca, daughter of Thomas Sayer, near Norwich, esq. His grandfather was Daniel Bonnell of London, merchant, and his great-grandfather, Thomas Bonnell, a gentleman of good family near Ipres in Flanders, who, to avoid the duke of Alva’s persecution, removed with his family into England, and settled at Norwich, of which, before his death, he was chosen mayor. Samuel Bonnell, father of James Bonnell, being bred up under that eminent merchant, sir William Courteen, knt. applied himself to the Italian trade, at Leghorn and Genoa, with such success, that about 1649, he was worth at least 10,000l. and his credit much greater than his fortune. But both were soon impaired by several accidents, by great losses at sea, and particularly by his zeal for kingCharles II. during his exile, and the rest of the royal family, whom he privately supplied with large sums of money. About 1655, he removed with his family into England; and, at the restoration, on account of the services he had done the royal family, and as a compensation for the large sums he had advanced them (which, it seems, were never repaid otherwise) there was granted him a patent to be accomptant-general of the revenue of Ireland, a place worth about 800l. a year, his son’s life being included in the patent with his own. But this he was not long possessed of, for he died in 1664, leaving his son and one daughter.

After this son, the object of the present article, had been instructed in the first rudiments of learning at Dublin, he was sent to Trim school, where he was eminent for sweetness of temper, and for a most innocent, gentle, and religious behaviour. At fourteen years of age he left that place, and was sent to a private philosophy school at Nettlebed in Oxfordshire, kept by Mr. William Cole, who had formerly been principal of St. Mary Hall in Oxford, and remained there two years and a half. But finding his master was too remiss in matters of morality and religion , a thing quite unsuitable with his strict temper; and observing there were in that place all the dangers and vices of the university, without the advantages, he removed to Catherine-hall in Cambridge, where he prosecuted his studies with indefatigable diligence, and performed all his exercises with general approbation. After taking the degrees of A.B. in 1672, and A. M. 1676, he removed into the family of Ralph Freeman of Aspenden-hall in Hertfordshire, esq. as tutor to his eldest son, and there continued till 1678, when, going with his pupil into Holland, he stayed about a year in sir Leoline Jenkyns’s family at Nimeguen. From Nimeguen he went, in the ambassador’s company, through Flanders and Holland: and returning to England, continued with his pupil till 16S5, when Mr. Freeman was sent into France and Italy. In 1684, Mr. Bonnell went into France, and met Mr. Freeman at Lyons, and in his company visited several parts of that country. From thence, however, he went directly to Ireland, and took his employment of accountant-general into his own hands, which had, since his father’s death, been managed by others for his use. In the discharge of it he behaved with so much diligence and fidelity, that he soon acquired the esteem of the government, and the love of all who were concerned with him. During the troublesome reign of king James II. he neither deserted his employment, as others did, nor countenanced the arbitrary and illegal measures of the court, and yet was continued in his office, which proved a great advantage to the protestant interest in Ireland, for whatever he received out of his office, he liberally distributed among the poor oppressed protestants. He also took every opportunity to relieve the injured, and boldly to plead their cause with those who were in power. But though his place was very advantageous, and furnished him with ample means of doing good, yet either the weight of the employment, or his ill state of health, or perhaps his desire of entering into holy orders, which he had long designed, but never effected, made him resolve to quit it; and he accordingly parted with it to another person in 1693. In the whole course of his life he behaved in so upright and worthy a manner, that he was courted by his superiors and reverenced by his equals. In piety, justice, charity, sobriety, and temperance, few have excelled him. His devotion was confined within the strictest bounds of sobriety and reason, and free from the least appearance of affectation. He commonly gave away the eighth part of his yearly income to the poor, and his charity was not only extensive but impartial. His learning was very considerable; he thoroughly digested the Greek and Roman authors, understood French perfectly, and had made great progress in the Hebrew language. In philosophy and oratory he exceeded most of his contemporaries in the university, and applied himself with success to mathematics and music. In the course of his studies he read several of the fathers, and translated some parts of Synesius into English. There is nothing, however, of his published, but some Meditations and Prayers inserted in his Life, and a “Harmony of the Gospels,” written by another hand, but “improved by James Bonnell, esq. for his own use,” Lond. 1705, 8vo. This excellent man died of a malignant fever, April 23, 1699, and was buried in St. John’s church in Dublin. In 1693 he married Jane, daughter of sir Albert Conyngham, by whom he had three children, of whom only one daughter survived him a very short time. A neat monument was erected to his memory by his relict. “Such a character,” says Mr. Granger, “may, perhaps, be overlooked by some, because there is nothing remarkably striking in it. But the man who is uniformly good, and that to such a degree as Mr. Bonnell was, ought to stand high in our opinion, and to be esteemed what he certainly was, a great man.”

, bishop of London, proverbial for his cruelty, was the son of an honest poor man, and born, at Hanley in Worcestershire, although some have very eagerly reported that he was the natural son of one George Savage, a priest, as if the circumstance of his birth could have had any effect on his future disposition. He was maintained at school by an ancestor of Nicholas Lechmere, esq. a baron of the exchequer in the reign of king William; and in 1512, he was entered at Broadgate-hall in Oxford, now Pembroke college. On June 12, 1519, he was admitted bachelor of the canon, and the day following bachelor of the civil law. He entered into orders about the same time, and had some employment in the diocese of Worcester; and on the 12th of July 1525, was created doctor of the canon law. He was a man of some, though not great learning, but distinguished himself chiefly by his skill and dexterity in the management of affairs, which made him be taken notice of by cardinal Wolsey, who appointed him his commissary for the faculties; and he was with this prelate at Cawood, when he was arrested for high treason. He enjoyed at once the livings of Blaydon and Cherry Burton in Yorkshire, Ripple in Worcestershire, East Dereham in Norfolk, and the prebend of Chiswick in the cathedral church of St. Paul: but the last he resigned in 1539, an of East Dereham in 1540. He was installed archdeacon of Leicester, October 17, 1535.

After the cardinal’s death, he got into the good graces of king Henry VIII. who appointed him one of his chaplains. On this he began his career in a manner not very consistent with his after-conduct. He was not only a favourer of the Lutherans, but a promoter of the king’s divorce from queen Catherine of Spain, and of great use to his majesty in abrogating the pope’s supremacy. He was also in high favour with lord Cromwell, secretary of state, by whose recommendation he was employed as ambassador at several courts. In 1532, he was sent to Rome, along with sir Edward Karne, to excuse king Henry’s personal appearance upon the pope’s citation. In 1533, he was again sent to Rome to pope Clement VII. then at Marseilles, upon the excommunication decreed against king Henry VIII. on account of his divorce; to deliver that king’s appeal from the pope to the next general council. But in this he betrayed so much of that passionate temper which appeared afterwards more conspicuously, and executed the order of his master in this affair with so much vehemence and fury, that the pope talked of throwing him into a caldron of melted lead, on which he thought proper to make his escape. He was employed likewise in other embassies to the kings of Denmark and France, and the emperor of Germany. In 1538, being then ambassador in France, he was nominated to the bishopric of Hereford, Nov. 27; but before consecration he was translated to London, of which he was elected bishop Oct. 20, 1539, and consecrated April 4, 1540.

At the time of the king’s death in 1547, Bonner was ambassador with the emperor Charles V.; and though during Henry’s reign he appeared zealous against the pope, and had concurred in all the measures taken to abrogate his supremacy, yet these steps he appears to have taken merely as the readiest way to preferment; for his principles, as far as such a man can be said to have any, were those of popery, as became evident from his subsequent conduct. On the 1st of September 1547, not many months after the accession of Edward VI. he scrupled to take an oath, to renounce and deny the bishop of Rome, and to swear obedience to the king, and entered a protestation against the king’s injunction and homilies. For this behaviour he was committed to the Fleet; but having submitted, and recanted his protestation, was released, and for sometime complied outwardly with the steps taken to advance the reformation, while he used privately all means in his power to obstruct it. After the lord Thomas Seymour’s death, he appeared so remiss in putting the court orders in execution, particularly that relating to the use of the common prayer book, that he was severely reproved by the privy council. He then affected to redouble his diligence: but still, through his remissness in preaching, and his connivance at the mass in several places, many people in his diocese being observed to withdraw from the divine service and communion, he was accused of neglect in the execution of the king’s orders. He was summoned before the privy council on the llth of August, when, after a reproof for his negligence, he was enjoined to preach the Sunday three weeks after at Paul’s cross, on certain articles delivered to him; and also to preach there once a quarter for the future, and be present at every sermon preached there, and to celebrate the communion in that church on all the principal feasts: and to abide and keep residence in his house in London, till he had licence from the council to depart elsewhere. On the day appointed for his preaching, he delivered a sermon to a crowded audience on the points assigned to him. But he entirely omitted the last article, the king’s royal power in his youth; for which contempt he was complained of to the king by John Hooper, afterwards bishop of Worcester: and archbishop Cranmer, bishop Ridley, sir William Petre, and sir Thomas Smith, secretaries of state, and William May, LL. D. and dean of St. Paul’s, were appointed commissioners to proceed against him. Appearing before them several days in September, he was, after a long trial, committed to the Marshalsea; and towards the end of October deprived of his bishopric.

On the accession of queen Mary, Bonner had an opportunity of shewing himself in his proper character, which indeed had been hitherto but faintly-concealed. He was restored to his bishopric by a commission read in St. Paul’s cathedral the 5th of September 1553; and in 1554, he was made vicegerent, and president of the convocation, in the room of archbishop Cranmer, who was committed to the Tower. The same year he visited his diocese, in order to root up all the seeds of the Reformation, and behaved in the most furious and extravagant manner; at Hadham, he was excessively angry because the bells did not ring at his coming, nor was the rood-loft decked, or the sacrament hung up. He swore and raged in the church at Dr. Bricket, the rector, and, calling him knave and heretic, went to strike at him; but the blow fell upon sir Thomas Joscelyn’s ear, and almost stunned him. On his return he set up the mass again at St. Paul’s, before the act for restoring it was passed. The same year, he was in commission to turn out some of the reformed bishops. In 1555, and the three following years, he was the occasion of above two hundred of innocent persons being put to death in the most cruel manner, that of burning, for their firm adherence to the Protestant religion. On the 14th of February 1555-6, he came to Oxford (with Thirlby bishop of Ely), to degrade archbishop Cranmer, whom he used with great insolence. The 29th of December following he was put into a commission to search and raze all registers and records containing professions against the pope, scrutinies taken in religious houses, &c. And the 8th of February 1556-7, he was also put in another commission, or kind of inquisition, for searching after and punishing all heretics.

Upon queen Elizabeth’s accession, Bonner went to meet her at Highgate, with the rest of the bishops; but she looked on him as a man stained with blood, and therefore would shew him no mark of her favour. For some months, however, he remained unmolested; but being called before the privy council on the 30th of May 1359, he refused to take the oath of allegiance and supremacy: for which reason only, as it appears, he was deprived a second time of his bishopric the 29th of June following, and committed to the Marshalsea. After having lived in confinement some years, he died September 5, 1569, and three days after he was buried at midnight, in St. George’s churchyard, Southwark, to prevent any disturbances that might have been made by the citizens, who hated him extremely. He had stood excommunicated several years, and might have been denied Christian burial; but of this no advantage was taken. As to his character, he was a violent, furious, and passionate man, and extremely cruel in his nature; in his person he was very fat and corpulent, the consequence of excessive gluttony, to which he was much addicted. He was a great master of the canon law, being excelled in that faculty by very few of his time, and well skilled in politics, but understood little of divinity. Several pieces were published under his name, of which the following is a list 1. Preface to the Oration of Stephen Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, concerning true Obedience. Printed at London, in Latin, 1534, 1535, and at Hamburgh in 1536, 8vo. Translated into English by Mi-, chael Wood, a zealous Protestant, with a bitter preface to the reader, and a postscript, Roan, 1553, 8vo. It is also inserted in J. Fox’s book of Martyrs. In the preface Bonner speaks much in favour of king Henry the VHIth’s marriage with Ann Boleyn, and against the tyranny exercised by the bishop of Rome in this kingdom. 2. Several letters to the lord Cromwell. 3. A declaration to lord Cromwell, describing to him the evil behaviour of Stephen (bishop of Winchester), with special causes therein contained, wherefore and why he misliked of him. 4. Letter of his about the proceedings at Rome concerning the king’s divorce from Catherine of Arragon. 5. An admonition and advertisement given by the bishop of London to all readers of the Bible in the English tongue. 6. Injunctions given by Bonner, bishop of London, to his clergy (about preaching, with the names of books prohibited). 7. Letter to Mr. Lechmere. 8. Responsum & exhortatio, Lond. 1553, 8vo. Answer and exhortation to the clergy in praise of priesthood: spoken by the author in St. Paul’s cathedral, the 16th October, 1553, after a sermon preached before the clergy, by John Harpesfield. 9. A letter to Mr. Lechmere, 6th September, 1553. 10. Articles to be enquired of in the general visitation of Edmund bishop of London, exercised by him in 1554, in the city and diocese of London, &c. To ridicule them, John Bale, bishop of Ossory, wrote a book, entitled, A declaration of Edmund Bonner’s articles, concerning the clergy of London diocese, whereby that execrable anti-christ is in his right colours revealed, 1554, and 1561, 8vo. 11. A profitable and necessary doctrine, containing an exposition on the Creed, seven Sacraments, ten Commandments, the Pater Noster, Ave Maria, with certain homilies adjoining thereto, for the instruction and information of the diocese of London, Lond. 1554-5, 4to. This book was drawn up by his chaplains John Harpesfield and Henry Pendleton; the former part of it, which is catechism, is mostly taken out of the Institution of a Christian man, set out by king Henry VIII. only varied in some points. 12. Several letters, declarations, arguings, disputes, &c. of his are extant in John Fox’s book of Martyrs, vol. last. 13. His objections against the process of Robert Horn, bishop of Winchester, who had tendered the oath of supremacy to him a second time, are preserved by Mr. Strype in his Annals of the Reformation. The character of bishop Bonner is so familiar to our readers as to require little illustration, or any addition to the preceding account from the former edition of this Dictionary; yet some notice may be taken of the defence set up by the Roman Catholic historians. Dodd, alluding to his cruelties, says, that “Seeing he proceeded according to the statutes then in force, and by the direction of the legislative power, he stands in need of no apology on that score.” But the history of the times proves that Bonner’s character cannot be protected by a reference to the statutes, unless his vindicator can likewise prove that he had no hand in enacting those statutes; and even if this were conceded, his conduct will not appear less atrocious, because, not content with the sentence of the law carried into execution by the accustomed officers, Bonner took frequent opportunities to manifest the cruelty of his disposition by anticipating, or aggravating, the legal punishments. He sometimes whipped the prisoners with his own hands, till he was tired with the violence of the exercise; and on one occasion he tore out the beard of a weaver who refused to relinquish his religion; and that he might give him a specimen of burning, he held his hand to a candle, till the sinews and veins shrunk and burst . The fact is, that Bonner was constitutionally cruel, and delighted in the sufferings he inflicted. Granger very justly says, that “Nature seems to have designed him for an executioner,” and as, wherever he could, he performed the character, how can he be defended by an appeal to the statutes? The most remarkable circumstance in his history is the lenity shown to him after all this bloody career. There seems no reason to think that he would have even been deprived of his bishopric, had he consented to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, a circumstance which is surely very extraordinary. His compliance, had he taken, that step, could have been only hypocritical, and what an object it would have been to have seen the duties and power of a protestant prelate intrusted to such a monster, and in that diocese, where so many families preserved the bitter remembrance of his cruelty.

, an eminent natural philosopher, was born at Geneva, on the 13th of March, 1720. His ancestors, who were compelled to emigrate from France, in 1572, after the dreadful slaughter of St. Bartholomew’s day, established themselves at Geneva, where his grandfather was advanced to the magistracy. His father, who preferred the station of a private citizen, paid unremitted attention to the education of his son, which the latter recompensed, at a very early period, by the amiableness of his disposition, and the rapid progress he made in general literature. When about sixteen years of age, he applied himself, with great eagerness, to the perusal of “Le Spectacle de la Nature,” and this work made such a deep impression on his mind, that it may be said to have directed the taste and the studies of his future life. What that publication had commenced, was confirmed by the work of La Pluche; but having accidentally seen the treatise of Reaumur upon insects, he was in a transport of joy. He was very impatient to procure the book, but, as the only copy in Geneva belonged to a public library, and as the librarian was reluctant to entrust it in the hands of a youth, it was with the utmost difficulty that he could obtain his end. By the possession of this treasure, our assiduous youth was enabled to make several new and curious experiments, which he communicated to Reaumur himself; and the high applause he gained, from so great a naturalist, added fresh vigour to his assiduity.

In compliance with his father’s desires, he applied himself, though with much reluctance, to the study of the law. The works of Burlamaqui pleased him the most, on account of the perspicuous and philosophic manner in which the subject was treated; the institutes of Heineccius gave him some courage also, as he perceived order and connection; but the Roman law terrified him. Notwithstanding his application to these authors, he still continued attached to natural history, and was very active in making experiments. Some experiments respecting treelice happening to be communicated by Reaumur to the academy of sciences, occasioned an epistolary correspondence between M. Bonnet and that great naturalist, a circumstance, doubtless, very flattering to a youth of twenty years, and the letter of Reaumur was accompanied with a present of that very book which he had borrowed, with so much difficulty, two years before.

Animated by such distinguished marks of approbation, he diligently employed every moment he could steal from the study of jurisprudence to the completion of his natural history of the tree-louse; to experiments on the respiration of caterpillars and butterflies, which he discovered to be effected by stigmata, or lateral pores; to an examination of the construction of the tinea, or tapeworm; in frequent correspondence with Reaumur; and in assisting Trembley in his discoveries and publication concerning millepedes, &c. Having, in 1743, obtained the degree of doctor of laws, he relinquished a pursuit which he had commenced with so much reluctance. In the same year he was admitted a member of the royal society of London, to which he had communicated a treatise on insects. Bonnet being now liberated from his other pursuits, applied himself, without intermission, to collecting together his experiments and observations concerning the tree-louse and the worm, which he published in 1744, under the title of “Insectology.” This work acquired deserved approbation from the public, and was honoured by the commendation of the celebrated B. de Jussieu. He was reproached, however, as some other naturalists have deserved, with having paid too little attention to the delicacy of his reader, though his patience and accuracy were acknowledged to be deserving of praise. Such unremitted application and labour could not fail of becoming injurious to his health. Inflammations, nervous fever, sore eyes, &c. compelled him to relinquish the use of the microscope and the study of insects. This prevention was so extremely mortifying to a man of his taste and activity of mind, that he was thrown into a deep melancholy, which could only be subdued by the resolution inspired by philosophy, and the consolations of religion; these gradually roused him from a dejected state of mind. About the end of 1746, he was chosen member of the literary institution at Bologna, which introduced him to a correspondence with the celebrated Zanotti, who may be deemed the Fontenelle of Italy.

In 1747, he undertook a very difficult work on the leaves of plants; which, of all his publications in natural history, bore the strongest marks of originality, both with respect to the manner in which his experiments were made, and the discoveries resulting from them. But from this extreme attachment to natural history, he was gradually led to a study of a very different nature; and speculative philosophy now engaged his whole attention. The first result of his meditations in this department was his “Essay on Psychology,” in which the principal facts observable in human nature, and the consequences resulting from them, are stated in a concise and perspicuous manner. He contemplated man, from the first moment of his existence, and pursued the developement of his senses and faculties, from simple growth up to intelligence. This work, which was published without his name, met with great opposition, and was criticised with severity; but the censures were directed more against his expressions than his principles, nor were they of sufficient importance to impede the general acceptance of the performance. His “Analysis of the mental faculties” was simply a developement of the ideas contained in the preceding work. It engaged his incessant attention for the space of five years; nor was it completed before 1759. It is somewhat singular, that both he and the abbe de Condilluc should have illustrated their principles by the supposition of a statue, organized like the human body, which they conceived to be gradually inspired with a soul, and the progressive enlargement of whose powers they carefully traced. In 1760 this work was published at Copenhagen by order and at the expence of Frederic V.; and it was followed in 1762 by “Considerations on organized bodies,” in which the author had three principal objects before him; the first was to give a concise view of every thing which appears interesting in natural history, respecting the origin, growth, and reproduction of organized bodies; the second was to confute the two different systems founded upon the Epigenesis; and the third was to explain the system of Germs, indicate the ground upon which it was founded, its correspondence with facts, and the consequences resulting from it. This work was received with much satisfaction by natural philosophers. The academy of Berlin, which had proposed the same subject, as a prize-question for 1761, declared that they considered this treatise as the offspring of close observation and profound reasoning; and that the author would have had an undubitable right to the prize, if he had confined his labours to the precise statement of the question, and Malesherbes reversed the interdict which the public censor had laid upon this book, as containing dangerous principles.

The “Contemplations of Nature” appeared in 1764. In this work, the author first enlarged upon the common conceptions entertained concerning the existence and perfections of God; and of the order and uniformity observable in the universe. He next descends to man, examines the parts of his composition, and the various capacities with which he is endowed. He next proceeds to the plants: assembles and describes the laws of their Œconomy; and finally, he examines the insects, indicates the principal circumstances in which they differ from large animals, and points out the philosophical inferences that may legitimately be deduced from these differences; and he concludes with observations respecting the industry of insects. This work being of a popular nature, the author spared no pains in bestowing upon it those ornaments of which it was susceptible. The principles which he thus discovered and explained, induced him to plan a system of moral philosophy; which, according to his ideas, consisted solely in the observance of that relation in which man is placed, respecting all the beings that surround him. The first branch would have comprehended various means, which philosophy and the medical science have discovered, for the prevention of disease, the preservation and augmentation of the corporeal powers, and the better exertion of their force: in the second, he proposed to show, that natural philosophy has a powerful tendency to embellish and improve our mind, and augment the number of our rational amusements, while it is replete with beneficial effects respecting the society at large. To manifest the invalidity of opinions, merely hypothetical, he undertook, in the third place, to examine, whether there were not truths within the compass of human knowledge, to which the most sceptical philosopher must be compelled to yield his consent, and which might serve as the basis of all our reasonings concerning man and his various relations. He then would have directed his attention to a first cause, and have manifested how greatly the idea of a deity, and supreme law-giver, favoured the conclusions which reason had drawn from the nature and properties of things; but his ill health, impaired by incessant labour, would not permit him to complete the design. His last publication was the “Palingenesis,” which treats of the prior existence and future state of living beings.

In 1783, he was elected honorary member of the academy of sciences at Paris, and of the academy of sciences and the belles lettres at Berlin. Much of his time was employed in a very extensive correspondence with some of the most celebrated natural philosophers and others. Of this number were Reaumur; De Geer, the Reaumur of Sweden; Du Hamel; the learned Haller; the experimental philosopher Spallanzani; Van Swieten; Merian; and that ornament of Switzerland, the great Lambert. He entertained, however, the utmost aversion to controversy. He thought that no advantage to be obtained by it could compensate for the lo ss of that repose which he valued, with Newton, as the rem prarsus substantiakm. He never answered remarks that were made to the prejudice of his writings, but left the decision with the public: yet, ever ready to acknowledge his errors, he was sincerely thankful to every one who contributed to the perfection of his works. He was used to say, that one confession, “I was in the wrong,” is of more value than a thousand ingenious confutations. His literary occupations, and the care he was obliged to take of his health, prevented him from travelling. He delighted in retirement, and every hour was occupied in the improvement of his mind. The last twenty-five years of his life were spent in the same rural situation where he had passed the greater part of his early days; yet, notwithstanding the pursuit of literature was his supreme delight, he never refused to suspend his studies, when the good of his country seemed to demand his services.

He was chosen, in 1752, member of the grand council, in the republic of Geneva; and he assisted regularly at their deliberations, till 1768, where he distinguished himself by his eloquence, his moderation, united with firmness; by his good sense and penetration, in cases of difficulty; and by the zeal with which he endeavoured to reclaim his fellow citizens to that ancient simplicity of manners which had been so conducive to the welfare of the state, and to the love of virtue, so essential to the existence of genuine liberty. His conduct, in every case, was consistent with his principles. He took no pains to accumulate wealth, but remained satisfied with a fortune equal to his moderate wants, and to the exercise of his benevolence. The perfect correspondence between his extensive knowledge and virtuous deeds, procured him universal esteem.

As a demonstration of the high value placed upon his labours and talents, by the literati, we have only to add, that he was member of most of the learned societies of Europe. The latter part of his life was employed in revising his works, of which a complete edition was published at Neuchatel in 9 vols. 4to, or 18 vols. 8vo, containing, besides these already noticed, several smaller pieces in natural history and metaphysics. Notwithstanding the high praises bestowed on Bonnet by his countrymen, there are many parts of his works which must be read with caution, nor, where there is not much danger in his speculations, is he always a very conclusive reasoner.

, count, known in the latter part of his life by the name of Osman Bashaw, descended from a family related to the blood royal of France, was born in 1672, and entered himself at the age of sixteen, in the service of that crown, and married the daughter of marshal de Biron. He made the campaign in Flanders in 1690, but soon after left the French army, and entered into the Imperial service under prince Eugene, who honoured him with an intimate friendship. The intrigues of the marquis de Prie, his inveterate enemy, ruined his credit however at the court of Vienna, and caused him to be banished the empire. He then offered his service to the republic of Venice, and to Russia; which being de^ clined, his next tender was to the grand Signior, who gladly received him: it was stipulated that he should have a body of 30,000 men at his disposal; that a government should be conferred on him, with the rank of bashaw of three tails; a salary of 10,000 aspers a day, equal to 45,000 livres a year; and that in case of a war, he should be commander in chief. The first expedition he engaged in after his arrival at Constantinople, was to quell an insurrection in Arabia Petraea, which he happily effected; and at his return, had large offers made him by Kouli Khan, which he did not choose to accept. Some time after, he commanded the Turkish army against the emperor, over whose forces he gained a victory on the banks of the Danube. But success does not always protect a person against disgrace; for Bonneval, notwithstanding his service, was first imprisoned, and then banished to the island of Chio. The sultan, however, continued his friend; and the evening before his departure made him bashaw general of the Archipelago, which, with his former appointment of beglerbeg of Arabia, rendered him one of the most powerful persons in the Ottoman empire. In this island, he found a retirement agreeable to his wishes, but did not long enjoy it, being sent for back, and made topigi or master of the ordnance, a post of great honour and profit. He died in this employment, aged 75, in 1747; and wrote the memoirs of his own life, which were published in London in 1755, 2 vols. 12 mo, and give but an indifferent idea of his personal character.

, an eminent artist, was born at Ferra.ra in 1569, and died in 1632. He was the scholar of Bastaruolo, and the rival of Scarsellino, whose suavity of manner he attempted to eclipse by energy and grandeur. He studied at Bologna, for that purpose, the Carracci; at Rome, with nature and the antique, perhaps the Roman style; at Venice, Paolo, and at Parma, Corregio. In compositions of a few figures only, he resembles Lod. Carracci sometimes to a degree of delusion; but in works of numerous grouping, such as the “Feast of Herod,” and the “Nuptials of Cana,” at Ferrara, and chiefly in the “Supper of Ahasuerus,” at Ravenna, he rivals in abundance and arrangement the ornamental style of Paolo. At St. Maria in Vado at Ferrara, his science in Corregiesque fore-shortening and forcible effects of chiaroscuro, fixed and astonished the eye of Guercino. His cabinet pictures possess a high degree of finish. That such powers should not hitherto have procured Bonone an adequate degree of celebrity in the annals of painting, proves only, that no felicity of imitation can ever raise its possessors to the honours of originality and invention.

, an ancient prelate of the fourth century, is known in church history as the heretical bishop of Naissus in Dacia, though some authors say of Sardica, the metropolis of that province. In the year 391 he was accused of crimes against the canons of the chnrch and the law of God, and was reported for heresy at the council of Capua, which met the latter end of that year. The particulars of his crimes cannot now be known, but his heresy may be gathered from St. Augustin and St. Ambrose. He had, before, been condemned by Damasus, bishop of Rome, who died A. D. 384. The council of Capua committed the hearing of his cause to the bishops of Mecodon, his neighhours, under their metropolitan Anysius, bishop of Thessalonica. The bishops assembled, agreeably to the order of the council, and Bonosus appeared before them; after examination, they were so well convinced of the truth of the charge, that they immediately suspended him from all episcopal functions; at the same time writing a letter to Syricius bishop of Rome, declaring their abhorrence of the detestable error, that the virgin Mary should have other children than Christ. Bonosus died A. D. 410; but his doctrine did not die with him, being maintained by some 200 years after his death. Pope Gregory makes mention of the Bonosians in the latter end of the sixth century.

, a native of Perugia, and author of the first history of music in the Italian language with which we are acquainted, was an able professor, of considerable learning, who flourished about the middle of the seventeenth century. His work, which has for title “Historia Musica di Gio. And. Angelini Bontempi,” was published at Perugia, in small folio, 1695. It is become somewhat scarce, which enhances its value with collectors of books; but Dr. Burney’s opinion is unfavourable. He says that with great parade of his learning, science, and acquaintance with the Greek theorists, that are come down to us, he leaves us in as utter darkness concerning the practice of ancient music as ever, and has furnished us with but little information concerning the modern of his own time, with which, however, as a contrapuntist, he seems to have been perfectly well acquainted. Indeed, by the frequent use he makes of scientific terms, his book, when casually opened, has more the appearance of a dry mathematical treatise, than the history of an elegant art. The most curious and interesting part of his work is, the account which he gives of the discipline of the college of singers in the service of the pontifical chapel, and of the great masters who then flourished at Rome, who had distinguished themselves in writing “Alia Palestrina” for the church: secular music was then but little cultivated, and less respected there, till operas and oratorios had made some progress in polishing melody, and in the just accentuation and expression of words.

, a lady who was born at Paris in 1718, and died in the same city April 18, 1768, had received from nature a good understanding and an excellent taste, which were cultivated by a suitable education. She possessed the foreign languages, and was mistress of all the delicate turns of her own. It is to her that the French are indebted for a translation, said to be accurate and elegant, of Thomson’s Seasons, 1759, 12mo. Madame Bontems had a select society that frequented her house, and though she had a great talent for wit, she only made use of it for displaying that of others. She was not less esteemed for the qualities of her heart than those of her mind.

, professor in medicine at the university of Leyden in the latter part of the sixteenth century, was a man of profound erudition, and critically versed in the Greek language. He was born at Ryswick, a small village of Guelderland, and died at Leyden, Sept. 15, 1599, sixty-three years old. Bontius is the inventor of a composition of pills, which, from his name, are called Pilulæ tartareæ Bontii. The Dutch for a long time kept this composition a secret; but they have been analysed by the industry of some physicians, and the ingredients are now well known. He wrote some commentaries on Hippocrates, but published no part of them. He left two sons, both eminent in the medical art, James and Reyner.

, called by some, John, a native of Leyden, was educated in philosophy and medicine under his father, Gerard; and being sent to the East Indies, practised physic at Batavia about the middle of the seventeenth century. On his return to Europe he wrote several valuable works on the diseases and practice of medicine of India, These are, “De conservanda Valetudine, ac dieta sanis in India observandis;” “Methodus modendi, qua oportet in India orientali uti;” “Observationes selectse ex dissectione cadaverum ac autopsia descriptae.” He also published curious observations relating to the botany and natural history of those regions, especially the vegetables used in medicine and diet, in his work entitled “De Medicina Indorum,” in 1642, and afterwards, with Alpinus’s work, “De Medicina Ægyptiorum,” 1718, 4to. He also published “Historia Nat. et Med. Indise orientalis,” 1658, fol. His brother Reyner was many years professor of medicine at Leyden, and rector of the university. He died in 1623.

, a nonjuring clergyman of great piety and learning, son of the rev. John Bonwicke, rector of Mickleham in Surrey, was born April 29, 1G52, and educated at Merchant Taylors school. Thence he was elected to St. John’s college, Oxford, in 1668, where he was appointed librarian in 1670; B.A. 1673; M. A. March 18, 1675; was ordained deacon May 21, 1676; priest, June 6 (Trinity Sunday), 1680; proceeded B. D. July 21, 1682; and was elected master of Merchant Taylors school June 9, 1686. In 1689, the college of St. John’s petitioned the Merchant Taylors company, that he might continue master of the school (which is a nursery for their college) for life; but, at Christmas 1691, he was turned out for refusing to take the oath of allegiance, and was afterwards for many years master of a celebrated school at Headley, near Leatherhead in Surrey, where he had at one time the honour of having the poet Fenton for his usher, and Bowyer (who was afterwards the learned printer) for a scholar.

, one of those impostors who amused the public in the seventeenth century, was born at Manchester in 1601, and was bred a haberdasher in Lawrencelane, London, but quitted this employment and followed that of a writing-master at Hadley in Middlesex, and was afterwards for some time clerk to the sitting aldermen at Guildhall. He in a few years rendered himself so eminent, that he was appointed licenser of mathematical books, under which were included all those that related to the celestial sciences. Lilly tells us, that he once thought him the greatest astrologer in the world; but it appears that he afterwards sunk in his esteem, and that he thought himself a much greater man. We are told by the same author, that “he had a curious fancy in judging of thefts, and was as successful in resolving love questions,” which was a capital branch of his trade. George Wharton, who was formerly one of his astrological friends, had a great quarrel with him, which occasioned his publishing “MercurioCrelico Mastix; or an Anti-caveat to all such as have heretofore had the misfortune to be cheated and deluded by that great and treacherous impostor John Booker; in an answer to his frivolous pamphlet, entitled Mercurius Coelicus, or a Caveat to all the people of England;” Oxon. 1644, 4to. The only work of Booker’s worth notice is, his “Bloody Irish Almanac,” which contains some memorable particulars relative to the war in Ireland. He died April 1667, and his books were sold to Elias Ashmole, who, as Lilly informs us, and we may readily believe, gave more for them than they were worth.

, a portrait-painter, was born at Dort, in 1669, and after having been for some time a disciple of Arnold Verbuis, placed himself under Godfrey Schalcken, who recommended to him, after having received his instructions for six years, to study nature. By following this advice, Boonen obtained the reputation of a great master at the age of twenty-five years. His style of colouring was extremely good; the attitudes of his figures were elegantly disposed; his touch neat. The whole possessed such harmony, and his portraits maintained such a striking likeness, that he was ranked among the ablest artists of his time; he had a number of admirers, and a greater demand for works than he was able to execute. He had the honour of painting the portraits of the czar of Muscovy, of Frederick I. king of Prussia, of the victorious duke of Marlborough, as well as of many of the princes of Germany, and most of the noblemen who attended the czar. His health was impaired by his excessive application, and he died rich in 1729.

, of a noble family, was born at Gorcum, in Holland, in 1604. After taking his degree of doctor in medicine, he came to England, and was in such estimation for his skill in his profession, that he was made physician to king Charles I. On the death of that prince he settled in Dublin, but died soon after, viz. in 1650. In 1630 he published “Heures de Recreation,” 4to, in the Dutch language; and in 1640, “Philosophia Naturalis reformata,” which are not, however, much esteemed. His brother Arnold, likewise a physician, was well versed in the Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and Syriac languages. After taking his degree of doctor in medicine, he came also to London; but on the breaking out of the troubles here, he removed to Ireland, where he practised with success and reputation for some years. Tired at length with the hurry and confusion incident to civil commotions, and having experienced some losses, he went to Paris, and there passed the remainder of his life in retirement and study. He died in 1653. He published, in 1649, “Observationes Medicae de affcctibus a veteribus omissis,” 12mo. Haller gives a particular account of this volume, which contains many interesting and curious observations.

, a pious and popular dissenting minister of the Baptist persuasion, was born at Blackwell in Derbyshire, May 20, 1734, of poor parents, who were unable to give him any education. He spent a considerable part of his youth in the farming business, and that of the stocking frame, but appears to have during this time read much, and at length began to preach among the sect called the general baptists, throughout the towns and villages in his neighbourhood. In his twenty-third year he married; and this producing a numerous family, he opened a school at Button-Ash field. At this time he held the doctrine of universal redemption, and disliked predestination to such a degree as to ridicule it in a poem (of which he was afterwards ashamed), but he now changed his sentiments and became a zealous Calvinist in that and othei points supposed to constitute the Calvinistic system. The consequence of this change was, an avowal and defence of his new opinions in his first publication, “The Reign of Grace,” in which he was encouraged hy the late rev. Henry Venn, vicar of Huddersfield, who wrote a recommendatory preface to it. It appeared in 1768, and led to a new and important aera in his life, being so much approved by the congregation of particular baptists in Prescot-street, Goodman’s fields, whose pastor was just dead, that they invited Mr. Booth to succeed him. This invitation he accepted, and in Feb. 1769, took possession of his pulpit, after being regularly ordained for the first time. Here he appears for some years to have spent what time he could spare from his public labours in laying in a stock of knowledge; and although he always lamented the want of a regular education, his proficiency, and the extent of his reading were so great as in some measure to redeem his time, and place him on a footing, both as a scholar, preacher, and writer, with the ablest of his brethren. He knew Greek and Latin usefully, if not critically: the Greek Testament he went through nearly fifty times by the simple expedient of reading one chapter every day. General science and literature, history, civil and ecclesiastical, he investigated with acuteness in the ablest writers, English, French, Dutch, and German; and his works show that he particularly excelled in a knowledge of controversial divinity, and of those arguments, pro and con, which were connected with his opinions as a baptist. After exercising his ministry in Prescot-street for nearly thirty-seven years, he died Monday, Jan. 27, 1806, and his memory was honoured by a tablet and inscription in his meeting-house, recording his virtues and the high respect his congregation entertained for him. Besides the work already mentioned, he published, 1. “The Death of Legal Hope, the Life of Evangelical Obedience,” 1770, 12mo. 2. “The Deity of Jesus Christ essential to the Christian Religion,” a translation from Abbadie, and occasioned by the subscription controversy, 1770. 3. “An Apology for the Baptists in refusing communion at the Lord’s Table to Pscdobaptists,” 1778. 4. “Paedobaptism examined, on the principles, concessions, and reasonings of the most learned Psedobaptists,” 1784, and enlarged 1737, 2 vols. a work which his sect consider as unanswerable. He published also some lesser tracts and occasional sermons.

, a celebrated tragic actor, was born in the county palatine of Lancaster, 1681. At the age of nine years he was put to Westminster school, under the tuition of the famous Dr. Busby, where he soon discovered an excellent genius and capacity. He had a peculiar turn for Latin poetry, and had fixed many of the finest passages of the antients so firmly in his memory, that he could repeat them with such propriety of emphasis, and gracefulness of action, as to charm every body who heard him. Thence it was, that when, according to custom, a Latin play was to be acted, one of the first parts was given to young Booth; who performed it in such a manner as gained him universal applause, and particular respect from the doctor. This first gave him an inclination for the stage. His father intended him for the church: but when Barton reached the age of seventeen, and was about to be sent to the university, he stole away from school, and went over to Ireland in 1698, with Mr. Ashbury, master of the company. Here he was soon distinguished greatly by his theatrical abilities, especially in tragedy, for which he seemed to be formed by nature; for he had a grave countenance and a good person, with a fine voice and a manly action. When he had been three seasons in Dublin, in which time he had acquired a great reputation, he resolved to return to England; which he accordingly did in 1701, and was recommended to Mr. Betterton, who behaved to him with great civility, and took him into his company. The first character in which he appeared on the English stage, was that of Maximus, in the tragedy of Valentinian; and it was scarce possible for a young actor to meet with a better reception. The Ambitious Stepmother coming on soon after, he performed the part of Artaban, which added considerably to the reputation he had acquired, and made him esteemed one of the first actors. Nor was his fame less in all the succeeding characters which he attempted; but he shone with greatest lustre in the tragedy of Cato, which was brought on the stage in 1712. “Although Cato (says Mr. Cibber) seems plainly written upon what are called whig principles, yet the tories at that time had sense enough not to take it as the least reflection on their administration; but, on the contrary, seemed to brandish and vaunt their approbation of every sentiment in favour of liberty, which, by a public act of their generosity, was carried so high, that one day while the play was acting, they collected 50 guineas in the boxes, and made a present of them to Booth, with this compliment For his honest opposition to a perpetual dictator, and his dying so bravely in the cause of liberty.” The reputation to which Booth was now arrived seemed to entitle him to a share in the management of the theatre; but this perhaps his merit would never have procured, had it not been through the favour of lord Bolingbroke, who, in 1713, recalling all former licences, procured a new one, in which Booth’s name was added to those of Gibber, Wilks, and Dogget. Dogget, however, was so much offended at this, that he threw up his share, and would not accept of any consideration for it; but Gibber tells us, he only made this a pretence, and that the true reason of his quitting was his dislike to Wilks, whose humour was become insupportable to him. When Booth came to a share in the management of the house, he was in the thirty-third year of his age, and in the highest reputation as an actor: nor did his fame as a player sink by degrees, as sometimes has happened to those who have been most applauded, but increased every day more and more. The health of Booth, however, beginning to decline, he could not act so often as usual; and hence became more evident the public favour towards him, by the crowded audiences his appearance drew, when the intervals of his distemper permitted him to tread the stage: but his constitution broke now very fast, and he was attacked with a complication of distempers, which carried him off, May 10, 1733.

His character as an actor has been celebrated by some of the best judges. Mr. Aaron Hill, a gentleman, who by the share he had in the management of the play-house, could not but have sufficient opportunities of becoming well acquainted with his merit, has given us a very high character of him. “Two advantages (says this gentleman) distinguished him in the strongest light from the rest of his fraternity; he had learning to understand perfectly whatever it was his part to speak, and judgment to know how far it agreed or disagreed with his character. Hence arose a peculiar grace, which was visible to every spectator, though few were at the pains of examining into the cause of their pleasure. He could soften, and slide over with a kind of elegant negligence, the improprieties in a part he acted; while, on the contrary, he would dwell with energy upon the beauties, as if he everted a latent spirit, which had been kept back for such an occasion, that he might alarm, awaken, and transport in those places only where the dignity of his own good sense could be supported by that of his author. A little reflection upon this remarkable quality will teach us to account for that manifest languor, which has sometimes been observed in his action, and which was generally, though I think falsely, imputed to the natural indolence of his temper. For the same reason, though in the customary rounds of his business he would condescend to some parts in comedy, he seldom appeared in any of them with much advantage to his character. The passions which he found in comedy were not strong enough to excite his fire, and what seemed want of qualification, was only absence of impression. He had a talent at discovering the passions, where they lay hid in some celebrated parts, by the injudicious practice of other actors, which when he had discovered, he soon grew able to express: and his secret for attaining this great lesson of the theatre was an adaption of his look to his voice, by which artful imitation of nature, the variations in the sound of his words gave propriety to every change in his countenance. So that it was Mr. Booth’s peculiar felicity to be heard and seen the same whether as the pleased, the grieved, the pitying, the reproachful, or the angry. One would almost be tempted to borrow the aid of a very bold figure, and, to express this excellence the more significantly, beg permission, to affirm, that the blind might have seen him in his voice, and the deaf have heard him in his visage. His gesture, or, as it is commonly called, his action, was but the result and necessary consequence of his dominion over his voice and countenance; for having, by a concurrence of two such causes, impressed his imagination with such a stamp and spirit of passion, he ever obeyed the impulse by a kind of natural dependency, and relaxed or braced successively into all that fine expressiveness, with which he painted what he spoke without restraint or affectation.”

Mr. Gibber has also taken particular notice of Booth, nor has he omitted either his excellencies or defects: this writer, speaking of Wilks and him, says, “they were actors so opposite in their manner, that if either of them could have borrowed a little of the other’s fault, they would both have been improved by it. If Wilks had sometimes too great a vivacity, Booth as often contented himself with too grave a dignity. The latter seemed too much to heave up his words, as the other to dart them to the ear with too quick and sharp a vehemence. Thus Wiiks would too frequently break into the time and measure of the harmony by too many spirited accents in one line; and Booth, by too solemn a regard to harmony, would as often lose the necessary spirit of it: so that (as I have observed) could we have sometimes raised the one and sunk the other, they had both been nearer the mark. Yet this could not be always objected to them; they had their intervals of unexceptionable excellence, that more than balanced their errors. The master-piece of Booth was Othello; then he was most in character, and seemed not more to animate and please himself in it than his spectators. It is true he owed his last and highest advancement to his acting Cato; but it was the novelty and critical appearance of that character, that chiefly swelled the torrent of his applause; for, let the sentiments of a declaiming patriot have all the sublimity of poetry, and let them be delivered with all the utmost grace and elocution, yet this is but one light wherein the excellence of an actor can shine; but in Othello we may see him in the variety of nature. In Othello, therefore, I may safely aver, that Booth shewed himself thrice the actor that he could in Cato, and yet his merit in acting Cato need not be diminished by this comparison. Wilks often regretted, that in tragedy he had not the full and strong voice of Booth, to command and grace his periods with. But Booth used to say, that if his ear had been equal to it, Wilks had voice enough to have shewn himself a much better tragedian. Now, though there might be some truth in this, yet these two actors were of so mixed a merit, that even in tragedy the superiority was not always on the same side. In sorrow, tenderness, or resignation, Wilks plainly had the advantage, and seemed more pathetically to feel, look, and express his calamity. But in the more turbulent transports of the heart, Booth again bore the palm, and left all competitors behind him.”

Besides his professional merit, Booth was a man of letters, and an author in more languages than one. He had a taste for poetry, which discovered itself when he was very young, in translations from several Odes of Horace; and in his riper years, he wrote several songs and other original poems, which were very far from injuring his reputation. He was also the author of a mask or dramatic entertainment called “Dido and JEneas,” that was very well received upon the stage; but his best performance was a Latin inscription to the memory of a celebrated actor, Mr. William Smith, one of the greatest men of his profession, and of whom Mr. Booth always spoke in raptures. This short elogy has much strength, beauty, and elegance. In his private life he had many virtues, and few of the failings so common to his profession. He had no envy in his composition, but readily approved, and as readily rewarded, merit, as it was in his power. He was something rough in his manner, and a little hasty in his temper, but very open and free to speak his sentiments, which he always did with an air of sincerity, that procured him as much credit with people at first sight, as he had with those to whom he had been long known. He was kind to all the players whose circumstances were indifferent, and took care not to make them uneasy, either in point of salary or of usage. He was no great speaker in company, but when he did, it was in a grave lofty way, not unlike his pronunciation on the stage. He had a great veneration for his parents while they were living, and was also very useful to his brother and sister after their decease. Booth was twice married; first in 1704, to Miss Frances Barkham, daughter of sir William Barkham, of Norfolk, bart. who died in 1710, without issue; and secondly, to Mrs. Santlowe, an actress, who. survived him forty years, and in 1772, erected a monument to his memory in Westminster abbey. In 1737 she married Mr. Goodyer,a gentleman of fortune in Essex.

, Lord Delamer, the son of William Booth, esq. and grandson of sir George Booth, bart. rendered himself remarkable by heading an insurrection in Cheshire, about a year after the death of Oliver Cromwell. He received a commission from king Charles II. under his signet and sign-manual, bearing date July 22, 1659, by which he was constituted commander in chief of all forces to be raised for his majesty’s service in Cheshire, Lancashire, and North Wales. A duplicate of this was dated at Brussels, Aug. 9, the same year, but sir George did not openly profess to act by the king’s authority, or with a view to his restoration, but only in opposition to the tyranny of the parliament. He assembled about four thousand men, took possession of Chester, and was joined by the earl of Derby, sir Thomas Middleton, and major Brook. Bui the parliamentary forces pursued sir George and his adherents so closely, that they could not avoid coming to an action; and, after a sharp contest, on the 19th of August, 1659, Lambert totally routed sir George Booth’s troops, pursued them a considerable way, and killed and took many of them. Ludlow informs us, that “Sir George Booth, after his defeat, put himself into a woman’s habit, and with two servants hoped to escape to London, riding behind one of them. The single horseman going before, went to an inn on the road; and, as he had been ordered, bespoke a supper for his mistress, who, he said, was coming after. The pretended mistress being arrived, either by alighting from the horse, or some other action, raised a suspicion in the master of the house, that there was some mystery under that dress. And thereupon resolving to make a full inquiry into the matter, he got together some of his neighbours to assist him, and with them entered the room vyhere the pretended lady was. But sir George Booth suspecting their intentions, and being unwilling to put them to the trouble of a farther search, discovered himself. Whereupon they took him into their custody, and sent him up to London, where the parliament committed him prisoner to the Tower.” Sir George made applications to many of the parliament and council, by his friends, for favour; was examined by Haselrig and Vane, who referred his examination to the council of state; and applications were made from the lord Say, and others, to save his life.

He was afterwards set at liberty, upon giving bail; and being member of parliament for Chester, he was the first of the twelve members sent by the house of commons, in May 1660, to carry to king Charles II. the answer of that house to his majesty’s letter, as appears by the journals of the house of commons, May 7, 1660. And on the 13th of July following, the house of commons ordered, that the sum of ten thousand pounds should be conferred on him, as a mark of respect for his eminent services, and great sufferings for the public. In this resolution the lords afterwards concurred. It appears, that the first motion was for twenty thousand pounds, which the house of commons was about to agree to, had not sir George Booth himself, in his place, requested of the house, that it might be no more than ten; declaring, that what he had done was purely with intention of serving his king and country, as became him in duty to do, without view of any reward. After the restoration, his services were also considered as so meritorious, that the king gave him liberty to propose six gentlemen to receive the honour of knighthood, and two others to have the dignity of baronet conferred on them. He was also himself created baron Delamer of Dunham-Massey; and on the 30th of July, 1660, he was appointed custos rotulorum for the county of Cheshire, but on the 30th of May, 1673, he resigned this office to Henry, his son and heir. “After this,” says Collins, “he not being studious to please the court in those measures which were taken in some parts of that reign, both he and his family were soon afterwards disregarded by the king, and ill used by his successor king James the Second.” His lordship died at Dunham-Massey, in the 63d year of his age, on the 8th of August, 1684, and was buried in a very splendid manner at Bowdon, in the burial-vault of the family. He was twice married: his first wife was the lady Catherine Clinton, daughter and co-heir to Theophilus earl of Lincoln, who died in child-bed in 1643, by whom he had issue one daughter, Vere, who Belied unmarried at Canonbury-house, in 1717, in the seventy-fourth year of her age, and was buried in Islington church. His second wife was the lady Elizabeth Grey, eldest daughter of Henry earl of Stamford, by whom he had issue seven sons and five daughters. His eldest son, William, died young, and he was succeeded in his honours and estate by his second son, Henry, who is the subject of the following article.

, earl of Warrington, and baron Delamer of Dunham Massey, an upright senator and distinguished patriot, was born on the 13th of January, 1651. He was the second son of the preceding George lord Delamer, by the lady Elizabeth Grey. In the life-time of his father, he was custos rotulorum for the county palatine of Chester, and also knight of the shire for that county, in several parliaments during the reign of king Charles ths Second. He very early rendered himself conspicuous by his zeal for the protestant religion, and the liberties of his country. When the bill for excluding the duke of York from the throne was brought into parliament, Mr. Booth was very active in the promotion of it, and also made a spirited speech in support of the necessity of frequent parliaments, and against governing by favourites; and he opposed, with a becoming spirit, the unjust and arbitrary power assumed by the privy council, of imprisoning men contrary to law.

As he was solicitous for frequent parliaments, so he was also anxious that they should be preserved incorrupt. He was, therefore, desirous of procuring an act for the punishment of those who had received bribes from the court, as members of that parliament which was styled the pensionparliament. He proposed, that a bill should be brought in, by which these prostituted senators should be rendered incapable of serving in parliament for the future, or of enjoying any office, civil or military; and that they should be obliged, as far as they were able, to refund all the money that they had received for secret services to the crown.

Mr. Booth was also extremely zealous against the papists; and this circumstance, together with the vigorous opposition that he made in parliament to the arbitrary measures of the court, occasioned him to be put out of the commission of the peace, and removed from the office of custos rotulorum of the county of Chester. In 1684, by the death of his father, he became lord Delamer; but about this time he was committed close prisoner to the Tower of London. The pretence probably was, that he was suspected of being concerned in some practices against the crown; but we have met with no particular account of the accusation against him: and as no parliament was then, sitting, it may be presumed, that less attention was paid to any illegality in the proceedings respecting him. He was, however, set at liberty, after a few months imprisonment. But soon after the accession of king James II. he was again committed prisoner to the Tower. After being confined for some time, he was admitted to bail; but was, shortly after, a third time committed to the Tower. This was on the 26th of July, 1685; and a parliament being assembled in the November following, on the first day of the session he stated his case in a petition to the house of peers. He represented to their lordships, that the king, by his proclamation, had required him. to appear before him in council within ten days. He had accordingly surrendered himself to lord Sunderland, then principal secretary of state; and being brought before his majesty, then sitting in council, he was neither confronted by any person who accused him, nor otherwise charged with any kind of treason, but only questioned about some inferior matters, and which were of such a nature, that, if he had been really guilty of them, he ought by law to have been admitted to bail: notwithstanding which, he had been committed close prisoner to the Tower, by a warrant from the secretary of state, in which he was charged with high, treason. After some debate, it was resolved, that the lords with white staves should wait upon his majesty, “to know the reason why the lord Delamer, a member of their house, was absent from his attendance there.” The day following, the earl of Rochester, lord treasurer, reported to the house, “That he, with the other lords, having waited on his majesty with their message, his majesty was pleased to answer, That the lord Delamer stood committed for high treason, testified upon oath; and that his majesty had already given directions, that he should be proceeded against according to law.”

After the parliament was broken up, lord Delamer was brought to his trial, before a select number of the peers, on the 14th of January, 1685-6. The peers who tried him were, the dukes of Norfolk, Somerset, Beaufort, and Grafton the earls of Rochester, Sunderland, Mulgrave, Oxford, Shrewsbury, Huntingdon, Pembroke, Bridgwater, Peterborough, Scarsdale, Craven, Feversham, Berkeley, Nottingham, and Plymouth; the viscounts Falconberg and Newport; and the lords Ferrers, Cromwell, Maynard, Dartmouth, Godolphin, and Churchill. Jefferies, then lord chancellor, was appointed lord high steward on the occasion. He was known to be a personal enemy of lord Delamer, who had arraigned in parliament the conduct of Jefferies as chief justice of Chester. Lord Delamer, after the indictment against him was read, objected against the jurisdiction of the court; alleging, that he ought not to be tried by a select number of the peers, but by the whole body of the house of peers in parliament, because the parliament was then only under a prorogation, and not dissolved. But his plea was overruled. In Jefferies’s charge to the peers, previous to the opening of the evidence against lord Delamer, he threw out some hints relative to the share his lordship had in promoting the bill of exclusion, and introduced an eulogium on the conduct of king James the Second. The only positive evidence against lord Delamer was one Thomas Saxon, a man of a very bad character, and who in the course of the trial was proved to be perjured. Jefferies maintained, that there was no necessity, in point of law, that there should be two positive witnesses to convict a man of treason; and that where there was only one positive witness, additional circumstances might supply the place of a second. Lord Delamer made a very able defence; and by the lords who were appointed to try him he was unanimously acquitted.

After this he lived for some time in a retired manner, at his seat at Dunham-Massey; but matters being at length ripe for the revolution, he exerted himself in the promotion of that great event. Upon the prince of Orange’s landing, he raised, in a very few days, a great force in Cheshire and Lancashire, with which he marched to join that prince. On his first appearance in arms, besides assigning other reasons for his conduct, he is said to have made this declaration: “I am of opinion, that when the nation is delivered, it must be by force, or miracle: it would be a great presumption to expect the latter; and, therefore, our deliverance must be by force; and I hope this is the time for it.” After he had joined the prince, he was sent by his highness, together with the marquis of Halifax, and the earl of Shrewsbury, on the 17th of December, 1688, with a message to king James, intimating to him, that he must remove from Whitehall. Lord Delamer, though little attached to that prince in his prosperity, was too generous to insult him in his distress; and therefore, on this occasion, treated him with respect. And James was so sensible of this instance of his lordship’s civility to him, that, after his retirement into France, he said, that <c the lord Delamer, whom he had used ill, had then treated him with much more regard than the other two lords, to whom he had been kind, and from whom he might better have expected it."

Lord Delamer, however, had no inclination that an accommodation should take place between king James and the nation. For in a debate in the house of peers, the 3 1st of January, 16S8-9, relative to declaring the throne vacant, lord Delamer said, that “it was long since he thought himself absolved from his allegiance to king James; that he owed him none, and never would pay him any; and, if king James came again, he was resolved to fight against him, and would die single with his sword in his hand, rather than pay him any obedience.” It is intimated by sir John Dalrymple, that lord Delamer was not sufficiently expeditious in joining the prince of Orange when he first landed in England; and that gentleman affirms, that this was never forgiven by king William: but this is an assertion unsupported by any proper evidence. It is certain, that his services in the promotion of the revolution were thought so meritorious at that period, that on the 13th of February, 1688-9, he was sworn a privy counsellor; on the 9th of April following, he was appointed chancellor and under treasurer of the exchequer; on the 12th of the same month, made lord-lieutenant of the city and county of Chester; and on the 19th of July made custos rotulorum of the same county. These last offices, together with that of privy counsellor, he enjoyed for life: but he continued in the others only for about a year. The reason appears to have been, that lord Delamer seems to have wished for more retrenchments of the regal prerogative, than were made at the revolution. That he was desirous of some new limitations of the prerogative, is evident from a protest signed by him, relative to a clause proposed to be added to the bill of rights. He also signed a protest respecting an amendment to the bill for recognizing king William and queen Mary.

Though lord Delamer was removed from the administration, it was thought necessary to confer on him some mark of royal favour. Accordingly, by letters-patent, bearing date at Westminster, April 17, 1690, he was created earl of Warrington, in the county of Lancaster, to continue to him and the heirs-male of his body. A pension likewise of two thousand pounds per annum was granted to him, for the better support of that dignity. And it was said, in the preamble of the patent for his earldom, that it was conferred on him, “for his great services in raising and bringing great forces to his majesty, to rescue his country and religion from tyranny and popery.” On the 3d of January, 1692-3, the earl of Warrington signed a protest against the rejection of the bill for incapacitating persons in office under the crown, either civil or military, from sitting in the house of commons. Two other protests were also signed by him on different occasions. But this patriotic peer did not live long to enjoy his new dignity; for he died at London on the 2d of January, 1693-4, having not quite completed the forty-second year of his age. He was interred in the family vault in Bowdon church, in the county of Chester, on the 14th of the same month. Mr. Granger says, that lord Delamer was “a man of a generous and noble nature, which disdained, upon any terms, to submit to servitude; and whose passions seemed to centre in the love of civil and religious liberty.” In every part of his life, indeed, he appears to have been actuated by the same principles; and in his “Advice to his Children,” printed in his works, he says, “There never yet was any good man who had not an ardent zeal for his country.” He was not only illustriously distinguished by his public spirit, and his noble ardour in defence of the liberties of his country; but in his private life he appears to have been a man of strict piety, and of great worth, honour, and humanity. He married Mary, sole daughter and heiress to sir James Langham, of Cottesbrooke, in the county of Northampton, knight and baronet, by whom he had four sons, and two daughters. His first son died an infant, and his second son, George, upon the death of his father, became earl of Warrington. He died on the 2d of August, 1758, and leaving no heirs male, the earldom became extinct, but was revived in his daughter’s husband.

The son of the preceding, who, we have just mentioned, died in 1758, has obtained a place among the royal and noble authors, for having published, but without his name, “Considerations upon the institution of Marriage, with some thoughts concerning the force and obligation of the marriage contract; wherein is considered, how far divorces may or ought to be allowed. By a gentleman. Humbly submitted to the judgment of the impartial,” Lond. printed for John Whiston, 1739. Jt is an argument for divorce on disagreement of temper, which was the aim of Milton in his “Tetrachordon,” and would, if we may conjecture from the effects of the experiment in a neighbouring nation, create more dissoluteness and misery than it was intended to remove. He also wrote a letter to the writer of the “Present state of the Republic of Letters” in, August 1734, vindicating his father from some reflections cast on him in Burnett’s “History of his own times.” His only daughter married Henry earl of Stamford, in whose son, the title of Earl of Warrington was revived in 1796.

, or Boquinus, a French divine, and one of the contributors to the reformation, was born in Aquitaine, and educated in a monastery at Bourges, of which he became prior, and in high estimation with his brethren. Having, however, perused some of the writings of Luther, Bucer, &c. he imbibed their sentiments, and went to Wittemberg, where he became acquainted with Luther and Melancthon, and at Basil he attended the lectures of Myconius, Carlostadt, and Sebastian Muncer. Melancthon afterwards recommended him as a proper person to supply Calvin’s place at Strasburgh, who had gone back to Geneva; and there he gave lectures on the epistle to the Galatians, and soon after had for his coadjutor Peter Martyr. Boquine being at some distance of time invited by his brother, who was a doctor in divinity, and not an enemy to the reformation, removed to Bourges, in. hopes that the French churches were friendly to his doctrine, and there he publicly read and expounded the Hebrew Bible. About this time, Francis, king of France, being dead, the queen of Navarre came to Bourges, when Boquine presented her with a book he had written on the necessity and use of the Holy Scriptures, which she received very graciously, allowed him a yearly stipend out of her treasury, and appointed him to preach a public lecture in the great church of Bourges, with the consent of the archbishop. He remained in like favour with her successor, king Henry’s sister; but the enemies of the reformation threatening his life, he was obliged to desist from his labours, and went back to Strasburgh, where he was appointed pastor to the French church. This office, however, he filled only about four months, and in 1557 went into Heidelberg, at the invitation of Otho Henry, prince elector Palatine, who was carrying on the reformation in his churches. Here he was appointed professor of divinity, and continued in this office about twenty years, under Otho and Frederic III. After the death of the latter in 1576, the popish party again prevailing, drove him and the rest of the reformed clergy from the place, but almost immediately he was invited to Lausanne, where he remained until his death in 1582. He left various works, the dates of which his biographers have not given, except the following “Oratio in obitum Frederici III. Comit. Palatini,” Leyden, 1577, 4to; but their titles are, 1. “Defensio ad calumnias Doctoris cujusdam Avii in Evangelii professores.” 2. “Examen libri quern Heshusius inscripsit.de praesentia corporis Christi in coena Domini.” 3. “Theses in ccena Domini.” 4. “Exegesis divinsc communicationis.” 5. “Adsertio veteris, ac veri Christianismi adversus novum et fictum Jesuitismum.” This appears to have been one of his ablest works, and was translated into English under the title, “A defence of the old and true profession of Christianitie against the new counterfeite sect of Jesuites, by Peter Boquine, translated by T. G.” London, 1581, 8vo, by John Wolf, city printer. 6. “Notatio praecipuarum causarum diuturnitatis controversial de crena Domini,” &c.

a painter, engraver, and antiquary, was born at Brussels in 1583, but when in his third year, the war obliged his parents to remove into Germany. From his earliest years he discovered a taste for painting, which induced his father to place him under Giles Van Valkenberg. He afterwards studied in Italy, and travelling over Germany, settled first at Franhendal, and in 1627 at Francfort on the Maine. His paintings, principally fruit and flowers, were much admired, but he perhaps had more reputation as an antiquary, in which capacity, the earl of Arundel sent him into Italy to Mr. Petty, who was then collecting for his lordship, and retained him in his service as long as he lived. After the death of this patron, Vander Borcht was employed by the prince of Wales (afterwards Charles II.) and lived in esteem at London several years, till he returned to Antwerp, where he died in 1660. As an engraver we have some few etchings by him; among the rest the “Virgin and Child,” a small upright print, from Parmigiano, engraved at London in 1637; a “Dead Christ, supported by Joseph of Arimathea,” from the same master, and “Apollo and Cupid,” a small upright oval from Perin del Vago.

, a celebrated French mathematician and natural philosopher, was born at Dax, in the department of the Landes, May 4, 1733. His mother was Maria Theresa de Lacroix, and his father John Anthony Borda, whose ancestors had acquired considerable distinction in the French army. He began his studies in the college of the Barnabites at Dax, where he gave early indications of his future genius. He was a considerable time after put under the charge of the Jesuits of La Fleche, and by his ardour for study and superior talents, frequently carried off the prizes which were held out as the reward of youthful genius. This induced the Jesuits to endeavour to press him into their order, but his attachment to geometry was too powerful to be weakened by their persuasions. He encountered afterwards a more formidable opposition from his father, who was hostile to the prosecution of what he called unprofitable studies, and endeavoured to please him by proposing to enter into the engineer service of the army, where the objects of his profession would necessarily require a knowledge of geometry and physics. His father, however, having eleven children, and being obliged to support two of his sons who were already in the army, was anxious that Charles should look forward to some situation in the magistracy, which might be obtained without much expence and trouble. To these views Borda reluctantly submitted; but after having thus lost some of the most precious years of his youth, a friar, who was a particular friend of his father, obtained, by earnest solicitation, that he should be allowed to devote himself to his favourite science; and, every restraint being now removed, he was in 1753, when only twenty years of age, introduced to D'Alembert, who advised him to remain in the capital, and look forward to a situation in the academy. Borda accordingly entered the light horse, and continuing his mathematical studies, he became professor to his comrades.

In 1756, he laid before the academy a memoir on the motion of projectiles, which was particularly mentioned in the history of its proceedings; and in the same year he was appointed an associate of the academy. In the following year he was called into active service, and was present at the battle of Hastembeck, July 26, 1757, as aid-de-camp to M. de Maillebois. He willingly returned, however, from a species of duty which interrupted the progress of his studies; and, upon his arrival at Paris, he became a candidate for a situation in the engineer service: and such was the estimation in which his talents were held, that he was received without examination, and immediately employed as an inspector of the dock-yards. This new appointment was highly favourable for calling into action the peculiar talents of Borda. It inspired him with a fondness for every thing that related to the naval service: and, what seldom happens to the man of genius, he found himself in a situation in which he was led both by his profession and by his inclination to the same line of study.

The first object of his research was an examination of the theories of the resistance of fluids, a subject intimately connected with the advancement and perfection of naval architecture. The experiments upon this subject made by the academy of sciences, were by no means fitted to determine the resistance of bodies that were wholly immersed in the fluid. Borda, however, employed a method which was susceptible of great accuracy, and had also the advantage of ascertaining accurately the velocity of the motion. The surfaces upon which his experiments were made were of various forms, and the experiments were made both in air and water. The results of these inseresting experiments are given at length in the Memoirs of the Academy for 1763 and 1767. The apparatus, however, employed by Borda, was not of his own invention. A machine of the same kind had been used some time before by our ingenious countryman, Benjamin Robins, in his admirable experiments on the resistance of air. Yet we are indebted to Borda for many ingenious experiments and observations on the motion of fluids through different orifices. He prepared a theory of the motion of fluids different from that which had been given by Bernoulli and D'Alembert, and he made new experiments on the vena contracta.

In 1767, he published an excellent dissertation in the Memoirs of the Academy, entitled “Memoire sur les Roues Hydrauliques,” shewing that an undershot wheel produces a maximum effect when its velocity is one-half that of the current, though in practice the velocity is never more than three-eighths that of the current. He proved, after Deparcieux, from theory, before Smeaton had determined it by experiment, that the effect of overshot wheels increases with the slowness of their motion: that they are capable of raising, through the height of the fall, a quantity of water equal to that by which they are driven; that undershot vertical wheels produce only three-eighths of this effect; that horizontal wheels produce about one-half of this effect with plain float-boards, and a little more than one half with curvilineal float-boards. This memoir was followed by another, in 1768, on the construction of water-pumps. About this time Borda’s attention was directed to isoperimetrical problems, in which he obtained the same results as Lagrange, though by a different method. His last work, in the Memoirs of the Academy, was a dissertation on the “Theory of Projectiles.”

These labours induced M. Prasslin, the minister of the marine, to wish for the aid of his talents in the French navy, and after some opposition from official etiquette, he appointed him sub-lieutenant, in which character he first appeared in 1768; but nothing occurred of consequence until 1771, when the French and English were employed in many inventions for the discovery of the longitude at sea, and the French government having determined to try the accuracy of some improved chronometers, the academy of sciences appointed Borda and Pingre to sail for that purpose in the Flora frigate. The result of their voyage was published at Paris in 1778, entitled, “Voyage fait par ordre du Roy en 1771 et 1772, &c.” 2 vols. 4to. He was afterwards employed to determine the position of the Canary Isles, and being promoted to the rank of lieutenant, sailed in 1776, and in the course of his voyage, performed its immediate object, with others. Being appointed majorgeneral to the naval armament which served under Count D'Estaign in America, his experience led him to discover many defects in the construction of vessels, which he thought might be easily remedied. He considered the want of uniformity in the construction of ships, which were to act together, as a great defect, because a great discordance arose in their movements and in the exeeution of signals. Upon his return to France he communicated this idea to government, who immediately resolved to carry it into effect, and his profound knowledge and patriotic exertions did not fail to be acknowledged not only by France, but by the best-informed men in England. The reputation which he had now acquired enabled him to be further serviceable to his country, by drawing up a plan for the schools of naval architecture, of which he may justly be termed the founder, as he not only suggested the idea, but formed the scheme for regulating these seminaries, and laid down the rules for the instruction of the pupils admitted into them.

As a naval officer, however, Borda acquired little fame, and being captured by the English, though after a very brave resistance, he determined to devote the remainder of his days to science and philosophy. During his voyage along with Pingre in 1771, Borda found by experience that Hadley’s quadrant was susceptible of great improvement. The celebrated Tobias Mayer had already endeavoured to remove its imperfections, but the merit of this Borda’s biographer has transferred to him, declaring that Mayer’s idea was never carried into effect, which is completely false; one of Mayer’s circles was made for Admiral Campbell by Bird; and Mayer had himself used an instrument for measuring terrestrial angles upon the repeating principle, which is described in “Commentaries of the Royal Society of Gottingen” for 1752. Borda having examined, with the utmost attention, the construction proposed by Mayer, pointed out its defects, and in a great measure removed them by a circle of his own invention in 1777, known by the name of the “Circle of Borda,” but still it was not without its numerous imperfections, and it was reserved to our ingenious countryman Troughton to bring to perfection one of the happiest inventions that was ever made.

To Borda France is indebted for the invention of the mensuration-rod, with which the new station -lines were lately ascertained. He was also a zealous promoter of the reform in weights and measures; and in order to assist in this, he published “Tables of Sines in the decimal sy.stern,” at his own expence. One of his last labours was, the accurate determination of the length of the pendulum vibrating seconds at Paris. Such were the acknowledged reputation and patriotism of Borda, that the highest offices in the state were not deemed too great for merit such as his; and we accordingly find the name of a man who had been decorated with the cross of merit during the monarchy, entered in the list of candidates for the office of Director under the republic. This occurred in 1797, and on the 20th of February 1799, the National Institute lost one of its greatest ornaments and most assiduous supporters, in consequence of his death, which was occasioned by a dropsy, that cut him off Feb. 20, 1799, in the 64th year of his age.

, or as he styles himself in Latin, Andreas Perforatus, was a very singular character, and the reputation he acquired among his contemporaries must be considered in a great measure as a proof of the ignorance and credulity of the times. He was born at Pevensey in Sussex about 1500, and was educated at Oxford; but before he had taken a degree, entered among the Carthusians in or near London. He afterwards left them, and studied physic at Oxford; and then travelled over most parts of Europe and Africa. On his return he settled at Winchester, where he practised physic with considerable reputation, and in this capacity he is said to have served Henry VIII. In 1541 and 1542 he was at Montpellier, where he probably took the degree of doctor, in which he was soon after incorporated at Oxford. He lived then for some time at Pevensey, and afterwards returned to Winchester, still observing all the austerities of the order to which he formerly belonged; though he has been accused of many irregularities. It is certain that his character was very odd and whimsical, as appears from the books he wrote; yet he is said to have been a man of great wit and learning, and an “especial physician.” That he was not of consequence eminent enough to rank with the first of his profession, may be inferred from his dying insolvent in the Fleet, April 1549. Bale intimates that he hastened his end by poison on the discovery of his keeping a brothel for his brother bachelors. His works are very various in their subjects; one of the most considerable is intituled, “A book of the introduction of knowledge,” black letter, imprinted by William Coplande, without date. He there professes to teach all languages, the customs and fashions of all countries, and the value of every species of coin. This is a motley piece, partly in verse and partly in prose; and is divided into thirty-nine chapters, before each of which is a wooden cut, representing a man in the habit of some particular country. His well known satire on the Englishman, who, to express the inconstancy and mutability of his fashions, is drawn naked with a cloth and a pair of sheers in his hand, is borrowed from the Venetians, who characterised the French in that manner. Before the 7th chapter is the effigies of the author, under a canopy, with a gown, a laurel on his head, and a book before him. The title of this chapter shews how the author dwelt in Scotland and other islands, and went through and round about Christendom. An edition of this singular work was printed in London in 1542. His “Breviary of Health,” which is a very trifling, coarse, and weak performance, was published in 1.547, and is supposed by Fuller to be the first medical piece written in English. As a specimen of the style, take what follows, which is the beginning of the Prologue, addressed to physicians: “Egregious doctors and maisters of the eximious and arcane science of physicke, of your urbanity exasperate not yourselves against me for making this little volume.” This work, with a second part called the “Extravagants,” was reprinted in 4to, 1575. He was also author of the following; “Compendyouse Regimente, or Dietary of Healthe made in Mounte Pyllor,” an edition of which was printed several years after his death, in 1562. A famous jest book called the “Merrye tales of the madmen of Gotham;” “The historye of the miller of Abingdon and the Cambridge scholars,” the same with that related by Chaucer in his Canterbury Tales; a book of “Prognostics,” and another of Urines, &c. It is said that the phrase “Merry Andrew” is derived from him.

, a French historical and miscellaneous writer of considerable fame, was born at Paris in 1734, of an opulent family, and devoted himself in his youth to high life and the fine arts. From being first valet de chambre to Louis XV. he became his favourite > and on the death of that monarch, he obtained the place of farmer-general, the duties of which unpopular office he performed with great assiduity, employing his leisure hours in cultivating music and general literature. He became one of the most celebrated composers of songs, and his “Recueil d'airs,” 4 vols. 8vo, ornamented with fine engravings, is in high esteem. He composed also the music of the opera of “Adela de Ponthieu,” which was performed with considerable success. Happening to read in De Bure, that there had been only thirty copies published of the Collection of antient paintings of Rome, coloured after Bartoli’s designs, he made inquiry for the coppers, had them repaired, and published a second edition of that work. His other works are: 1.“Essais sur la Musique ancienne et moderne,” 1780, 4 vols. 4to, a vast mass of useful materials, but many parts of it are written in the spirit of system and partiality, and many valuable passages of considerable length are borrowed from Dr. Burney and other authors of eminence, without any acknowledgment. The best part is that which treats of the French lyric music and poetry. 2. “Essai sur l‘histoire chronologique de plus de quatrevingts peuples de l’antiquité,” 1783, 8vo. 3. “Memoires historiques, de Coucy,” 2 vols. 8vo. 4. “Pieces interessantes pour servir a l'histoire des regnes de Louis XIII. et de Louis XIV.” 12mo. 5. “Lettres sur la Suisse,” 1781, 2 vols. 8vo. 6. “Abregè chronologique des principaux faits arrives depuis Henoch jusqu'a. Jesus Christ,” 1789, 8vo. 7. “Recueil de vers dedies à Adelaide par le plus heureux des epoux,” 16 mo, a tribute to conjugal happiness, so seldom celebrated by poets. La Borde also published a translation of Swinburne’s Travels; a fine edition of the Historical Romances of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, printed by Didot, in 11 vols, 12mo.; “Tableaux topographiques et pittoresques de la Suisse,” with letter-press and beautiful engravings by Robert: and lastly, in 1792, “L'Histoire abregée de la mer du Sud,” 3 vols. 8vo, containing an analysis of all the voyages to that sea from the time of Goneville, in the fifteenth century, to that of our countryman, Capt. Riou, in 1789. In this also he urges the Spaniards to widen the passage of Nicaragua, which is only three leagues, and make it navigable, and a communication between the North and South Seas, pointing out the advantages this would be attended with in voyages from Europe to China. During the Convention, la Borde retired to Rouen where he hoped to be overlooked, but the spies of the reigning tyrants discovered him, and conducted him to Paris, where he was beheaded July 22, 1791. His wife was the authoress of some “Poems” imitated fnjm the English, and printed by Didot in 1785, 18mo.

, regius professor and director of the academy of surgery, veteran associate of the academy of sciences of Paris, and member of the imperial academy of Florence, was born at Paris April 10, 1728. His father, who was also a surgeon, destined him for the same profession, which had long been followed by the branches of his family, but began with giving him the ordinary course of a learned education that he might acquire the languages in which the most celebrated anatomists of former ages wrote, and some of those principles of philosophy which are the foundation of all sciences and arts. Young Bordenave’s proficiency fully answered his father’s expectations, and he soon fdled the distinguished situations already mentioned, and contributed many valuable papers to the Memoirs of the academy of surgery, on extraordinary cases which occurred in his practice: the treatment of gunshot wounds, and anatomical subjects. He also in 1757 made some experiments to illustrate Haller’s opinion on the difference between sensible or irritable parts, and wrote a work in defence of that celebrated anatomist’s opinion on the formation of the bones, against that of Duhamel. He also, in 1768, translated Haller’s Elements of Physiology for the use of his students, but he had previously, in 1756, published a new work on the same subject, admired for precision of method. Bordenave had long wished for a place in the academy of sciences, and in 1774 was elected a veteran associate. This title, it seems, indicates that the party has been chosen contrary to the statutes, and that the academy did not choose him of their own will; but for this he was not to blame, as such an election was totally contrary to his wish. In a short time, however, the academicians were reconciled, and Bordenave enriched their memoirs with some important papers. Bordenave also became echevin, or sheriff, of Paris, an office never before conferred on a surgeon, but. which he filled in a manner highly creditable, and directed his attention, as a magistrate, chiefly to the health of the city. On the birth of Louis XVII. he was honoured with the ribbon of the order of St. Michael, in consideration of his talents and services, but did not long enjoy this honour, being seized with an apoplexy, which after eight days proved fatal, March 12, 1782. Besides the works already noticed, he published, “Dissertations sur les Antiseptiques,” 1769, 8vo; and “Memoires sur le danger des Caustiques pour la cure radicale des Hernies,” 1774.

a French physician of considerable eminence, was born at Iseste, in Beam, in 1693. After being initiated in the study of medicine by his father, he went to Montpellier, where he was admitted doctor in that faculty in 1719. Invited, in 1723, to Pan, the capital of the province, he acquired so much reputation, as to be appointed physician to the military hospital at Bareges, and inspector of the mineral waters there. To the waters he paid great attention, and in 1750, he published a small treatise, shewing the effects he had experienced from them in a variety of diseases. He lived to an advanced age, but the precise time of his death is not known.

, son to the preceding, was born Feb. 22, 1722, at Iseste in the valley of Ossan inBearn, and at the age of twenty, for his degree of bachelor in the university of Montpellier, where he was then a student, he held a thesis “De sensu generice considerate,” which contains the ground-work of all the publications he afterwards gave. Such early knowledge determined his professors to dispense with several acts usual before admission to practice. In> 1743, he was created M. D. at Montpellier, and two years after succeeded his father, as inspector of the mineral waters, and professor of anatomy. In 1747, he was made corresponding member of the royal academy of Sciences at Paris, whither he soon after went, and where he acquired great reputation. Having taken out his licence in that city in 1754, he was appointed physician to the hopital de la charite. He died of an apoplexy, Nov. 24, 1776. A deep melancholy, occasioned by the flying gout, was the fore-runner of his end. He was found dead in his bed. One of the faculty, jealous of his fame, and who had tried to ruin him by a prosecution, said on the occasion: “I should never have thought he would have died in a horizontal position.” But a witty lady retorted by observing “that death was so much afraid of him, that he was obliged to catch him napping.” The facility with which he exercised his profession, his reluctance to give medicines, and his great confidence in nature, sometimes drew upon him the reproach that he had not much faith in medicine; but his doubts were so much the less blameable, as he was continually occupied in rendering the resources of his art more certain. He never disputed at all towards the latter end of his life, because probably he had disputed much to no purpose in his youth. Nobody knew better how to doubt, and he had little confidence in his own knowledge, and trusted with difficulty to that of others. Seeing the great number of courses of lectures in all branches of science, advertised every day, he observed once to a friend: “Will no one ever give a course of good sense?” As he expressed himself at times with rather too much acerbity on the merits of others, some of his professional brethren have called his own into question. His works, however, sufficiently attest his abilities. The principal are, 1. “Chylificationis historia,” 1742, reprinted at Paris, 1752, 12mo. with his “Recherches sur les Glandes.” He thought he observed a duct passing from the thyroid gland to the trachaea; an opinion which he repeats in another of his works, but without sufficient ground. 3. “Dissertatio physiologica de sensu generice considerate,” Monspelii, 1743, 8 vo; Paris, 1751, with his “Chylificationis historia.” 4. “Lettres contenant des essais sur l'histoire des Eaux minerales du Beam, &c. 1746, 12mo.” In these he treats of the properties of the waters, and of the geography of Beam. 5. “Recherches anatomiques sur la position des Glandes, et sur leur actions,” Paris, 1751, 8vo. 6. “Recherches sur le pouls par raport aux crises,” Paris, 1756, 12mo; in which he has gone much beyond Solano in his discrimination of pulses, and beyond what can be followed in practice. 7. “Recherches sur le tissu mnqueux, et l'organecellulaire,” Paris, 1766, 12mo. Haller accuses him of disingenuity in attributing to himself the discovery of some properties of the cellular membrane, which had been before described by him and others, but allows the work to have, on the whole, considerable merit.

, brother to Theophilus, and educated under his father and him, was born at Pau, in 1737. Having taken his degree of doctor in medicine at Montpellier, in 1756, he returned to Pau, and was appointed to supply the place of his brother, as inspector of the waters there. In 1757, he published “De sensibilitate et contractibilitate partium in corpore humano sano,” Monspell.; and in 1760, “Precis d'observations sur les Eaux de Bareges,” &c. 12mo, collected principally from the works of his father, brother, and other writers on the subject. “Recherches sur les maladies chroniques, leur rapports avec les maladies aigues,” &c. 1775, 8vo; principally with the view of shewing the utility and the manner of administering mineral waters in the cure of chronical complaints.

, an Italian artist, was born at Trevigi, in 1513, and at eight years of age was conducted to Venice, where he was carefully educated by one of his relations. At a proper age he was placed as a disciple with Titian, under whom he made so happy a progress, that he did not continue with him many years; especially as he observed that Titian was not so communicative as he wished, or indeed had just reason to expect, and he lamented that Giorgione was not then alive to instruct him, because he preferred the manner of that master to all others. However, to the utmost of his power, he studied and imitated the style of Giorgione, and very soon rose into such reputation, that he was appointed to paint a picture in the church of St. Nicholas, when he was only eighteen years of age. Some time after he received an invitation to Vincenza, to adorn a gallery with paintings in fresco, part of which had been formerly enriched by the hand of Titian, with a design representing the “Judgment of Solomon.” Bordone engaged in the undertaking with an inward satisfaction, as his work was to be contrasted with the work of his master; and he composed the history of “Noah and his Sons,” which he finished with his utmost care; nor was it esteemed inferior to the work of Titian, both performances seeming to have been the product of one pencil. He likewise finished several considerable works at Venice and Trevigi, and in each city painted many portraits of the nobility and persons of distinction. But, in the year 1538, he entered into the service of Francis I. of France, and added continually to his reputation, by every historical subject and portrait which he finished, as they were excellently designed, and had a charming tone of colour to recommend them. On his quitting France, he visited the principal cities of Italy, and left a number of memorable works, as monuments of his extraordinary abilities. His colouring has all the appearance of nature, nor can any thing be more lively or more admired than the portraits of Bordone. Several of them are still preserved in the Palazzo Pitti, at Florence, of which the colouring is excessively clear, fresh, and truly beautiful. He died in 1588 according to Vasari, but in 1578 according to Felibien and Argenville.

, a French physician, naturalist, and chemist, was born at Castres, in Languedoc, about 1620. After studying medicine, he received his doctor’s degree, as is supposed, in 1641, and began practice at his native place. He collected a very fine museum of natural curiosities, of which he published a catalogue, “Catalogue des Raretes de Pierre Borel de Castres,” ibid. 1645, 4to. Niceron thinks he published this to get a name and practice: it appears, indeed, from the dedication of his “Bibliotheca Chimica,” that he was not rich, as he there complains that he could not afford to print his works. In 1653, he came to Paris, and some time after was appointed physician to the king, but it is thought this was merely an honorary title, and we are not certain whether he remained afterwards at Paris. He was, however, elected in 1674 into the academy of sciences, as a chemist. Niceron says he died in 1689, but a letter addressed to Bayle in 1678 speaks of him as then just dead. He published, 1. “Les Antiquites, Raretes, &c. de la ville et comte de Castres, &c.” Castres, 164y, 8vo. 2. “Historiarum et observationum Medico-Physicarum, centuria prima et secunda,” ibid. 1653, 8ro, and often reprinted. 3. “Bibliotheea chimica, sen catalogus librorum philosophicorum hermeticorum, in quo quatuor millia circiter authovum chemicorum, &c. cum eorum editionibus, usque ad annum 1653 continentur,” Paris, 1654; Heidelberg, 1656, 12mo. In this work he gives the titles of these chemical works, but very rarely the dates. 4. “De vero Telescopii Inventore, cum brevi omnium conspicillorum historia,” &c. Hague, 1655, 4to. 5. “Tresor des Recherches et Antiquity’s Gauloises, reduites en ordre alphabetique, et enrichies de beaucoup d'origines, epitaphes, et autres choses rares et curieuses, coin me aussi de beaucoup de mots de la langue Thyoise ou Theutfranque,” Paris, 1655, 4tq. This is a very curious and rare work, much prized by the French antiquaries. 6. '“Poeme a, la louange de I'lmprimerie.” 7. “Carmina in laudem regis, reginae, etcardinalis Mazarini,” 4to. 8. “Auctarium ad Vitam Peirescii,” in the Hague edition of that life published in 1655, 4to. 9. “Commentum in antiquum philosophum Syrum,” 1655. 10. “Hortus seu Armamentarium simplicium Plantarum et Animalium ad artem medicam spectantium,” &c. Castres, 1667, 8vo. 11.“De Curationibus Sympatheticis,” printed in the “Theatrum Sympatheticum,” Nurimberg, 1662, 4to. 12. “Discours nouveau, prouvant la Pluralite des Mondes,” Geneva, 8vo, and translated into English by D. Sashott, Lond. 1658. 13. “Vitae Renati Cartesii compendium,” Paris, 1656, 8vo. Borel appears to have been a man of great learning, and indefatigable in his researches, but in medicine somewhat credulous. His antiquarian productions are most esteemed.

, a celebrated philosopher and mathematician, was born at Naples the 28th of January, 1608. He was professor of philosophy and mathematics in some of the most celebrated universities of Italy, particularly at Florence and Pisa, where he became highly in favour with the princes of the house of Medici. But having been concerned in the revolt of Messina, he was obliged to retire to Rome, where he spent the remainder of his life under the protection of Christina queen of Sweden, who honoured him with her friendship, and by her liberality towards him softened the rigour of his hard fortune. He continued two years in the convent of the regular clergy of St. Pantaleon, called the Pious Schools, where he instructed the youth in mathematical studies. And thi’s study he prosecuted with great diligence for many years afterward, as appears by his correspondence with several ingenious mathematicians of his time, and the frequent mention that has been made of him by others, who have endeavoured to do justice to his memory. He wrote a letter to Mr. John Collins, in which he discovers his great desire and endeavours to promote the improvement of those sciences: he also speaks of his correspondence with, and great affection for, Mr. Henry Oldenburgh, secretary of the royal society; of Dr. Wallis; of the then late learned Mr. Boyle, and lamented the loss sustained by his death to the commonwealth of learning. Mr. Baxter, in his “Enquiry into the Nature of the Human Soul 3” makes frequent use of our author’s book “De Motu Animalium,” and tells us, that he was the first who discovered that the force exerted within the body prodigiously exceeds the weight to be moved without, or that nature employs an immense power to move a small weight. But he acknowledges that Dr. James Keil had shewn that Borelli was mistaken in his calculation of the force of the muscle of the heart; but that he nevertheless ranks him with the most authentic writers, and says he is seldom mistaken: and, having remarked that it is so far from being true, that great things are brought about by small powers, on the contrary, a stupendous power is manifest in the most ordinary operations of nature, he observes that the ingenious Borelli first remarked this in animal motion; and that Dr. Stephen Hales, by a course of experiments in his “Vegetable Statics,” had shewn the same in the force of the ascending sap in vegetables. After a course of unceasing labours, Borelli died at Pantaleon of a pleurisy, the 31st of December 1679, at 72 years of age, leaving the following works: 1. “Delle cagioni dellefebri maligni,” 1649, 12mo. 2. “Euclides restitutus,” &c. Pisa, 1658, 4to. 3. “Apollonii Pergaei conicorum, libri v. vi. & vii. paraphraste Abalphato Aspahanensi nunc primum editi,” &c. Floren. 1661, fol. 4. “Theoriæ Medicorum Planetarum ex causis physicis deductae,” Flor. 1666, 4to. 5. “De Vi Percussionis,” Bologna, 1667, 4to. This piece was reprinted, with his famous treatise “De Motu Animalium,” and that “De Motionibus Naturalibus,” in 1686. 6. “Osservazione intorno alia virtu ineguali degli occhi.” This piece was inserted in the Journal of Rome for the year 1669. 7. “De motionibus naturalibus e gravitate pemlentibus,” Regio Julio, 1670, 4to. 8. “Meteorologia Ætnea,” &c. Regio Julio, 1670, 4to. 9. “Osservazione dell' ecclissi lunare, fatta in Roma,” 1675. Inserted in the Journal of Rome, 1675, p. 34. 10. “Elementaconica Apollonii Pergoei et Archimedis opera nova et breviori methodo demonstrata,” Rome, 1679, 12mo, at the end of the 3d edition, of his Euclides restitutus. 11. “De Motu Animaiium: pars prima, et pars altera,” Romae, 1681, 4to. This was reprinted at Leyden, revised and corrected; to which was added John Bernouilli’s mathematical meditations concerning the motion of the muscles. “12. At Leyden, 1686, in 4to, a more correct and accurate edition, revised by J. Broen, M. D. of Leyden, of his two pieces” De vi percussionis, et de motionibus de gravitate pendentibus,“&c. 13.” De renum usu judicium:“this had been published with Bellini’s book” De structura renum," at Strasburgh, 1664, 8vo.

, D. D. a pious and learned divine of the seventeenth century, and brother to sir William Boreman, clerk of the green cloth to Charles II. was fellow of Trinity college, Cambridge, S. T. P. per literas regias, 1661, and afterwards rector of St. Giles’s in the Fields, London. He died in November, 1675, at Greenwich, where he was buried. He published, I. “The Churchman’s Catechism: or the Church’s plea for Tithes,” Lond. 1651, 4to. 2. “The Triumphs of learning over ignorance, and of truth over falsehood; being an answer to four queries, first, whether there be any need of universities,” &c. ibid. 1653, 4to. 3. “A Panegyrick and Sermon at the funeral of Dr. Comber, master of Trinity college, and dean of Carlisle,” 1654, 4to. 4. “Life and death of Freeman Sonds, esq.” and “Relation of sir George Sonds’ narrative of the passages on the death of his two sons,” ibid. 4to. This Freeman Sonds was executed for the murder of his brother. 5. “Life and death of Alice dutchess Dudley,” ibid. 1669, 4to; and two or three occasional sermons.

, was born at Florence in 1515 of a noble family, and became a Benedictine monk in 1531. He was one of the persons appointed to correct the Decameron of Boccace, by order of the council of Trent, and performed this curious task for the edition of Florence, 1573, 8vo. But the best known of his works, and which did him the most honour, is that entitled, “Discovsi di M. Vincenzo Borghini,” printed at Florence 1584 and 1585, in 2 vols. 4to, and reprinted at the same place in 1755, with annotations. In these dissertations he treats of the origin of Florence, and of several interesting particulars of its history, of its families, of its coins, &c. Borghini died in 1680, after having refused, through humility, the archbishopric of Pisa, which was offered to him some time before his death. His only promotion was that of prior of the hospital of St. Maria degh Innocenti in Florence. Another writer of the same name [IlAFAELLO Borghini], was author of several comedies, and of a tract on painting and sculpture, in some estimation, under the title of “Riposo della Pittura, e della Scukura,” published at Florence in 1584, 8vo.

, a monster of ambition and cruelty, was a natural son of pope Alexander VI. What year he was born in, we do not find: but he was at his studies in the university of Pisa, when Alexander was elected pope, in August 1492. Upon the news of his father’s advancement, he banished all thoughts of his former private condition of life; and, full of ambition, as if himself was to be made emperor of the world, he hastened directly to Rome, where Alexander received him with formality and coldness, but whether it was real or but affected, is not easy to determine. Cscsar, however, took it to be real; and, greatly disgusted as well as disappointed, went immediately and complained to his mother Vanozza, who bid him not be cast down; and told him, that she knew the pope’s mind better than any body, and for what reasons his holiness had given him that reception. In the mean time the courtflatterers solicited the pope to make Cæsar a cardinal, which he absolutely refused; but, that he might not seem altogether forgetful of him, he created him archbishop of Valenza, a benefice which his holiness had enjoyed in his younger days. This preferment was by no means acceptable to Cæsar, yet he affected to be content, since the pope, he found, Was determined to confer the best of his secular dignities on his eldest son Francis, who at that time was made duke of Gandia by Fertlinand king of Castile and Arragon.

Alexander VI. had five children by his mistress Vanozza; Francis and Cæsar, already mentioned, two other sons, and a daughter named Lucretia. Francis was a gentleman of good disposition and probity, and in every respect opposite to his brother Cæsar; but Cæsar seems to have possessed abilities superior to those of Francis: which made a certain historian say, “that Cæsar was great among the wicked, and Francis good among the great.” Cæsar however was the mother’s favourite, as having a temper and principles more conformable to hers: for which reason, at the time when Alexander was undetermined on which of these brothers he should bestow the cardinal’s cap, Vanozza declared herself in favour of Cæsar, who was accordingly made a cardinal in the second year of Alexander’s pontificate. From this time he acted in concert with his father, and was an useful instrument in executing all the schemes of that wicked pope, as he had no scruples of honour or humanity, nor was there any thing too atrocious for him to perpetrate, to promote his insatiable ambition. This is said to have even incited him to the murder of his elder brother Francis, duke of Gandia. All the secular dignities, which then were much more coveted than the ecclesiastical, were heaped upon Francis, which obstructed Cæsar’s projects so entirely, that he was resolved at all adventures to remove him. TJjfle story is, that in 1497, hiring assassins, he caused him to be murdered, and thrown into the Tiber; where his body was found some days after, full of wounds and extremely mangled. The pope was afflicted to the last degree; for though he made use of Cæsar as the abler, he loved Francis as the better man. He caused therefore strict inquiry to be made after the murderers; upon which Vanozza, who for that and other reasons was justly suspected to be privy to the affair, went privately to the pope, and used all the arguments she could, to dissuade him from searching any further. Some say, that she went so far as to assure his holiness, that if he did not desist, the same person who took away his son’s life would not spare his own. The whole of this story, however, appears doubtful; nor, indeed, is there any positive proof that Borgia was even privy to his brother’s death. Gordon, only, has asserted it with accompanying proofs, but the latter -appear to be historic fictions. It cannot be necessary to add to Cesar’s crimes. He now, however, succeeded to his brother’s fortunes and honours, began to be tired of ecclesiastical matters, and grew quite sick of the cardinalate, and therefore determined to throw it off as soon as possible, that he might have the greater scope for practising the excesses, to which his natural ambition and cruelty prompted him: for cruel as well as ambitious he was in the highest degree. Numbers he caused to be taken off by poison or the sword; and it is recorded, that assassins were constantly kept in pay by him at Rome, for the sake of removing all who were either obnoxious or inconvenient to him. Getting rid of the cardinalate, he was soon after made duke of Valentinois by Lewis XII. of France: with whom he entered into a league for the conquest of the Milanese. From this time he experienced various turns of fortune, being sometimes prosperous, sometimes unfortunate. He very narrowly escaped dying of poison in 1503; for, having con-, certed with the pope a design of poisoning nine newly created cardinals at once (or, as some say, only one cardinal), in order to possess their effects, the poisoned wine destined for the purpose was by mistake brought to themselves and drank. The pope died of it; but Cæsar, by the vigour of his youth, and the force of antidotes, after many struggles, recovered. He only recovered, however, to outlive his fortune and grandeur, to see himself depressed, and his enemies exalted; for he was soon after divested of all his acquisitions, and sent a prisoner to Spain, in order to free Italy from an incendiary, and the Italian princes from those dangers which his turbulent and restless spirit made them fear, even though he was unarmed. From Spain he escaped to Navarre to king John his brother-in-law, where he met with a very friendly reception. From hence he designed to go into France; and there, with the assistance of Lewis, to try if he could once more re-establish his fortune, but Lewis refused to receive him, not only because he and Spain had concluded a truce, but because they were also at enmity with the king of Navarre. The French king also, in order to gratify Spain, had confiscated Cæsar’s duchy of Valentinois, and taken away the yearly pension which he had from France. So that this fallen tyrant, in a poor and abandoned condition, without revenue or territory, was forced to be dependent upon his brother-in-law, who was then at war with his subjects. Borgia served as a volunteer in that war; and, while the armies were engaged in battle, and fighting under the walls of Viana, was wounded, and died in consequence, March 12, 1507. On his death-bed he is said to have exclaimed, “I had provided in the course of my life for every thing but death; and now, alas! I am to die, though completely unprepared for it.” Cæsar Borgia took these words for his device, “Aut Cæsar aut nihil;” which gave occasion to the following epigrams:

“Of this extraordinary character,” says Mr. Roscoe, “it may with truth be observed, that his activity, courage, and perseverance, were equal to the greatest attempts. la the pursuit of his object he overlooked or overleaped all other considerations: when force was ineffectual, he had recourse to fraud; and whether he thundered in open hostility at the gates of a city, or endeavoured to effect his purpose by negociation and treachery, he was equally irresistible. If we may confide in the narrative of Guicciardini, cruelty, rapine, injustice, and lust, are the only particular features in the composition of this monster: yet it is diificult to conceive that a man so totally unredeemed by a single virtue, should have been enabled to maintain himself at the head of a powerful army: to engage in so eminent a degree the favour of the people conquered: to form alliances with the first sovereigns of Europe: to destroy or overturn the most powerful families of Italy, and to lay the foundations of a dominion, of which it is acknowledged that the short duration is to be attributed rather to his ill-fortune and the treachery of others, than either to his errors or his crimes. If, however, he has been too indiscriminately condemned by one historian, he has in another met with as zealous and as powerful an encomiast, and the maxims of the politician are only the faithful record of the transactions of his hero. On the principles of Machiavelli, Borgia was the greatest man of the age. Nor was he, in fact, without qualities which in. some degree compensated for his demerits. Courageous, magnificent, eloquent, and accomplished in all the exercises of arts and arms, he raised an admiration of his endowments which kept pace with and counter-balanced the abhorrence excited by his crimes. That even these crimes have been exaggerated, is highly probable. His enemies were numerous, and the certainty of his guilt in some instances gave credibility to every imputation that could be devised against him. That he retained, even after he had survived his prosperity, no inconsiderable share of public estimation, is evident from the fidelity and attachment shewn to him on many occasions. After his death, his memory and achievements were celebrated by (Strozza) one of the most elegant Latin poets that Jtaly has produced. The language of poetry is not indeed always that of truth; but we may at least give credit to the account of the personal accomplishments and warlike talents of Borgia, although we may indignantly reject the spurious praise, which places him among the heroes of antiquity, and at the summit of fame.”

, a learned Roman cardinal, was born of a noble family at Velletri, in 1731; and as the second son of the family, was from his birth destined for the clerical dignities. In youth he appears to have been studious, and particularly attentive to historic and diplomatic science, and modern and ancient languages. In 1770, he was appointed secretary to the congregation of Propaganda, the purposes of which are to furnish missionaries to propagate Christianity, on popish principles; and into this college children are admitted from Asia and Africa, in order to be instructed in religion, and to diffuse itj on their return, through their native countries. A more fit person could not be selected than Borgia, as he had both zeal and learning. In 1771, the abbe Amaduzzi, director of the printing-house of the college, procured the casting of the Malabar types, and published some works in that language, as well as in those of the Indians of Ava and of Pegu. By the care of this new secretary also, an Etruscan alphabet was published, which soon proved of the highest benefit to Passeri: for, by its means, this celebrated antiquary, in the latter part of his life, could better explain than he had ever done some Etruscan monuments of the highest interest. About this time he began to lay the foundation of the family museum at Velletri, which, before 1780, exhibited no less than eighty ancient Egyptian statues in bronze or marble, many Etruscan and Greek idols, numerous coins, inscriptions, &c. To form some idea of the total of this museum, it may be observed that only a small part of it, relative to Arabic antiquity, was the subject of the description which, in 1782, was published under the title of “Musaeum Cusicum.” He had long before this published “Monumento di Giovanni XVI. summo Pontifice illustrate,” Rome, 1750, 8vo. “Breve Istoria dell‘ antica citta di Tadino nell’ Umbria, &c.” ibid. 1751, 8vo. “Dissertatione sopra un‘ antica Iscrizione rinuentanelP Isoladi Malta nell’ anno 1749,”Fermo, 1751, and “Dissertatione FUologica sopra un' antica gemma in tagliata.”

In 1788 he published his “Vindication of the rights of the Holy See on the kingdom of Naples,” 4to, a work now of little importance, and relating to a dispute which will probably never be revived. On the 30th of March, 1789, he was promoted to the rank of cardinal, and about the same time was appointed prefect of the congregation of the Index; and, what was more analogous to his pursuits, he held the same office in the Propaganda, and in the congregation for the correction of the books of the oriental churches. After these promotions, he continued to be the liberal patron of all who had any connection either with his offices or with his literary pursuits, until Italy was inTaded by the French, when, like the greater part of his colleagues, he was involved in losses and dangers, both with respect to his fortune and to his pursuits. He forfeited all his benefices, and was near witnessing the destruction of all the establishments committed to his care, especially the Propaganda. He was soon, however, extricated from his personal difficulties; and, by his timely measures, the invaluable literary treasures of the Propaganda were also saved. He was allowed a liberal pension from the court of Denmark, and he soon obtained the removal of the establishment of the Propaganda to Padua, a city which, being then under the dominion of the emperor <?f Germany, was thought to be sheltered from robbery. Here he remained till the death of pope Pius VI. after which he repaired, with his colleagues, to Venice, to attend the conclave; and, a new pope being elected, he returned to Rome. When the coronation of the emperor of France was ordered, cardinal Borgia was one of those individuals who were selected by the pope as the companions of his intended journey to Paris, but having caught a, violent cold on his way, he died at Lyons, Nov. 23, 1804. Cardinal Stephen Borgia was not much favoured by nature with respect to person. He was so clumsy, and his motions so much embarrassed, as to have little of the appearance of a person of birth and rank. He was far, also, from being nice in his house or equipage. These little defects, however, were compensated by the superior qualities of his mind. From, the time of Alexander Albani, no Roman cardinal had so many distinguished connections and correspondents in every part of Europe: and a great similarity (elegance of manners excepted) was remarked between the character of that illustrious prelate and his own. The Borgian ms. so called by Michaelis, is a fragment of a Coptic-Greek manuscript, brought by a monk from Egypt, consisting of about twelve leaves, and sent to cardinal Borgia. The whole of it is printed in “Georgii Fragmentum Graeco-Copto-Thebaicum,” Rome, 1789, 4to.

, a painter and engraver, was born at Rome, in 1630, and learned design from Giulio Borgianni his brother; but improved himself by studying the capital performances of the ancient and modern artists, which he was enabled to contemplate every day in his native city. Having had an offer from a nobleman, of travelling with him in a tour through Europe, he willingly accepted it, from a desire of being acquainted with the different customs and manners of different nations. But his progress was stopped by his falling in love with a young woman in Spain, to whom he was afterwards married; and finding his circumstances reduced to a narrow compass, he applied himself to his profession with double diligence, to procure a comfortable support. His endeavours were soon successful; and he was happy enough to find many friends, admirers, and employers, and was accounted one of the best painters in Spain. After the death of his wife, having then no attachment to that country, he returned to Rome, and painted some historical subjects larger than life; but the figures being above his accustomed size, shewed a want of correctness in several of the, members, which made his pictures not quite acceptable to the refined taste of the Roman school. He was, however, engaged in some great works for the chapels and convents, and also to paint portraits, by which he acquired honour, and lived in affluence. He died in 1681, of a broken heart, in consequence of the ill treatment he received, through the envy and villainy of one Celio, a painter, who proved a most malicious competitor, and to whom he had been often preferred, by the best judges of painting at Rome; but he died lamented and pitied by every worthy man of his profession. As an engraver, he is probably best known to many of our readers, for his engravings of the Bible histories, which were painted by Raphael in the Vatican, commonly called “Raphael’s Bible,” small plates, length-ways, dated 1615, which are very slight, and seem to be the hasty productions of his point. Mr. Strutt says, that his most finished etching is “a dead Christ,” a small square plate, the figure greatly foreshortened, and behind appear the two Mary’s and St. John, who is kissing one of the hands of our Saviour. His etchings are, in general, in a bold, free manner, and more finished than usual, when considered as the works of a painter, but in some the drawing is not correct.

, son of sir John Borlace, master of the ordnance, and one of the lords justices of Ireland, was born in the seventeenth century, and educated at the university of Dublin. Then he travelled to Leyden, where he commenced doctor of physic in 1650, and was afterwards admitted to the same degree at Oxford. At last he settled at Chester, where he practised physic with great reputation and success; and where he died in 1682, Among several books which he wrote and published, are, 1. “Latham Spaw in Lancashire: with some remarkable cases and cures effected by it,” Loud. 1670, 8vo, dedicated to Charles earl of Derby. 2. “The Reduction of Ireland to the Crown of England: with the governors since the conquest by king Henry II. anno 1172, and some passages in their government. A brief account of the rebellion, ann. Dom. 1641. Also the original of the university of Dublin, and the college of physicians,” Lond. 1675, a large octavo. 3. “The History of the execrable Irish Rebellion, traced from many preceding acts to the grand eruption, Oct. 23, 1641; and thence pursued to the act of settlement, 1672,” Lond. 1680, folio. Wood tells us, that much of this book is taken from another, entitled “The Irish Rebellion; or, The History of the beginnings and first progress of the general rebellion raised within the kingdom of Ireland, Oct. 23, 1641,” Lond. 1646, 4to, written by sir John Temple, master of the rolls, one of his majesty’s privy council in Ireland, and father of the celebrated sir William Temple. 4. “Brief Reflections on the earl of Castlehaven’s Memoirs of his engagement and carriage in the War of Ireland. By which the government of that time, and the justice of the crown since, are vindicated from aspersions cast upon both,” Lond. 1682, 8vo.

, a learned English antiquary, was born at Pendeen, in the parish of St. Just, Cornwall, February 2, 1695-6. The family of that name, from which he was descended, had been settled at the place from whence they derived it (Borlase), from the time of king William Rufus. Our author was the second son of John Borlase, esq. of Pendeen, in the parish before mentioned, by Lydia, the youngest daughter of Christopher Harris, esq. of Hayne in the county of Devon; and was put early to school at Penzance, from which he was removed, in. 1709, to the care of the rev. Mr. Bedford, then a learned school-master at Plymouth. Having completed his grammatical education, he was entered of Exeter college, Oxford, in March 1712-13; where, on the 1st of June 1719, he took the degree of master of arts. In the same year, Mr. Borlase was admitted to deacon’s orders, and ordained priest in 1720. On the 22d of. April, 1722, he was instituted, by Dr. Weston, bishop of Exeter, to the rectory of Ludgvan in Cornwall, to which he had been presented by Charles Duke of Bolton . On the 28th of July, 1724, he was married in the church of Illuggan, by his elder brother, Dr. Borlase of Castlehorneck, to Anne, eldest surviving daughter and coheir of William Smith, M. A. rector of the parishes of Camborn and Illuggan. In 1732, the lord chancellor King, by the recommendation of sir William Morice, bart. presented Mr. Borlase to the vicarage of St. Just, his native parish, and where his father had a considerable property. This vicarage and the rectory of Ludgvan were the only preferments he ever received.

When Mr. Borlase was fixed at Ludgvan, which was a retired, but delightful situation, he soon recommended himself as a pastor, a gentleman, and a man of learning. The duties of his profession he discharged with the most rigid punctuality and exemplary dignity. He was esteemed and respected by the principal gentry of Cornwall, and lived on the most friendly and social terms with those of his neighbourhood. In the pursuit of general knowledge he was active and vigorous; and his mind being of an inquisitive turn, he could not survey with inattention or indifference the peculiar objects which his situation pointed to his view. There were in the parish of Ludgvan rich copper works, belonging to the late earl of Godolphin. These abounded with mineral and metallic fossils, which Mr. Borlase collected from time to time; and his collection increasing by degrees, he was encouraged to study at large the natural history of his native county. While he was engaged in this design, he could not avoid being struck with the numerous m'onuments of remote antiquity that are to be met with in several parts of Cornwall; and which had hitherto been passed over with far less examination than they deserved. Enlarging, therefore, his plan, he determined to gain as accurate an acquaintance as possible with the Druid learning, and with the religion and customs of the ancient Britons, before their conversion to Christianity. To this undertaking he was encouraged by several gentlemen of his neighbourhood, who were men of literature and lovers of British antiquities; and particularly by sir John St. Aubyn, ancestor of the present baronet of that family, and the late rev. Edward Collins, vicar of St. Earth. In the year 1748, Mr. Borlase, happening to attend the ordination of his eldest son at Exeter, commenced an acquaintance with the Rev. Dr. Charles Lyttelton, late bishop of Carlisle, then come to be installed into the deanry, and the Rev. Dr. Milles, the late dean, two eminent antiquaries, who, in succession, have so ably presided over the society of antiquaries in London. Our author’s correspondence with these gentlemen was a great encouragement to the prosecution of his studies; and he has acknowledged his obligations to them, in several parts of his works. In 1750, being at London, he was admitted a fellow of the royal society, into which he had been chosen the year before, after having communicated an ingenious Essay on the Cornish Crystals. Mr. Borlase having completed, in 1753, his manuscript of the Antiof Cornwall, carried it to Oxford, where he finished the whole impression, in folio, in the February following. A second edition of it, in the same form, was published at London, in 1769. Our author’s next publication was, “Observations on the ancient and present state of the Islands of Scilly, and their importance to the trade of Great Britain, in a letter to the reverend Charles Lyttelton, LL. D. dean of Exeter, and F. R. S.” This work, which was printed likewise at Oxford, and appeared in 1756, in quarto, was an extension of a paper that had been read before the royal society, on the 8th of February 1753, entitled, “An Account of the great Alterations which the Islands of Scilly have undergone, since the time of the ancients, who mention them, as to their number, extent, and position.” It was at the request of Dr. Lyttelton, that this account was enlarged into a distinct treatise. In 1757, Mr. Borlase again employed the Oxford press, in printing his “Natural History of Cornwall,” for which he had been many years making collections, and which was published in April 1758. After this, he sent a variety of fossils, and remains of antiquity, which he 'had described in his works, to be placed in the Ashmolean museum; and to the same repository he continued to send every thing curious which fell into his hands. For these benefactions he received the thanks of the university, in a letter from the vice-chancellor, dated November 18, 1758; and in March, 1766, that learned body conferred on him the degree of doctor of laws, by diploma, the highest academical honour.

Though Dr. Borlase, when he had completed his three principal works, was become more than sixty years of age, he continued to exert his usual diligence and vigour in quiet attention to his pastoral duty, and the study of the Scriptures. In the course of this study, he drew up paraphrases on the books of Job, and the books of Solomon, and wrote some other pieces of a religious kind, rather, however, for his private improvement, than with a view to publication. His amusements abroad were, to superintend the care of his parish, and particularly the forming and reforming of its roads, which were more numerous than in any parish of Cornwall. His amusements at home were the belles lettres, and especially painting; and the correction and enlargement of his “Antiquities of Cornwall,” for a second edition, engaged some part of his time; and when this business was completed, he applied his attention to a minute revision of nis “Natural History.” Alter this, he prepared for the press a treatise he had composed some years before, concerning the Creation and Deluge. But a violent illness, in January 1771, and the apprehensions of entangling himself in so long and close an attention as the correcting of the sheets, solely, and at such a distance from London, would require, induced him to drop his design, and to recal the manuscript from his bookseller, when only a few pages of it had been printed. From the time of his illness, he began sensibly to decline, the infirmities of old age came fast upon him; and it was visible to all his friends that his dissolution was approaching. This expected event happened on the 3 1st of August, 1772, in the 77th year of his age, when he was lamented as a kind father, an affectionate brother, a sincere friend, an instructive pastor, and a man of erudition. He was buried within'the communion rails in Ludgvan church, by the side of Mrs. Borlase, who had been dead above three years.

The Doctor had by his lady six sons, two of whom alone survived him, the rev. Mr. John Borlase, and the rev. Mr. George Borlase, who was Casuistical Professor and Registrar of the university of Cambridge, and died in 1809.

Besides Dr. Borlase’s literary connections with Dr. Lyttelton and Dr. Milles, before mentioned, he corresponded with most of the ingenious men of his time. He had a particular intercourse of this kind with Mr. Pope; and there is still existing a large collection of letters, written by that celebrated poet to our author. He furnished Mr. Pope with the greatest part of the materials for forming his grotto at Twickenham, consisting of such curious fossils as the county of Cornwall abounds with: and there might have been seen, before the destruction of that curiosity, Dr. Borlase’s name in capitals, composed of crystals, in the grotto. On. this occasion a very handsome letter was written to the Doctor by Mr. Pope, in which he says, “I am much obliged to you for your valuable collection of Cornish diamonds. I have placed them where they may best represent yourself, in a shade, but shining;” alluding to the obscurity of Dr. Borlase’s situation, and the brilliancy of his talents. The papers which he communicated at different times to the Royal Society are numerous and curious.

, Baron, an eminent mineralogist, was born of a noble family at Carlsburg, in Transylvania, Dec. 26, 1742. He came early in life to Vienna, and studied under the Jesuits, who, perceiving his abilities, prevailed on him to enter into their society, but he remained a member only about a year and a half. He then went to Prague, where, as it is the custom in Germany, he studied law, and having completed his course, made a tour through a part of Germany, Holland, the Netherlands, and France, and returning to Prague, he engaged in the studies of natural history, mining, and their connected branches, and in, 1770, he was received into the department of the mines and mint at Prague. The same year he visited the principal mines of Hungary and Transylvania, and during this tour kept up a correspondence with the celebrated Ferber, who, in 1774, published his letters. It was in this town, also that he so nearly lost his life, and where he was struck with the disease which embittered the rest of his days. It appears from his eighteenth letter to Mr. Ferber that, when at Felso-Banya, he descended into a mine, where fire was used to detach the ore, to observe the efficacy of this means, but too soon after the fire had been extinguished, and while the mine was full of arsenical vapours raised by the heat. How greatly he suffered in his health by this accident appears from his letter, in which he complained that he could hardly bear the motion of his carriage. After this he was appointed at Prague counsellor of the mines. In 1771, he published a small work of the Jesuit Poda, on the machinery used about mines, and the next year his “Lithophylacium Borneanum,” a catalogue of that collection of fossils, which he afterward disposed of to the lion. Mr. Greville. This work drew on him the attention of mineralogists, and brought him into correspondence with the first men in that study. He was now made a member of the royal societies of Stockholm, Sienna, and Padua; and in 1774, the same honour was conferred on him by the royal society of London.

During his residence in Bohemia, his active disposition induced him to seek for opportunities of extending knowledge, and of being useful to the world. He took a part in the work, entitled “Portraits of the learned men and artists of Bohemia and Moravia.” He was likewise concerned in the “Literary transactions, or Acta Litteraria, of Bohemia and Moravia,” and the editor of the latter pubr licly acknowledges in the preface, how much Bohemian literature is indebted to him. Prague and Vienna were both without a public cabinet for the use of the students: it was at his instigation that government was induced tq form one, which he assisted by his contributions and his labours. In 1775, he laid the foundation of a literary society, which published several volumes under the title of “Memoirs of a private Society in Bohemia.” His fame reaching the empress Mary Theresa, in 1776, she called him to Vienna to arrange and describe the Imperial collection, and about two years after, he published the splendid work containing the Conchology: in the execution of which he had some assistance. The empress defrayed the expences for a certain number of copies. On the death of this patron the work was discontinued, her successor, the femperor Joseph, not favouring the undertaking. He had likewise the honour of instructing the arch-duchess Maria Anna in natural history, who was partial to this entertaining study; and he formed and arranged for her a neat museum. In 1779, he was raised to the office of actual counsellor of the court-chamber, in the department of the tnines and mint. This office detained him constantly in Vienna, and engaged the chief part of his time.

The consequences of his misfortune at Felso-Banya began now to be felt in the severest manner; he was attacked with the most excruciating cholics, which often threatened a speedy termination of his life and miseries. In this depth of torment, he had recourse to opium, and a large portion of this being placed by his side, which he was ordered only to take in small doses, on one occasion, through the intensity of his pain, he swallowed the whole, which brought on a lethargy, of four and twenty hours; but when he awoke he was free of his pains. The disorder now attacked his legs and feet, particularly his right leg, and in this he was lame for the rest of his life, and sometimes the lameness was accompanied by pain. But his feet by degrees withered, and he was obliged to sit, or lie, or lean upon a sopha; though sometimes he was so well as to be able to sit upon a stool, but not to move from one room to the other without assistance.

His free and active genius led him to interest himself in all the occurrences of the times, and to take an active part in all the institutions and plans which professed to enlighten and reform mankind. With these benevolent intentions he formed connexions with the free-masons, whose views in this part of the world occasioned the laws and regulations made against masonry by the emperor Joseph. Under Theresa, this order was obliged to keep itself very secret in Austria; but Joseph, on his coming to the throne, tolerated it, and the baron founded in the Austrian metropolis, a lodge called the “True Concord,” a society of learned men, whose lodge was a place of rendezvous for the literati of the capital. The obstacles these gentlemen found, to the progress of science and useful knowledge, had the tendency to draw their attention to political subjects; and subjects were really discussed here which the church had forbidden to be spoken of, and to which the government was equally averse. At their meetings, dissertations on some subject of history, ethics, or moral philosophy, were read by the members; and commonly something on the history of ancient and modern mysteries and secret societies. These were afterward published in the Diary for Free-masons, for the use of the initiated, and not for public sale. In the winter they met occasionally, and held more public discourses, to which the members of the other lodges were allowed access. Aa most of the learned of Vienna belonged to this lodge, it was very natural to suppose, that many of the dissertations read here, were not quite within the limits of the original plan of the society. It was these dissertations which gave rise to another periodical work, which was continued for some time by the baron, and his brother masons. He was, likewise active in extirpating what he reckoned superstitions of various kinds, which had crept into the other lodges, and equally zealous in giving to these societies such an organization, as might render them useful to the public.

The baron, and many others of his lodge, belonged to the society of the illuminated. This, says his biographer, was no dishonour to him: the views of this order, at least at first, seem to have been commendable; they were the improvement of mankind, not the destruction of society. Such institutions are only useful or dangerous, and to be approved of or condemned, according to the state of society; and this was before the French revolution, and in a country less enlightened than almost any other part of Germany. But this was before the French revolution as a cause is before its effect, and there can be no doubt that much of the misery inflicted on Europe is to be traced to these societies. So zealous, however, was the baron in favour of the illuminati, that when the elector of Bavaria ordered all those in his service to quit this order, he was so displeased that he returned the academy of Munich the diploma they had sent him on their receiving him among them, publicly avowed his attachment to the order, and thought it proper to break off all further connexion with Bavaria, as a member of its literary society. The freemasons did not lung retain the patronage of their sovereign: the emperor Joseph soon became jealous of their influence, and put them under such restrictions, and clogged them with such incumbrances, as to amount almost to a prohibition; and the society found it necessary to dissolve.

What raised the baron more justly high in the public opinion, was his knowledge of mineralogy, and his successful experiments in metallurgy, and principally in the progress of amalgamation. The use of quick-silver in extracting the noble metals from their ores, was not a discovery of the baron’s, nor of the century in which he lived; yet he extended so far its application in metallurgy as to form a brilliant epoch in this most important art. After he had at great expence made many private experiments, and was convinced of the utility of his method, he laid before the emperor an account of his discovery, who gave orders that a decisive experiment on a large quantity of ore should be made at Schemnitz, in Hungary, in the presence of Charpentier from Saxony, Ferber from Russia, Elhujar from Spain, Poda, and other celebrated chemists, which met with universal approbation, and established the utility of his discovery. In 1786, Born published, at the desire of the emperor, his treatise on Amalgamation; and in the following year, a farther account of it was published by his friend Ferber. As a considerable saving in wood, time, and labour, attended his process, the emperor gave orders that it should be employed in the Hungarian mines; and as a recompence to the inventor, a third of the sum that should be saved by adopting his method was granted to him for ten years, and for ten years more the interest of that sum. Such, however, was the hospitality of Born, and his readiness to admit and entertain all travellers, and to patronize distressed talents of every kind, that his expences exceeded his income, and he was at last reduced to a state of insolvency. Amidst all his bodily infirmities and pecuniary embarrassments, and notwithstanding the variety of his official avocations, he was indefatigable in his literary pursuits; and in 1790, he published in two volumes, a “Catalogue methodique raisonné,” of Miss Raab’s collection of fossils, which is regarded as a classical work on that subject. He employed himself also in bleaching wax by a new chemical process, and in boiling salt with half the wood commonly used for that purpose. Whilst he was engaged in writing the “Fasti Leopoldini,” or a history of the reign of Leopold II. in classical Latin, and a work on Mineralogy, his disease rapidly advanced, and being attended with violent spasms, terminated his life on the 28th of August, 1791. His treatise on Amalgamation was translated into English, and published by R. E. Raspe, Lond. 1791, 4to, and his travels through the Bannat of Temeswar, &c. were published in 1787.

, a famous chemist, quack, and heretic, was a Milanese, and born in the beginning of the seventeenth century. He finished his studies in the seminary at Rome, where the Jesuits admired him as a prodigy for his parts and memory. He applied himself to chemistry, and made some discoveries; but, plunging himself into the most extravagant debaucheries, was obliged at last, in 1654, to take refuge in a church. He then set up for a pietist; and, affecting an appearance of great zeal, lamented the corruption of manners which prevailed at Rome, saying, that the distemper was come to the height, and that the time of recovery drew near: a happy time, wherein there would be but one sheepfold on the earth, whereof the pope was to be the only shepherd. “Whosoever shall refuse, said he, to enter into that sheepfold, shall be destroyed by the pope’s armies. God has predestinated me to be the general of those armies: I am sure, that they shall want nothing. I shall quickly finish my chemical labours by the happy production of the philosopher’s stone; and by that means I sball have as much gold as is necessary for the business. I am sure of the assistance of the angels, and particularly of that of Michael the archangel. When I began to walk in the spiritual life, I had a vision in the night, attended with an angelical voice, which assured me, that I should become a prophet. The sign that was given me for it was a palm, that seemed to me surrounded with the light of paradise.”

He communicated to his confidants, in this manner, the revelations which he boasted to have received: but after the death of Innocent X. finding that the new pope Alexander XII. renewed the tribunals, he despaired of succeeding, left Rome, and returned to Milan. There too he acted the devotee, and gained credit with several people, whom he caused to perform certain exercises, which carried a wonderful appearance of piety. He engaged the members of his new congregation, to take an oath of secrecy to him; and when he found them confirmed in the belief of his extraordinary mission, he prescribed to them certain vows, one of which was that of poverty; for the performance of which he very ingeniously caused all the money that every one had to be consigned to himself. The design of this crafty impostor was, in case he could get a sufficient number of followers, to appear in the great square of Milan; there to represent the abuses of the ecclesiastical and secular government; to encourage the people to liberty; and then, possessing himself of the city and country of Milan, to pursue his conquests. But his design miscarried, in consequence of the imprisonment of some of his disciples; and as soon as he saw that first step of the inquisition, he fled, on which they proceeded against him for contumacy in 1659 and 1660; and he was condemned as an heretic, and burnt in effigy, with his writings, in the field of Flora at Rome, on the 3d of January 1661. He is reported to have said, that he never was so cold in his life as on the day that he was burnt at Rome: a piece of wit, however, which has been ascribed to several others. He had dictated a treatise on his system to his followers: but took it from them as soon as he perceived the motions of the inquisition, and hid all his papers in a nunnery, from which they fell into the hands of the inquisition, and were found to contain doctrines very absurd and very impious.

Borri staid some time in the city of Strasburgh, to which he had fled; and where he found some assistance and support, as well because he was persecuted by the inquisition, as because he was reputed a great chemist. But this was not a theatre large enough for Borri: he went therefore to Amsterdam, where he appeared in a stately and splendid equipage, and took upon him the title of Excellency: people flocked to him, as to the physician who could cure all diseases; and proposals were concerted for marrying him to great fortunes, &c. But his reputation began to sink, as his impostures became better understood, and he fled in the night from Amsterdam, with a great many jewels and sums of money, which he had pilfered. He then went to Hamburgh, where queen Christina was, and put himself under her protection: persuading her to venture a great sum of money, in order to find out the philosopher’s stone. Afterwards he went to Copenhagen, and inspired his Danish majesty to search for the same secret; by which means he acquired that prince’s favour so far, as to become very odious to all the great persons of the kingdom. Immediately after the death of the king, whom he had cheated out of large sums of money, he left Denmark for fear of being imprisoned, and resolved to go into Turkey. Being come to the frontiers at a time when the conspiracy of Nadasti, Serini, and Frangipani, was discovered, he was secured, and his name sent to his Imperial majesty, to see if he was one of the conspirators. The pope’s nuncio, who happened to be present, as soon as he heard Borri mentioned, demanded, in the pope’s name, that the prisoner should be delivered to him. The emperor consented to it, and ordered that Borri should be sent to Vienna; and afterwards, having first obtained from the pope a promise that he should not be put to death, he sent him to Rome; where he was tried, and condemned to perpetual confinement in the prison of the inquisition. He made abjuration of his errors in the month of October, 1672. Some years after he obtained leave to attend the duke d‘Estree, whom all the physicians had given over; and the unexpected cure he wrought upon him occasioned it to be said, that an arch-heretic had done a great miracle in Rome. It is said also, that the queen of Sweden sent for him sometimes in a coach; but that, after the death of that princess, he went no more abroad, and that none could speak with him without special leave from the pope. The Utrecht gazette, as Mr. Bayle relates, of the 9th of September, 1695, informed the public, that Borri was lately dead in the castle of St. Arigelo, being 79 years of age. It seems that the duke d’ Estre*e, as a recompence for recovering him, had procured Borri’s prisou to be changed, from that of the inquisition to the castle of St. Angelo.

Some pieces were printed at Geneva in 1681, which are ascribed to him; as, 1. “Letters concerning Chemistry;” and 2. “Political reflections.” The first of these works is entitled, “La chiave del gabinetto;” the second, “Istruzioni politichi.” We learn from the life of Borri, that when he was at Strasburg, he published a letter, which went all over the world. Two other of his letters are said to have been printed at Copenhagen in 1699, and inscribed to Bartholinus; one of them, “De ortu cerebri, et usu medico;” the other, “De artificio oculorum humores restituendi.” The Journal des Savans, of the 2d of September, 1669, speaks fully of these two letters. Konig ascribes also another piece to him, entitled, “Notitia gentis Burrhorum.” Sorbiere saw Borri at Amsterdam, and has left us a description and character of him. He says, that “he was a tall black man, well shaped, who wore good clothes, and spent a good deal of money: that he did not want parts, and had some learning, was without doubt somewhat skilled in chemical preparations, had some knowledge in metals, some methods of imitating pearls or jewels, and some purgative and stomachic remedies: but that he was a quack, an artful impostor, who practised upon the credulity of those whom he stood most in need of; of merchants, as well as princes, whom he deluded out of great sums of money, under a pretence of discovering the philosopher’s stone, and other secrets of equal importance: and that, the better to carry on this scheme of knavery, he had assumed the mask of religion.”

, or Borch, a very learned physician, son of a Lutheran minister in Denmark, was born 1626, and sent to the university of Copenhagen in 1644, where he remained six years, during which time he applied himself chierly to physic. He taught publicly in his college, and Acquired the character of a man indefatigable in labour, and of excellent morals. He gained the esteem of Caspar Brochman, bishop of Zealand, and of the chancellor of the kingdom, by the recommendation of whom he obtained the canonry of Lunden. He was offered the rectorship of the famous school of Heslow, but refused it, having formed a design of travelling and perfecting his studies in physic. He began to practise as a physician during a most terrible plague in Denmark, and the contagion being ceased, he prepared for travelling as he intended; but was obliged to defer it for some time, Mr. Gerstorf, the first minister of state, having insisted on his residing in his house in the quality of tutor to his children. He continued in this capacity five years, and then set out upon his travels; but before his departure, he was appointed professor in poetry, chemistry, and botany. He left Copenhagen in November 1660, and, after having visited several eminent physicians at Hamburgh, went to Holland, the Low Countries, to England, and to Paris, where he remained two years. He visited also several other cities of France, and at Angers had a doctor’s degree in physic conferred upon him. He afterwards passed the Alps, and arrived at Rome in October 1665, where he remained till March 1666, when he was obliged to set out for Denmark, where he arrived in October 1666. The advantages which Borrichius reaped in his travels were very considerable, for he had made himself acquainted with all the learned men in the different cities through which he passed. At his return to Denmark he resumed his professorship, in the discharge of which he acquired great reputation for his assiduity and universal learning. He was made counsellor in the supreme council of justice in 1686, and counsellor of the royal chancery in 1689. This same year he had a severe attack of 'the stone, and the pain every day increasing, he wss obliged to be cut for it; the operation however did not succeed, the stone being so big that it could not be extracted. He bore this affliction with great constancy and resolution till his death, which happened in October 1690.

Borrichius died rich, and made a most liberal use of his money. After satisfying his relations (who were all collateral, as he had no family) with bequests to the amount of fifty thousand crowns, he left twenty-six thousand crowns to found a college for poor students, consisting of a house, completely furnished for sixteen students, with library, chemical laboratory, garden, &c. to be called the Medicean college. His principal medical productions consist of observations published in the Acta Haffniensia, and other similar collections, and of the letters sent by him while on his travels, to F. Bartholine, under whom he had been educated. The letters are the most valuable of those published by Bartholine in his “Epistolas Medicse;” but the works by which he acquired his principal celebrity, were “De ortu et progressu Chemise,” published in 1668, 4to; and his “Hermetis Ægyptiorum et Chemicorum sapientia, ab H. Conringio vindicata,” 1674. In this very learned and elaborate work, the author defends the character of the ancient Egyptians against the strictures of Conringius: attributing to them the invention and perfection of chemistry, and even of alchemy; persuading himself that among their secrets they possessed the art of transmuting metals. But either from infatuation, or a desire of victory, he cites several manuscripts, since known to be spurious, as genuine, and some written since the time of our Saviour, as of much higher antiquity. He shews, however, from undoubted authority, that the Egyptians were early acquainted with the medical properties of several of their plants; that they used saline, and even mineral preparations, some of them prepared by chemistry; that incubation, or the method of hatching eggs by artificial beat, was first used by them; in fine, that the art of medicine, invented by them, passed from them to the Grecians. Borrichius was also author of “Conspectus prcestantiorum scriptorum linguæ Latinæ;” 1698, 4to; “Cogitationes de variis linguae Latinas cetatibus,” 1675, 4to; “Analecta philologica, et judicium de lexicis Latinis Graecisque,” 1682, 4to; and various other philological works.

, an eminent Romish saint and cardinal, was born the 2d of October 1538, of a good family, in the castle of Arona, upon lake Major in the Milanese. He addicted himself at an early period to retirement and study. His maternal uncle, Pius IV. sent for him to the court of Rome, made him cardinal in 1560, and afterwards archbishop of Milan. Charles was then but 22 years of age, but conducted the affairs of the church with disinterested zeal and prudence. The Romans were at that time ignorant and lazy: he therefore formed an academy composed of ecclesiastics and seculars, whom, by his example and his liberality, he animated to study and to virtue. Each of them was to write upon some chosen subject, either in prose or verse, and to communicate to each other in frequent conferences the fruits of their studies. The works produced by this society have been published in many volumes, under the title of “Noctes Vaticanas,” their assemblies being held in the Vatican, and at night, after the business of the day was over. About the same time he also founded the college at Pavia, which was dedicated to St. Justina.

In the mean while, however, the young cardinal, in the midst of a brilliant court, went along with the torrent, fitted up grand apartments, furnished them magnificently, and kept splt-ntiid equipages. His table was sumptuously served; his house was never empty of nobles and scholars. His uncle, delighted with this magnificence, gave him ample revenues to support it. In a very short time he was at once grand penitentiary of Rome, archpriest of St. Mary Major; protector of several crowns, and of various orders, religious and military; legate of Bologna, of Romania, and of the marche of Ancona. It was at that time that the famous council of Trent was held. Much was said about the reformation of the clergy, and Charles, after having advised it to others, gave an example of it in his own conduct. He suddenly discharged no less than eighty livery servants, left off wearing silk, and imposed on himself a weekly fast on bread and water. From this beginning he soon proceeded greater lengths. He held councils for confirming the decrees of that of Trent, terminated partly by his means. He made his house into a seminary of bishops; he established schools, colleges, communities; re-modelled his clergy and the monasteries; made institutions for the poor and orphans, and for girls exposed to ruin, who were desirous to return to a regular life. His zeal was the admiration of good men, but was far from acceptable to the corrupt clergy. The order of the Humiliati, which he attempted to reform, excited against him a friar, Farina, a shocking member of that society, who fired a gun at the good man while he was at evening prayer with his domestics. The bail having only grazed his skin, Charles petitioned for the pardon of his assassin, who was punished with death, notwithstanding his solicitations, and his order was suppressed. These contradictions did not abate the ardour of the good archbishop. He visited the desolate extremities of his province, abolished the excesses of the carnival, preached to his people, and shewed himself every where as their pastor and father. During the ravages of a cruel pestilence, he assisted the poor in their spiritual concerns by his ecclesiastics and his personal attentions, sold the furniture of his house to relieve the sick, put up prayers and made processions, in which he walked barefoot, and with a rope round his neck. His heroic charity was repaid with ingratitude. The governor of Milan prevailed on the magistrates of that city to prefer complaints against Charles, whom they painted in the blackest colours. “They accused him (says Baillet) of having exceeded the limits of his authority during the time of the plague; of having introduced dangerous innovations; of having abolished the public games, the stage-plays, and dances; of having revived the abstinence on the first Sunday in Lent, in violation of the privilege granted to that town of including that day in the carnival.” They published an injurious and insulting manifesto against him: but, contented with the testimony of his own conscience, he resigned the care of his justification to the Almighty. At length, worn out by the labours of an active piety, he finished his course the 3d of November 1594, being only in his 47th year. He was canonized in 1610. He wrote a very great number of works on doctrinal and moral subjects, which were printed 1747 at Milan, in 5 vols. folio, and the library of St. Sepulchre in that city is in possession of thirty-one vols. of his manuscript letters. The clergy of France reprinted at their expence the Institutions he composed for the use of confessors. Among his works are many homilies and sermons, as he thought it incumbent on him to preach the word of God himself to his people, notwithstanding the various business and government of so large a diocese. The edition of “Ada Ecclesiae Mediolanensis,” Milan, 1599, fol. is much valued.

Upon the whole St. Charles Borromeo appears entitled to the praises bestowed on him. His piety, however mistaken in some points, was sincere, and he practised with perfect disinterestedness and true consistency what he recommended to others. His life was written by Austin Valerio, bishop of Verona, Boscape, bishop of Novara, and by Giussano, a Milanese priest; but the best life of him, and the most free from superstitious narrative, is that of the abbé Touron, “La Vie et l'esprit de St. Charles Borromeo,” Paris, 1761, 3 vols. 12 mo.

, cousin german to the preceding, and also a cardinal and archbishop of Milan, was first educated under St. Charles, who afterwards placed him in his newly-founded college at Pavia. Jn 1587, pope Pius V. made him a cardinal, and in 1595, Clement VIII. promoted him to the archbishopric of Milan. He died in 1632, leaving various pious works, written in Italian, the principal of which is “Sacri Ragionamenti,” Milan, 1632 1G46, 4 vols. folio, and “Ragionamenti Spiritual!,” ibid. 1673 1676; “De Piacere della mente Christiana,” ibid. 1625. All his works are said to be scarce, but literature was most indebted to him as the founder of the celebrated Ambrosian library at Milan, which was enriched in his time with ten thousand manuscripts collected by Antony Oggiati, whom he made librarian, and by a large collection of books from the Pinelli library.

, an eminent French architect, was born at Bissona in the diocese of Como in 1599, and acquired great reputation at Rome, where he was more employed than any architect of his time. A great number of his works are seen in that city, but the major part are by no means models for young artists. Thjey abound in deviations from the received rules, and other singularities; but, at the same time, we cannot fail of perceiving in them talents of a superior order, and strong marks of genius. It was in his violent efforts to outdo Bernini, whose fame he envied, that he departed from that simplicity which is the true basis of the beautiful, in order to give extravagant ornaments in that taste; which have induced some to compare his style in architecture to the literary style of Seneca or Marini. With his talents, had he studied the great masters in their greatest perfections, he would have been the first architect of his time, merely by following their track; but he unfortunately deviated into the absurdities of singularity, and has left us only to guess from the college of the Propaganda, and a few other buildings at Rome, what he might have been. Even in his own time, his false taste was decried, and it is supposed that the mortifications he met with brought on a derangement of mind, in one of the fits of which he put an end to his life in 1667. From a vain opinion of his superiority, he is said to have destroyed all his designs, before his death, lest any other architect should adopt them. There was published, however, in 1725, at Rome, in Italian and Latin, his “Description of the church of Vallicela,” which he built, with the plans and designs, and a plan of the church of Sapienza, at Rome.

, an artist of singular taste, was born at Bois-le-Duc. He seemed to have a peculiar pleasure in painting spectres, devils, and enchantments: and although he possessed considerable powers as a painter, both in freedom of touch and strength of colouring, his pictures rather excite a horror mixed with admiration than any degree of real delight. Among the singular objects which he chose, there is one which represents the Saviour delivering the Patriarchs from hell. The fire and flames are painted with great truth. Judas in the attempt of slyly escaping with the Saints, is seized in the neck by the devils, who are going to hang him up in the air. A most remarkable painting of this master’s hand, among several others in the Escurial, is an allegory of the pleasures of the flesh: in which he represents the principal figure in a carriage drawn by monstrous imaginary forms, preceded by demons, and roll owed by death. As to his manner, it was less still than tnat of most of the painters of his time; and his draperies were in a better taste, more simple, and with less sameness, than any of his contemporaries. He painted on a white ground, which he so managed as to give a degree of transparence to his colours, and the appearance of more warmth. He laid on his colours lightly, and so placed them, even at the first touch of his pencil, as to give them their proper effect, without disturbing them: and his touch was full of spirit. Bos was also an engraver, and, as Strutt thinks, the first artist who attempted to engrave in the grotesque style. His engravings have that stiffness which so strongly characterises the works of the early German masters, and prove that he possessed a great fertility of invention, though perhaps but little judgment. He died in 1500.

, a learned philologist, was born at Worcum in Friesland, Nov. 23, 1670. His father who was rector or principal regent of the schools, and accustomed to mark the early appearance of talents, soon discovered his son’s aptitude for learning, and taught him Greek and Latin. His mother, a woman of abilities, and aunt to Vitringa, when she saw the latter, then a very young man, advanced to the professorship of Oriental languages, exclaimed with maternal fondness that she hoped to see her son promoted to a similar rank. In this, however, she was not gratified, as she died before he had finished his studies. When he had gone through the ordinary course of the classes in his father’s school, he continued adding to his knowledge by an attentive perusal of the Greek and Latin authors, and had many opportunities for this while he lived with a man of rank, as private tutor to his children. Cicero, above all, was his favourite Latin, author, whom he read again and again. In 1694 he went to the university of Franeker, where his relation, Vitringa, encouraged him to pursue the Greek and Latin studies, to which he seemed so much attached. In October 1696 he was permitted to teach Greek in the university, and in February of the following year, the curators honoured him with the title of prelector in that language. In 1704, when the Greek professorship became vacant by the death of Blancard, Mr. Bos was appointed his successor, and on taking the chair, read a dissertation on the propagation of Greek learning by their colonies, “de eruditione Graecorum per Colonias eorum propagata.” About the end of 1716 he was attacked with a malignant fever, ending in a consumption, a disorder he inherited from his mother, which terminated his life Jan. 6, 1717. Bos was a man of extensive classical learning, a solid judgment, and strong memory. In his personal character he was candid, amiable, and pious; in his studies so indefatigable that he cegretted every moment that was not employed in them. About five years before his death he married the widow of a clergyman, by whom he left two sons.

He published, 1. “Exercitaciones Philologicæ, in quibus Novi Fœderis nonnulla loca è profants maximè auctoribus Græcis iiiustrantur,” Franeker, 1700, 8vo; and in 1713 much enlarged, particularly with an ingenious etymological dissertation, on which, as well as on the work itself, Le Clerc bestows high praise in his “Bibliotheque Choisie,” vol. XV. and his “Bibl. Anc. et Moderne,” vol. 11. 2. “Mysterii Ellipsios Grcecas expositi Specimen,” ibid. 1702, 12 mo. There have been many editions of this useful work to Greek students. 3. “Observatiunes Misceilanex ad loca quaedam cum Novi Fcederis, turn externorum Scriptorum Græcorum,” ibid. 1707, 8vo. 4. An edition of the “Septuagint,” 1709, 2 vols. 4to, with Prolegomena, &c. which Breitinger, who published another edition in 1730— 1732, has criticised with considerable seventy in the “Journal Litteraire,” vol. XVIII. which the reader may compare with what is said of Breitinger’s edition in vol. XL of the “Bibliotheque Raisonnee.” 5. “Antiquitatum Gritearum, praecipne Atticarurh, brevis Descriptio,” Franeker, 1713, 12mo. Of this there have been several editions, as it became a school book. That of Leisner, at Paris, 1769, was in 1772 translated into English by our countryman, the late rev. Percival Stock'dale, and published in octavo, in hopes that it might supply young scholars with a manual more useful than Potter’s Antiquities, but it did not answer the translator’s expectations in this respect. 6. “Animadversiones ad Scriptores quosdam Graccos. Accedit specimen animadversionum Latinarum,” Franeker, 1715, 8vo. The same year he published a new edition of Weller’s Greek Grammar, adding two chapters on accentuation and syntax, shorter and more methodical than those of Weller. F. H. Schcefer published a variorum edition of his “Ellipses,” in 1809, Leipsic. Saxius only, of all his biographers, notices a work by Bos which appears to have been his first, “Thomre Magistri Dictionum Atticarurh Ecloga,” Franeker, 1698, 8vo.

, an artist, was born at Bois-le-Duc, and having been carefully instructed in the art of painting by the artists of his native city, he applied himself entirely to study after nature, and rendered himself very eminent for truth of colouring and neatness of handling. His favourite subjects were flowers and curious plants, which he usually represented as grouped in glasses, or vases of chrystal, half filled with water, and gave them so lively a look of nature, that it seemed scarcely possible to express them with greater truth or delicacy. In representing the drops of dew on the leaves of his subjects, he executed them with uncommon tnnsparence, and embellished his subjects with butterflies, bees, wasps, and other insects, which, Sandrart says, were superior to any thing of that kind performed by his contemporary artists. He likewise painted portraits with very great success.

, an engraver, was a native of France, and being invited to England by Nicholas Dorigny, assisted him for some time in engraving the cartoons of Raphael; and afterwards separating from Dorigny, he undertook to engrave the cartoons for the printsellers. He also engraved the duke of Marlborough’s battles, for which he received 80l. per plate; and, assisted first by Du Guernier, and afterwards by Beauvais and Baron, he completed them within two years, in 1717. He then became a printseller, and published, by subscription, the translation of Picart’s Religious Ceremonies. As an engraver, he possessed no great merit: his style is coarse and heavy, and the drawing of the naked parts of the figure in his plates is very defective. The “Continence of Scipio,” from a picture of Nicholas Poussin, in the Houghton collection, is one of his plates. He flourished in 1714.

, a French minister, and the greatest preacher in his time among the protestants, was son of William du Bosc, advocate to the parliament of Roan, and born at Bayeux, February 21, 1623. He made such progress, after having studied divinity eighteen months at Montauban, and three years at Saumur, that although he was but in his three and twentieth year, he was qualified to serve the church of Caen, to which he was presented Nov. 15, 1645, and received the imposition of hands Dec. 17, the same year. The merit of his colleagues, and above all that of Mr. Bochart, did not hinder Mr. du Bosc from acquiring speedily the reputation of one of the first men of his function; and his eloquence became so famous throughout the whole kingdom, that the church of Charenton would have him for their minister, and sent to desire him of his church, in the beginning of 1658. The strongest solicitations were made use of; but neither the eloquence of the deputies of Paris, nor the letters of persons of the greatest eminence in France amongst the protestants, could engage the church of Caen to part with him, nor him to quit his flock. It was impossible that such talents and fame should not give umbrage to the enemies of the protestant religion, which they shewed in 1664, by procuring a lettre de cachet, which banished him from Chalons till a new order, for having spoke disrespectfully of auricular confession. Mr. du Bosc, as he passed through Paris to go to the place of his banishment, explained to Mr. le Tellier his opinion on confession, and in what manner he had spoken of it, with which Le Tellier was satisfied, and told him that he had never doubted of the falseness of the accusation. Mr. du Bosc recovered the liberty of returning to his church October 15, 1664, and the joy which was at Caen among the brethren, when he came there, November 8, was excessive, A great many honourable persons of the other party congratulated him; and there was a catholic gentleman who celebrated the event in a very singular manner, as thus related by Du Bosc’s biographer. “A gentleman of the Roman religion, of distinction in the province, whose life was not very regular, but who made open profes&ion of loving the pastors who had particular talents, and seemed particularly enamoured with the merit of Mr. du Bosc, having a mind to solemnize the feast with a debauch, took two Cordeliers whom he knew to be honest fellows, and made them drink so much, that one of them died on the spot. He went to see Mr. du Bosc the next day, and told him that he thought himself obliged to sacrifice a monk to the public joy; that the sacrifice would have been more reasonable, if it had been a Jesuit; but that his offering ought not to displease him, though it was but of a Cordeiier. This tragical accident, of which he was only the innocent occasion, did not fail to disturb the joy which he had upon seeing himself again in his family and amongst his flock.” During the prosecutions of the protestant churches in 1665, he defended that of Caen, and many others of the province, against the measures of the bishop of Bayeux. The king having published in 1666 a severe proclamation against the protestants, all the chrrches sent deputies to Paris to make humble remonstrances to his majesty. The churches of Normandy deputed Mr. du Bosc, who departed from Caen July 3, 1668. As soon as he was arrived at Paris, the other deputies chose him “to draw up several memoirs. It being reported that the king would suppress some chambers of the edict, all the deputies ran to Mr. de Ruvigni, the deputy general, to speak with him about so important an affair, in hopes of procuring leave to throw themselves at his majesty’s feet; but Mr. du Bosc only was admitted to the audience. He harangued the king, who was alone in his closet, November 27, 1668; and after having ended his discourse, he had the courage to represent several things, and succeeded so well as to make all the court speak of his eloquence and prudence. After several conferences with Mr. le Tellier, and many evasions and delays, in April 1669, he obtained some relaxation of the declaration of 1666. After that time Mr. du Bosc went several journies about the churches’ affairs, and supported them, before the ministers of state and the intendants, with great force and ability, until he was commanded himself, by an act of the parliament of Normandy June 6, 1685, not to exercise his ministry any more in the kingdom. It was, however, universally acknowledged, t.iat if it had been possible to preserve the reformed church of France by the means of negotiation, he was more likely to succeed than any one that could be employed. He retired into Holland after his interdiction, and was minister of the church of Rotterdam, until his death, which happened January 2, 1692. He published some volumes of sermons; and after his death, P. Le Gendre, his son-in-law, published his” Life, Letters, Poems, Orations, Dissertations," and other curious documents respecting the history of the reformed churches in his time, Rotterdam, 1694, 8vo, dedicated to lord viscount Galloway.

, a Spanish poet, of a noble family, was born at Barcelona, about the end of the fifteenth century, and is supposed to have died about 1543. He was bred to arms, and, having served with distinction, was afterwards a great traveller. From the few accounts we have of him, as well as from what appears in his works, he seems to have been a very good classical scholar; and he is said to have been highly successful in the education of Ferdinand, the great duke of Alba, whose singular qualities were probably the fruit of our poet’s attention to him. He married Donna Anna Giron di Rebolledo, an amiable woman, of a noble family, by whom he had a very numerous offspring. Garcilaso was his coadjutor in his poetical labours, and their works were published together, under the title “Obras de Boscan y Garcilaso,” Medina, 1544, 4to, and at Venice, 1553, 12mo. The principal debt which Spanish poetry owes to Boscan, is the introduction of the hendecasyllable verse, to which it owes its true grace and elevation. His works are divided into three books, the first of which contains his poetry in the redondiglia metre, and the other two his hendecasyllables. In these he seems to have made the Italian poets his models, imitating Petrarch in his sonnets and canzoni; Dante and Petrarch in his terzine; Politian, Ariosto, and Bembo, in his ottave rime; and Bernardo Tasso, the father of Torquato, in his versi sciolti. It is said he also translated a play of Euripides, which is lost; but he has left us a prose translation, no less admirable than his poetry, of the famous II Cortegiano, or the Courtier of Castiglione. M. Conti, in his “Collecion de Poesias, &c.” or collection of Spanish poems translated into Italian verse, has given as specimens of Boscan, two canzoni, six sonnets, and a familiar epistle to Don Hurtado de Mendoza.

, a brave English admiral, the second son of Hugh, lord viscount Falmouth, was born in 1711, and having early embraced the naval service, arose, through the usual gradations, to be captain of the Shoreham of 20 guns, in 1740, and distinguished himself as a volunteer under admiral Vernon, in November, at the taking and destroying the fortifications of Porto Bello. At the siege of Carthagena in March 1741, he had the command of a party of seamen, who resolutely attacked and took a fascine battery of fifteen twenty-four pounders, though exposed to the fire of another fort of five guns, which they knew nothing of. Lord Aubrey Beauclerk being killed March 24, at the attack of Bocachica, capt. Boscawen succeeded him in the command of the Prince Frederic of 70 guns; and on the surrender of that castle, was entrusted with the care of its demolition.

In December following, after his return home, he married Frances, daughter of William Glanville, esq. of St Clere in Kent; and the same year was elected member of parliament for Truro in Cornwall. In 1744, he was made captain of the Dreadnought of sixty guns, and on the 29th of April, soon after war had been declared against France, he took the Medea, a French man of war of 26 guns and 240 men, commanded by M. Hoquart, being the first king’s ship taken that war. In January 1745, he was one of the court-martial appointed to inquire into the conduct of capt. Mostyn: and, during the rebellion, an invasion being apprehended, he commanded as commodore on board the Royal Sovereign at the Nore, whence he sent away several of the new-pressed men that were brought to him, in company with some experienced seamen, in frigates and small vessels, to the mouths of many of the creeks and rivers on the coasts of Kent and Sussex, to guard in those parts.

In November 1746, being then captain of the Namur, of seventy-four guns, he chased into admiral Anson’s fleet the Mercury, formerly a French ship of war, of fifty-eight guns, but then serving as an hospital ship to M. d'Anvilie’s squadron. On May 3, 1747, he signalized himself under the admirals Anson and Warren, in an engagement with a French fleet off Cape Finisterre, and was wounded in the shoulder by a musquet-ball. Here M. Hoquart, then commanding the Diamant of fifty-six guns, again became his prisoner, and all the French ships of war, ten in number, were taken. In July of the same year, he was appointed rear-admiral of the blue, and commander in chief of the land and sea-forces employed on an expedition to the East Indies. Nov. 4, he sailed from St. Helen’s, with six ships of the line, five frigates, and two thousand soldiers: and though the wind soon proved contrary, the admiral was so anxious of clearing the channel, that he rather chose to turn to the windward than put back. After refreshing his men some weeks at the Cape of Good Hope, where he arrived March 29, 1748, he made the island of Mauritius, belonging to the French, on June 23. But on reconnoitering the landing place, and finding it impracticable, without great loss, it was determined by a council of war, to proceed on the voyage, that not being the principal design of the expedition. July 29, he arrived at Fort St. David’s, where the siege of Pondicherry being immediately resolved on, the admiral took the command of the army, and marched with them, August 8th, and on the 27th opened trenches before the town: but the men growing sickly, the monsoons being expected, the chief engineer killed, and the enemy being stronger in garrison than the besiegers, the siege was raised Oct. 6th, and in two days the army reached for St. David’s, Mr. Boscawen shewing himself in the retreat as much the general as the admiral. Soon after the peace was concluded, and Madras delivered up to him by the French.

In April 1749, he lost in a violent storm his own ship the Namur, and two more, but was himself providentially on shore. In April 1750 he arrived at St. Helen’s, in the Exeter, having, in his absence, been appointed rear-admiral of the white. In June 1751, he was appointed one of the lords commissioners of the admiralty, and in July was chosen an elder brother of the Trinity -house. In May 1754, he was re-elected for the borough of Truro. In February 1755 he was appointed vice-admiral of the blue, and on April 19, he sailed from Spithead with a strong fleet, in order to intercept the French squadron bound to North America. June 10th, he fell in, off Newfoundland, with the Alcide and Lys, of sixty-four guns each, which were both taken by the Dunkirk and Defiance, being the first action of that war. On this occasion, it was very extraordinary, that M. Hoquart became a third time his prisoner. In November, the admiral arrived at Spithead with his prizes, and fifteen hundred prisoners. In 1756 he commanded the squadron in the Bay; and in December was appointed vice-admiral of the white. In 1757 he again commanded in the Bay; and in 1758 was appointed admiral of the blue, and commander in chief of the expedition to Cape Breton. Feb. 15, he sailed from St. Helen’s, and in conjunction with general (afterwards lord) Amherst, took the important fortress of Louisburgh, July 27th, with the islands of Cape Breton and St. John. On Nov. 1st. the admiral arrived at St. Helen’s with four ships, having fallen in, off Scilly, with six French ships from Quebec, which escaped him in the night; but in chacing one of them, the Belliqueux of sixty-four guns, having carried away her fore top-mast, was forced up Bristol Channel, where she was taken by the Antelope. December 12th, on his coming to the house of commons, the thanks of that august assembly, the greatest honour that can be conferred on any subject, were given him by the speaker.

In some French memoirs, admiral Boscawen is represented as having, at the siege of Louisburgh, wholly given himself up to the direction of a particular captain in that arduous and enterprising business. This, however, was not the case. Whoever knew Mr. Boscawen’s knowledge in his profession, with his powers of resource upon every occasion, his intrepidity of mind, his manliness and independence of conduct and of character, can never give the least degree of credit to such an assertion. The admiral, however, upon other occasions, and in other circumstances, deferred to the opinions of those with whom he was professionally connected. When once sent to intercept a St. Domingo fleet of merchantmen, and while waiting near the track which it was supposed they would take, one of his seamen came to tell him that the fleet was now in sight. The admiral took his glass, and from his superior power of eye, or perhaps from previous information, said, that the sailor was mistaken, and that what he saw was the grand French fleet. The seaman, however, persisted. The admiral desired some others of his crew to look through the glass; who all, with their brains heated with the prospect of a prize, declared, that what they saw was the St. Domingo fleet. He nobly replied, “Gentlemen, you shall never say that I have stood in the way of your enriching yourselves: I submit to you; but, remember, when you find your mistake, you must stand by me.” The mistake was soon discovered; and the admiral, by such an exertion of manffiuvres as the service has not often seen, saved his ship.

In 1759, being appointed to command in the Mediterranean, he sailed from St. Helen’s April 14th. The Toulon fleet, under M. de la Clue, having passed the Streights, with an intent to join that at Brest, the admiral, then at Gibraltar, being informed of it by his frigates, immediately got under sail, and on Aug. 18th, discovered, pursued, and engaged the enemy. His ship, the Namur, of ninety guns, having lost her mainmast, he instantly shifted his flag to the Newark, and, after a sharp engagement, took three large ships, and burnt two, in Lagos-bay. On Sept. 15th he arrived at Spithead with his prizes, and two thousand prisoners. In December of the following year, he was appointed general of the marines, with a salary of Sooo/. per annum, and was also sworn of his majesty’s most honourable privy-council. In the same year he commanded in the Bay, till relieved by admiral Hawke: and, returning home, died at his seat at Hatchland park, near Guildford, of a bilious fever, Jan. 10, 1761. A monument was afterwards erected to him in the church of St. Michael Penkevel in Cornwall, where he was buried, with an elegant inscription said to have been written by his widow.

This excellent officer was so anxious for the honour of the sea-service, and his own, that when lord Anson, then first lord of the admiralty, refused to confirm his promotion of two naval officers to the rank of post-captains, in consequence of their having distinguished themselves at the siege of Louisburgh (Laforey and Balfotir, if we mistake not), he threatened to give up his seat at the board of admiralty, and lord Anson, rather than lose the advice and experience of this great seaman, thought fit to retract his opposition. Admiral Boscawen was so little infected with the spirit of party, that when, on his return from one of his expeditions, he found his friends out of place, and another administration appointed, and was asked whether he would continue as a lord of the admiralty with them, he replied, “the country has a right to the services of its professional men: should I be sent again upon any expedition, my situation at the admiralty will facilitate the equipment of the fleet I am to command.” He probably thought, with his great predecessor, Blake, “It is not for us to mind state affairs, but to prevent foreigners from fooling us.” No stronger testimony of the merit of admiral Boscawen can be given, than that afforded by the late lord Chatham, when prime minister: “When I apply,” said he, “to other officers respecting any expedition I may chance to project, they always raise difficulties; you always find expedients.”

, an English miscellaneous writer, and poet of considerable merit, was nephew to the preced ng, being the younger son of general George Boscawen, third son of lord Falmouth. He was born August 28, 1752, and was sent to Eton school before he was seven years old, where he obtained the particular notice and favour of the celebrated Dr. Barnard. From school he was removed to Oxford, where he became a gentleman commoner of Exeter college, but left it, as is not unusual with gentlemen intended for the law, without taking a degree. He then studied the law, as a member of the Middle Temple, and the practice of special pleading under Mr. (afterwards judge) Buller: was called to the bar, and for a time went the Western circuit. Nor were his legal studies unfruitful, as he published an excellent work under the title of “A Treatise of Convictions on Penal Statutes; with approved precedents of convictions before justices of the peace, in a variety of cases; particularly under the Game Laws, the Revenue Laws, and the Statutes respecting Manufactures, &c.” 1792, 8vo. He was also appointed one of the commissioners of bankrupts, which situation he held till his death. On Dec. 19, 1785, he was appointed by patent to the situation of a commissioner of the victualling office, in consequence of which, and of his marriage in, April 1786, he soon after quitted the bar. He married Charlotte, second daughter of James Ibbetson, D. D. archdeacon of St. A 1 ban’s, and rector of Bushey. By Mrs. Boscawt'n, who died about seven years before him, he had a numerous family, five of whom, daughters, survived both parents.

Being an excellent classical scholar, and warmly attached to literary pursuits, he published, in 1793, the first volume of a new translation of Horace, containing the “Odes, Epodes, and Carmen Seculare.” This being much approved, was followed, in 1798, by his translation of the “Satires, Epistles, and Art of Poetry,” thus completing a work, which, though Francis’s translation still holds its popularity, is, in the judgment of all classical men, very greatly superior to it, in many essential points of merit. In 1801 he published a small volume of original poems, in which, if he does not take a lead among his contemporaries, he at least discovers an elegant taste, a poetical mind, and a correct versification. He was for several years before his death a constant and able assistant in the “British Critic.” He is also the supposed writer of“The Progress of Satire, an essay, in verse, with notes, containing remarks on ‘The Pursuits of Literature’,” 1798, and “A Supplement to the same,” 1799, two pamphlets occasioned by some freedoms taken with eminent characters in the “Pursuits.”

Mr. Boscawen’s constitution was delicate, and probably not improved by close confinement to the duties of his commissionership. He had, consequently, for several years suffered much by asthmatic affections of the lungs, which gradually exhausted the powers of life, and in the beginning of May, 1811, from an accidental accession of cold, proved fatal on the sixth of that month. The character of Mr. Boscawen, says a writer, whom we know to have been one of his intimate friends, could it be truly drawn, would exhibit a consummate picture of every thing that is amiable and estimable in human nature, improved by knowledge and exalted by religion. In every possible relation of life, whatever was kind, whatever was affectionate, whatever was benevolent, might with certainty be expected from him. That excellent institution, the Literary Fund, he considered almost as his child; and his affection to it was testified, not only by contributions, but by annual verses in its praise, and assiduous attendance on its meetings. Within five days of his death he wrote a copy of verses for its anniversary, and even contemplated the design of attending it. A new edition of his Horace, much improved by his long continued attention, is intended to be brought forward, accompanied by the original, and by many additional notes.

, an artist, was born at Antwerp, in 1675, and was placed under the care of one Thomas, whose subjects were apartments with figures, in the manner of Teniers; and he decorated the insides of those apartments with bustos, vases, pictures, and other curiosities, which sort of subjects were at that time in great request. Bosch studied the same manner of painting, and with great success; but the connoisseurs and his friends advised him to employ his pencil on subjects of a more elegant and elevated kind; because it seemed a little absurd, to see apartments designed with so much magnificence, and so richly ornamented, occupied by persons so mean and vulgar in their appearance as the figures generally represented. Bosch profited by the advice, and soon acquired a different style of design and elegance in his composition, which afforded more pleasure to the eye, and more value to his productions. He also painted portraits with a great deal of reputation, particularly a portrait of the duke of Marlborough on horseback, which gained him all the applause that he could possibly desire. The horse was painted by Van Bloemen. His paintings rose to a most extravagant price, and were at that time more dear than those of Teniers or Ostade. Some of his works have true merit, being very good in the composition and design, and also in respect of the colouring; and the forms of his figures were more elegant than most of his contemporaries. His subjects were judiciously chosen, and for the most part they were sculptors or painters, surrounded with pictures or bustos of marble, brass, or plaster, to which he gave abundance of variety, and a great degree of truth. His pencil is light, his touch spirited, and his figures are dressed in the mode of the time. However, notwithstanding he possessed so much merit, as is generally and justly ascribed to him, his works cannot enter into competition with those of Ostade or Teniers; nor is he now esteemed as he formerly had been, even by hi own countrymen. He died of excess, in 1715.

, an historical painter, was born at Florence, in 1553, and educated under Santi di Titi. He was the first person who had a just notion of the chiaro scuro, and used it successfully in the Florentine school; where, though it had been happily practised by Giorgione, at Venice, and also by Titian, it was not well understood before his time. He possessed great freedom of hand, and gave a surprising force of colour; and both in design and composition the grandeur of his style resembled that of his master. He studied after nature; and in his travels he drew sketches of any particular objects that struck him; but pursuing this practice at Loretto, with regard to the fortifications of the city, he was seized by the officers of justice, and condemned to be hanged; but he happily escaped, within a few hours of execution, by the interposition of signior Bandini, who explained to the chief magistrate his innocent intention. He was also an engraver; but the subjects of his plates are not specified either by Marolles or Florent le Comte. He died in 1606.

, one of the most eminent mathematicians and philosophers of the last century, was born May 11, 17.11, in the city of Ragusa, and studied Latin grammar in the schools of the Jesuits in his native city, where it soon appeared that he was endued with superior talents for the acquisition of learning. In the beginning of his fifteenth year, he had already gone through the grammar classes with applause, and had studied rhetoric for some months, and as it now became necessary to determine on his course of life, having an ardent desire for learning, he thought he could not have a better opportunity of gratifying it, than by entering the society of the Jesuits; and, with the consent of his parents, he petitioned to be, received among them. It was a maxim with the Jesuits to place their most eminent subjects at Rome, as it was of importance for them to make a good figure on that theatre; and as they had formed great expectations from their new pupil, they procured his being called to that city in 1725, where he entered his noviciate with great alacrity. After this noviciate (a space of two years) had passed in the usual probationary exercises, he studied in the schools of rhetoric, became well acquainted with all the classical authors, and cultivated Latin poetry with some taste and zeal.

After this he removed from the noviciate to the Roman college, in order to study philosophy, which he did for three years, and as geometry made part of that course, he soon discovered that his mind was particularly turned to this science, which he cultivated with such rapid success, as to excel all his condisciples, and had already begun to give private lessons in mathematics. According to the ordinary course followed by the Jesuits, their young men, after studying philosophy, were employed in teaching Latin and the belles lettres for the space of five years, as a step to the study of theology and the priesthood at a riper age; but as Boscovich had discovered extraordinary talents for geometrical studies, his superiors dispensed with the teaching of the schools , and commanded him to commence the study of divinity, which he did for four years, but without neglecting geometry and physics, and before that space was ended, he was appointed professor of mathematics, an office to which he brought ardent zeal and h'rst-rate talents. Besides having seen all the best modern productions on mathematical subjects, he studied diligently the antient geometricians, and from them learned that exact method of reasoning which is to be observed in all his works. Although he himself easily perceived the concatenation of mathematical truths, and could follow them into their most abstruse recesses, yet he accommodated himself with a fatherly condescension to the weaker capacities of his scholars, and made every demonstration clearly intelligible to thm. When he perceived that any of his disciples were capable of advancing faster than the rest, he himself would propose his giving them private lessons, that so they might not lose their time; or he would propose to them proper books, with directions how to study by themselves, being always ready to solve difficulties that might occur to them. He composed also new elements of arithmetic, algebra, plain and solid geometry, &c. and although these subjects had been well treated by a great many authors, yet Boscovich’s work will always be esteemed by good judges as a masterly performance, well adapted to the purpose for which ii was intended. To this be afterwards added a new exposition of Conic Sections, the only part of his works which lias appeared in English, It was within these few years translated, abridged, and somewhat altered, by the rev. Mr, Newton of Cambridge.

According to the custom of the schools, every class in the Roman college, towards the end of the scholastic year, gave puhlic specimens of their proficiency. With this view Boscovich published yearly a dissertation on some interesting physico-mathematical subject, the doctrine of which was publicly defended by some of his scholars, assisted by their master, and in the presence of a concourse of the most learned men of Rome. His new opinions in philosophy T. ere here rigorously examined and warmly controverted by persons well versed in physical studies: but he proposed nothing without solid grounds: he had foreseen all their objections, answered them victoriously, and always came off with great applause and increase of reputation. He published likewise dissertations on other occasions: and these works, though small in size, are very valuable both for matter and manner. It was in some of them that he first divulged his sentiments concerning the nature of body, which he afterwards digested into a regular theory, and which is justly become so famous among the learned.

Father Noceti, another Jesuit, and one of his early preceptors, had composed two excellent poems on the" rainbow and the aurora borealis, which were published in 1747, with learned annotations by Boscovich. His countryman, Benedict Stay, after having published the philosophy of Descartes in Latin verse t attempted the same with regard to the more modern and more true philosophy, and has executed it with wonderful success. The first two volumes of this elegant and accurate work were published in 1755, and 1760, with annotations and supplements by Boscovich. These supplements are short dissertations on the most important parts of physics and mathematics. In these he affords a solution of the problem of the centre of oscillation, to which Huygens had come by a wrong method; confutes Euler, who had imagined that the vis inertiæ was necessary in matter; and refutes the ingenious efforts of Riccati on, the Leibnitzian opinion of the forces called living.

Benedict XIV. who was a great encourager of learning, and a beneficent patron of learned men, gave Boscovich many proofs of the esteem he had for him; and both he and his enlightened minister, cardinal Valenti, consulted Boscovich on various important objects of public economy, the clearing of harbours, and the constructing of roads and canals. On one occasion, he was joined in a commission with other mathematicians and architects, invited from different parts of Italy, to inspect the cupola of St. Peter’s, in which a crack had been discovered. They were divided in opinion; but the sentiments of Boscovich, and of the marquis Poleni, prevailed. In stating, however, the result of the consultation, which was to apply a circle of iron round the building, Poleni forgot to refer the idea to its real author, and this omission grievously offended Boscovich, who was tenacious of fame, and somewhat irritable“in temper. About the same time other incidents had concurred to mortify his pride; and he became at last disgusted with his situation, and only looked for a convenient opportunity of quitting Rome. While in this temper of mind, an application was made by the court of Portugal to the general of the Jesuits, for ten mathematicians of the society to go out to Brazil, for the purpose of surveying that settlement, and ascertaining the boundaries which divide it from the Spanish dominions in America. Wishing to combine with that object the mensuration of a degree of latitude, Boscovich offered to embark in the expedition, and his proposition was readily accepted. But cardinal Valenti, unwilling to lose his services, commanded him, in the name of the pope, to dismiss the project, and persuaded him to undertake the same service at home in the Papal territory. In this fatiguing, and often perilous operation, he was assisted by the English Jesuit, Mayer, an excellent mathematician, and was amply provided with the requisite instruments and attendants. They began the work about the close of the year 1750, in the neighbourhood of Rome, and extended the meridian line northwards, across the chain of the Appennines as far as Rimini. Two whole years were spent in completing the various measurements, which were performed with the most scrupulous accuracy. The whole is elaborately described by Boscovich in a quarto volume, full of illustration and minute details’, and with several opuscules, or detached essays, which display great ingenuity, conjoined with the finest geometric taste. We may instance, in particular, the discourse on the rectification of instruments, the elegant synthetical investigation of the figure of the earth, deduce^ both from the law of attraction, and from the actual measurement of degrees, and the nice remarks concerning the curve and the conditions of permanent stability. This last tract gave occasion, however, to some strictures from D'Alembert, to which Boscovich replied, in a note annexed to the French edition of his works. The arduous service which Boscovich had now performed was but poorly rewarded. From the pope he received only a hundred sequins, or about forty-five pounds sterling, a gold box, and” abundance of praise." He now resumed the charge of the mathematical school, and besides discharged faithfully the public duties of religion, which are enjoined by his order. A trifling circumstance will mark the warmth of his temper, and his love of precedence. He had recourse to the authority of cardinal Valenti, to obtain admission into the oratory of Caravita, from which his absence excluded him, and which yet afforded only the bent-fit of a free, but frugal supper. In presiding at that social repast, the philosopher relaxed from the severity of his studies, and shone by his varied, his lively, and fluent conversation.

At this time a dispute arose between the little republic of Lucca, and the government of Tuscany, on the subject of draining a lake. A congress of mathematicians was called, and Boscovich repaired to the scene of contention, in order to defend the rights of the petty state. Having waited three months in vain, expecting the commissioners, and amused with repeated hollow promises, he thought it better for the interest of his constituents, to proceed at once to the court of Vienna, which then directed the affairs of Italy. The flames of war had been recently kindled on the continent of Europe, and Boscovich took occasion to celebrate the first successes of the Austrian arms, in a poem, of which the first book was presented to the empress Theresa; but the military genius of Frederic the Great of Prussia soon turned the scale of fortune, and our poet was reduced to silence. More honourably did he employ some leisure in the composition of his immortal work, “Theoria philosophise niituralis reducta ad unicam legem virium in natura existentium,” printed at Vienna, in 1758. This he drew up, it is alledged, in the very short space of thirty days, having collected the materials a considerable time before; yet we must regret the appearance of haste and disorder, which deforms a production of such rare and intrinsic excellence.

After a successful suit of eleven months at Vienna, Boscovich returned to Rome, and received from the senate of Lucca, for his zealous services, the handsome present of a thousand sequins, or abut 450l. Thus provided with the means of' gratifying his curiosity, he desired and obtained leave to travel. At Paris he spent six months, in the society of the eminent men who then adorned the French capital; and, during his stay in London, he was elected, in 1760, a fellow of the Royal Society, and he dedicated to that learned body his poem on eclipses, which contains a neat compendium of astronomy , and was published at London the same year. The expectation of the scientific world was then turned to the transit of Venus, calculated to happen in the following year. Boscovich, eager to observe it, returned through Holland and Flanders to Italy, and joined his illustrious friend, Correr, at Venice, from whence they sailed to Constantinople, having on their way, visited the famous plain of Troy. In Turkey, he scarcely enjoyed one day of good health, and his life was repeatedly despaired of by the physicians. After spending half a year in this miserable state, he returned in the train of sir James Porter, our ambassador at the Porte; and having traversed Bulgaria, Moldavia, and part of Poland, his intention was to penetrate into Russia, if the agitation which there prevailed, on the death of the emperor Peter, had not deterred him from executing the project. The diary of his journey, which he published in Italian and French, is inferior to any of his works, and contains many trifling and insipid remarks. The truth was, Boscovich began his travels at too late a period of life to profit much by them.

At Rome his arrival was welcomed, and he was again consulted on various plans of public improvement. But in the spring of 1764, he was called by the Austrian governor of Milan, to fill the mathematical chair in the university of Pavia. The honours which he received provoked the jealousy of the other professors, who intrigued to undermine his fame. He took tlfe most effectual mode, however, to silence them, by publishing his Dissertations on optics, which exhibit an elegant synthesis and well-devised set of experiments. These essays excited the more attention, as, at this time, the ingenuity of men of science was particularly attracted to the subject, by Dollond’s valuable discovery of achromatic glasses.

The expulsion of the Jesuits from the dominions of Spain prevented Boscovich from going to California, to observe the second transit of Venus, in 1769, and which expedition the royal society of London had strongly solicited him to undertake. And as his rivals began now to stir themselves again, he sought to dispel the chagrin, by a second journey into France and the Netherlands. At Brussels he met with a peasant, famous for curing the gout, and from whose singular skill he received most essential benefit. On his return to Italy in 1770, he was transferred from the university of Pavia to the Palatine schools at Milan, and resided with those of his order, at the college of Brera, where he furnished, mostly at his own expence, an observatory, of which he got the direction. But he was still doomed to experience mortification. Some young Jesuits, who acted as his assistants, formed a conspiracy, and, by their artful representations, prevailed with the government to exclude his favourite pupil and friend from holding a charge of trust. This intelligence was communicated to him at the baths of Albano, and filled him with grief and indignation. He complained to prince Kaunitz, but implored his protection in vain. To the governor of Milan he wrote, that he would not return, unless things were restored to their former footing. He retired to Venice, where, having staid ten months in fruitless expectation of obtaining redress, he meditated spending the remainder of his days in honourable retirement at his native city of Ragnsa. But while he waited for the opportunity of a vessel to convey him thither, he received the afflicting news of the suppression of his order in Italy. He now renounced his scheme, and seemed quite uncertain what step he should take. Having come into the Tuscan territory, he listened to the counsels and solicitation of Fabroni, who held forth the prospect of a handsome appointment in the Lyceum of Pisa. In the mean time he accepted the invitation of La Bord, chamberlain to Louis XV. accompanied him to Paris in 1773, and through his influence obtained the most liberal patronage from the French monarch; he was naturalized, received two pensions, amounting to 8000 livres, or 333l. and had an office expressly created for him, with the title of “Director of optics for the marine.” “Boscovich might now appear to have attained the pinnacle of fortune and glory; but Paris was no longer for him the theatre of applause, and his ardent temper became soured by the malign breath of jealousy and neglect. Such extraordinary favour bestowed on a foreigner could not fail to excite the envy of the sgavans, who considered him as rewarded greatly beyond his true merit The freedom of his language gave offence, his perpetual egotism became disgusting, and his repetition of barbarous Latin epigrams was most grating to Parisian ears. Besides, the name of a priest and a Jesuit did not now command respect; and the sentiments of austere devotion, which he publicly professed, had grown unfashionable, and were regarded as scarcely befitting the character of a philosopher”.

But, notwithstanding these discouragements, Boscovich applied assiduously to the improvement of astronomy and optics; revised and extended his former ideas, and struck out new paths of discovery. His solution of the problem to determine the orbit of a comet from three observations, is remarkable for its elegant simplicity; being derived from the mere elementary principles of trigonometry. Not less beautiful are his memoirs on the micrometer, and on achromatic telescopes. But his situation becoming more irksome, in 1783, he desired and obtained leave of absence. Two years he spent at Bassano, in the Venetian state, where he published his opuscules, in five volumes, 4to, composed in Latin, Italian, and French, and containing a variety of elegant and. ingenious disquisitions connected with astronomical and optical science. During that time he lived with his editor Remondini, and occupied himself in superintending the press. After finishing his task, he came to Tuscany, and passed some months at the convent of Valombrosa. Thence he went to Milan, and issued a Latin prospectus, in which he proposed to reprint the remaining two volumes of the philosophical poem of Stay, enriched with his annotations, and extended to ten, books. But very few subscribers appeared; his opuscules experienced a slow sale; and the Imperial minister neither consulted nor employed him in some mathematical operations which were carrying on; all symptoms that he was no more a favourite of the Italian public. These mortifications preyed upon his spirits, and made the deeper impression, as his health was much disordered by an inflammation of the lungs. He sunk into a stupid, listless melancholy, and after brooding many days, he emerged into insanity, but not without lucid intervals, during which religion suggested topics of consolation, and he regretted having spent his time in curious speculation, and considered the calamity with which he was visited as a kind of chastisement of heaven for neglecting the spiritual duties of his profession. In this temper of resignation, he expired on the 13th of February, 1787. He was interred decently, but without pomp, in the parochial church of S. Maria Pedone. “Such was the exit,” says Fabroni, “of this sublime genius, whom Rome honoured as her master, whom all Italy regarded as her ornament, and to whom Greece would have erected a statue, had she for want of space been obliged even to throw down some of her heroes.”

Boscovich was tall in stature, of a robust constitution, but pale complexion. His countenance, which was rather long, was expressive of cheerfulness and good humour. He was open, sincere, communicative, and benevolent. We have already noticed that with all these qualities, he was too irritable, and too sensible of what he thought a neglect, which gave him unnecessary uneasiness. He was a man of strict piety, according to his views of religion. His great knowledge of the works of nature made him entertain the highest admiration of the power and wisdom of the Creator. He saw the necessity and advantages of a divine revelation, and was sincerely attached to the Christian religion, having a sovereign contempt for the presumption and foolish pride of infidels.

Zamagna, his countryman, and also a Jesuit, published a panegyric on him in elegant Latin, and a short encomium of him is to be found in the “Estratto della Litteratura Europa;” and another, in the form of a letter, was directed by Lalande to the Parisian journalists. A more full life and eulogium is in Fabroni’s collection; another is in the Journal of Modena; a third was published at Milan by the abbate Ricca; and a fourth at Naples by Dr. Julius Bajamonte. Fabroni has given the most complete catalogue of his works.

, a native of Milan, and servitor of the order of Malta, lived about the end of the sixteenth century, when he was appointed agent for the religion of Malta at Rome, and discharged the duties of this office with fidelity. The knowledge he found it necessary to acquire, appears to have suggested the design of writing a history of that celebrated order, which was published under the title “Historia dell' ordine di S. Giovanni Gierosolimitano,” in three parts or volumes, the first two at Rome, 1594, and the third in 1602, a work in which he is said to have been assisted by two monks, and which contains many curious facts, that have been highly serviceable to the subsequent historians of Malta. It happened that Bosius resided with Petrochini at Rome, and when he was made cardinal by Sixtus V. Bosius attached himself to him, in hopes of being promoted to the same honour, when Petrochini should be pope; but the latter being overlooked at the next election for the papal chair, Bosius went home and passed the remainder of his days, how many we are not told, in exercises of devotion. He appears to have had much of the superstition of his order, and of the age in which he lived, as he wrote a history of the sacred cross on which our Saviour suffered, from its discovery in the reign of Constantine the great.; and decorated the church of St. Blaise with this choice morsel of authentic history. His nephew,

, and the inheritor of his property, was educated by him, studied law, and by his uncle’s interest was appointed agent to the order of Malta. He was a very little man, of a dark countenance, resembling that of his mother, who had been an African slave, whom his father married. In his youth he was very wild, but reformed, lest his uncle should disinherit him, and addicted himself to the study of antiquities, producing the “Roma Sottefanea,” Rome, 1632, fol. a description of the tombs and the epitaphs of the early Christians which are found in the catacombs at Rome. For this purpose he investigated them with great care, often remaining five or six days together under ground, but he did not live to put the finishing hand to the work, which was published by John Severani, a priest of the oratory. Father Aringhi, another of the oratory, translated and published it in Latin, 1651, 2 vols. fol. an edition in more request than the original, and more full and correct.

, an eminent philologer and historian, was born at Leipsic, June 17, 1626, and succeeded so rapidly in his first studies, that he was admitted to his bachelor’s degree in the college of his native city when he had scarcely attained his fifteenth year; and afterwards wrote and defended some theses, as is the custom at Leipsic. In 1643 he went to study at Wittemberg, lodging first with Balthasar Cellarius, and afterwards with J. C. Seldius, two learned men, by whose assistance he was enabled to improve what he heard from the public lecturers. In 1645 he returned to Leipsic, and again attended some of the able professors under whom he was first educated, particularly Muller and Rivinus; and the following year, after a public disputation, in which he acquitted himself with great applause, he was admitted to his master’s degree. In 1647 he went to Strasburgh, and studied divinity and ecclesiastical history, and the modern languages, until he was recalled to Leipsic, where, after two disputations on the solar spots, he was, in 1655, admitted assessor of philosophy. The following year he was invited to be professor of history at Jena, and acquired the greatest reputation as a teacher, while he employed his leisure ho-.irs in composing his own works, or editing some of those of the ancients, making considerable progress in an edition of Josephus, and some of the Byzantine historians. For five years he was dean, and, in 1661, rector of the college, and in 1672 he founded the society of inquirers, “Societas disquirentium,” at Jena. He died of repeated attacks of the gout, which had undermined his constitution, on April 29, 1674. Bosius was the particular friend of Heinsius and Graevius, both of whom speak highly of his talents. Among his works may be enumerated, 1. “Dissertatio de veterum adoratione,” Leipsic, 1646, 4to. 2. His edition of “Cornelius Nepos,” 1657, and again at Jena, 1675, 8vo, which gave such general satisfaction to the learned men of his day, that few subsequent editors ventured to depart from his text. 3. “Dissertatio de Pontificatu Maximo Imperatorum præcipue Christianorum,” Jena, 1657, 4to, reprinted by Grævius in the fifth vol. of his Thesaurus. 4. “De ara ignoti Dei ad Act. 17,” Jena, 1659, 4to. 5. “De Tiberio,” ibid. 1661. 6. “Exercitatio historica de Clinicis Ecclesiae Teteris,” ibid. 1664, 4to. 7. An edition of Tacitus, “De Vita Agricolae, Jena, 1664, 8vo. 8.” Schediasma de comparanda notitia Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum,“ibid, 1673, 4to, reprinted by Crenius in his” Tractatus de eruditibne comparanda,“Leyden, 1699, 4to, and by J. G. Walch, Jena, 1723, 8vo. After his death were published, 9.” Introductio in notitiam rerum publicarum,“with his Essay on the stale of Europe, Jena, 1676, 4to. 10.” Dissertatio Isagogica de comparanda prudentia civili, deque scriptoribus et libris ad earn rem maxime aptis,“ibid. 1679, 4to, and reprinted by Crenius. 11.” Ejusdem et Reinesii Epistolae mutuse,“ibid. 1700, 12mo. 12.” Petronii Satyriconpuritatedonatum cum fragmento Traguriensi et Albas Graecas, &c.“ibid. 1701, 8vo. 13.” Hispaniæ, Ducatus Mediolanensis, et Regni Neapolitani Notitia," Helmstadt, 1702, 4to.

, bishop of Lodeve, and afterwards of Montpellier, was one of the most learned French prelates in the seventeenth century. He was born at Narbonne, May 28, 1605, and studied atThoulouse. He was afterwards appointed judge royal of Narbonne, intendant of Guienne and Languedoc, solicitor general to the parliament of Normandy, and counsellor of state in ordinary. For his services in this last office he was promoted to the bishopric of Lodeve, Jan. 1650. When the affair of the five propositions was agitated at Rome, Bosquet was appointed deputy on the part of the king and clergy of France, and while there, the cardinal Este appointed him bishop of Montpellier. He was exemplary for piety, disinterestedness, and charity, and, like the best of his brethren at that time, practised rigorous austerities. He assisted at the general assembly of the clergy held at Paris in 1670, and was distinguished for his learning and eloquence. An apoplexy carried him off July 24, 1676, and he was interred in the cathedral, with an epitaph celebrating his many virtues. The first work he published was “Pselli Synopsis Legum,” 1632, apiece never before printed, and written in Greek verse by Pselius for the use of his pupil Michael Ducas,in the eleventh century. Bosquet translated it into Latin, and added notes to it. He then published, 2. “Ecclesiye Gallicanae Historiarum liber primus,” 1656, 4to. 3. “Pontificum Romanorum qui e Gallia oriundi in ea seclerunt, historia, ab anno 1315 ad ann. 1394 ex Mss. edita,” Paris, 1632, The second edition of his history of the Gallican Church, the one above mentioned "in 1636, was much enlarged, but some passages were omitted that had appeared in the first octavo edition, which archbishop Usher has transcribed. By these it appears that Bosquet was of opinion that the mistaken zeal of the monks was the chief cause of those fabulous traditions which have destroyed all confidence in the early history of the Gallican church, and while he makes some apology for the credulous believers of those stories, he makes none for those who originally invented them, a concession of great liberality from a prelate of the Romish church.

, a French engraver, was born at Tours, and gave the first lessons of perspective in the academy of painting at Paris. He had great judgement in that branch as well as in architecture. He left, 1. Three good tract on the manner of drawing the orders of architecture, 1684, folio; on the art of engraving, 1645, 8vo; on perspective, 1682, 8vo. 2. Representation of dirers human figures, with their measures, taken from the antiques at Rome, Paris, 1656; a pocket volume all engraved. His plates in aqua fortis, but in a peculiar method, are agreeable. The work of Bosse on the art of engraving was re-published some years ago, with the remarks and augmentations of M. Cochin the younger. Bosse died in his own country about the year 1660, according to Jombert. Bosse was a turbulent character,* and created many enemies, particularly owing to his having published some pieces of Desargues on perspective, and having adopted the opinions of this writer, which were adverse to those of Le Brim and the ablest academicians. This produced a controversy, in which he so displeased the academicians that they expelled him from their society.

, an Italian scholar and writer of considerable eminence, was born at Verona in 1427, and in 1451 entered the congregation of the regular canons of St. John of Lateran, where he bore several employments, as visitor of the order, procurator-general, and abbot of Fiesole in Tuscany. Cosmo de Medici, who had a high respect for him, spent seventy thousand crowns in the repairs of that monastery, and it was in the church belonging to it that Bosso delivered the ensigns of the cardinalship to John de Medici, afterwards pope Leo X. Sixtus VI. also employed him in many important affairs, particularly in reforming the religious houses of Genoa, and other neighbouring districts, and he thrice offered him a valuable bishopric, which he refused. He vigorously opposed the decree of pope Innocent VIII. which ordered all sorts of monks to pay part of their yearly revenues to the clerks of the apostolic chamber. Hermolaus Barbarus was his pupil and guest at Fiesole, and Picus of Mirandula, his friend. He died at Padua in 1502. Mr. Roscoe says he was a profound scholar, a close reasoner, and a convincing orator; and to these united a candid mind, an inflexible integrity, and an interesting simplicity of life and manners. His literary productions were, l.“De Instituendo Sapientia animo,” Bologna, 1495. 2. “De veris et salutaribus animi gaudiis,” Florence, 1491. 3, “Epistolar. Lib. tres,” or rather three volumes, printed 1493, 1498, 1502. Some orations of his are in the collection entitled “Recuperationes Fsesulanse,” a rare and beautiful book, said to have been printed in 1483. His whole works were published by P. Ambrosini, at Bologna, 1627, with the exception of the third book, or volume, of letterS| which, on account of its extreme rarity, was at that time unknown to the editor. His moral writings were very highly esteemed; and one of his pieces on female dress, “de vanis mulierum ornamentis,” excited a considerable interest. The editor of Fabricius throws some doubts on the date of the “Recuperationes,” and if there be letters in it dated 1492 and 1493, it is more probable that it is a typographical error for 1493.

, a distinguished French critic, was born at Paris, March 16, 1631. He began his studies at Nanterre, where he discovered an early taste for polite literature, and soon made surprising progress in all the valuable parts of learning In 1649 he left Nanterre, was admitted a canon regular in the abbey of St. Genevieve, and after a year’s probation took the habit in this abbey. Here he applied to philosophy and divinity, in which he made great proficiency, and took upon him priest’s orders in 1657; but, either from inclination, or in obedience to his superiors, he resumed the belles letters, and taught polite literature in several religious houses. After twelve years, being tired of the fatigue of such an employment, he gave it up, with a resolution to lead a quiet and retired life. Here he published his “Parallel, or comparison betwixt the principles of Aristotle’s natural philosophy, and those of Des Cartes,” Paris, 1674. His intention in tnis piece was not to shew the opposition betwixt these two philosophers, but to prove that they do not differ so much as is generally thought; yet this production of his was but indifferently received, either because these two philosophers differ too widely to be reconciled, or because Bossu had not made himself sufficiently acquainted with their opinions, and it is of little consequence now, since both have given way to a more sound system. The next treatise he published was that on “epic poetry,” which gained him great reputation: Boileau says it is one of the best compositions on this subject that ever appeared in the French language. Bossu having met with a piece wrote by St. Sorlin against this poet, he wrote a confutation of it, for which favour Boileau was extremely grateful; and it produced an intimate friendship betwixt them, which continued till our author’s death, March 14, 1680. He left a vast number of manuscript volumes, which are kept in the abbey of St. John de Chartres.

Bossu’s treatise on the epic was long thought a standard book, even in this country, being translated into English in 1719, 2 vols. 8vo, and there are, undoubtedly, many just remarks in it, but he is too visionary and fantastic for the present more refined state of public taste. His notion that Homer fixed on some moral truth or axiom, and then added a fable or story, in which it was of little consequence whether men or beasts were the heroes and speakers, has been acutely exposed by Drs. Blair and Warton. The first edition of this “Traité de poeme epique” was published at Paris in 1675, and it went through several other editions. There was one printed at the Hague in 17 14, which F. Le Courayer had the care of, and to which he prefixed a discourse to the abbé de Morsan, containing an account of the treatise, and some encomiums upon it, and some memoirs concerning Bossu’s life.

, bishop of Meaux, an eminent French writer and preacher, was born at Dijon, 27th of September 1627. He received the first rudiments of his education there, and in 1642 was sent to Paris to finish his studies at the college of Navarre. In 1652 he took his degrees in divinity, and soon after went to Metz, where he was made a canon. Whilst he resided here, he applied himself chiefly to the study of the scriptures, and the reading of the fathers, especially St. Augustine. In a little time he became a celebrated preacher, and was invited to Paris, where he had for his hearers many of the most learned men of his time, and several persons of the first rank at court. In 1669 he was created bishop of Condom, and the same month was appointed preceptor to the dauphin; upon which occasion, and the applause he gained in the discharge of so delicate an office, pope Innocent XI. congratulated him in a very polite letter. When he had almost finished the education of this prince, he addressed to him his “Discours surl'Histoire Universelle,” which was published in 1681, and is by far the best of his performances. About a year after he was made preceptor he gave up his bishopric, because he could not reside in his diocese, on account of his engagement at court. In 1680 the king appointed him first almoner to the dauphiness, and the year after gave him the bishopric of Meaux. In 1697 he was made counsellor of state, and the year following first almoner to the duchess of Burgundy. Nor did the learned world honour him less than the court; for he had been admitted a member of the French academy; and in 1695, at the desire of the royal college of Navarre, of which he was a member, the king constituted him their superior.

The writings of Bossuet gained him no less fame than his sermons. From the year 1655 he had entered the lists against the protestants; and the most famous piece he wrote against them was his “Refutation du catechisme de Paul Ferri.” In 1671 he wrote another, intituled “L‘exposition de la doctrine de l’église catholique sur les matieres de controverse.” This had the approbation of the bishops of France, as well as of the prelates and cardinals of Rome. Innocent XI. wrote him two letters on the subject, and the work was translated into most of the European languages: M. l'abbé Montague, a relation of the Sandwich family, was the author of the English translation. He is said to have brought back several to the Romish church who had embraced the protestant religion; and it was for the benefit of such that in 1682 he published his “Traite de la communion sous les deux espèces,” and his “Lettre pastorale aux nonveaux catholiques.” In 1686 he published his “Histoire des églises protestantes,” for which, as well as several other of his writings, he was successfully attacked by Mess. Jurieu, Burnet, Basnage, and several other protestant ministers. He always distinguished himself as a zealous advocate for the catholic religion; and so great was his desire to bring about a re-union of the protestants with the church of Rome, that for this purpose he voluntarily offered to travel into foreign countries. He formed several schemes for this purpose, which were approved of by the church of Rome, but the succeeding wars prevented his putting them in execution. His writings in controversy with the protestants, and against quietism, the religion of Madame Guion, Fenelon, and many of the pious French, make several volumes.

There are still extant several of his very celebrated funeral orations, particularly those on the queen-mother of France in 1667, on the queen of England 1669, on the dauphiness 1670, on the queen of France 1633, on the princess Palatine 1685, on chancellor le Tellier 1686, on the prince de Conde, Louis de Bourbon 16S7. These are printed in the “Recueil de Diverses Oraisons Funebres,” 5 vols. 1712, a neglected book, but containing the best specimens of French oratory. Nor, amidst all the great affairs in which he was employed, did he neglect the duty of his diocese. The “Statuts Synodaux,” which he published in 1691, and several other of his pieces, shew how attentive he was to maintain regularity of discipline. After having spent a life in the service of the church, he died at Paris, April 12, 1704, and was buried at Meaux; where his funeral was honoured with the presence of many prelates his friends, and an oration pronounced in his praise by father de la Rue the Jesuit. The same honour was likewise paid to his memory at Paris, in the college of Navarre, where cardinal Noailles performed the pontifical ceremonies, and the funeral oration was spoken by a doctor of the house. Nor was Rome silent in his praise; for an eulogium was spoken to his memory; and, what was unusual, was delivered in the Italian tongue, at the college De propaganda, by the chevalier Matfei, in presence of several cardinals, prelates, and other persons of the first rank. It was afterwards printed, and dedicated to his illustrious pupil the dauphin.

In estimating the character of this celebrated prelate, we must not be guided by d'Alembert’s desultory and artful Eloge, who, however, struggles in vain to conceal the truth, that Bossuet was, with all his taste and talents, a furious bigot in favour of the Catholic religion, and while he affected to dislike persecution, either submitted to the exercise of it, or promoted it by the asperity of his writings. We shall come nearer the truth by adopting Bossuet’s character as contrasted with that of Fenelon by the writer of the “Letters concerning Mythology,” who represents him as a prelate of vast parts, learned, eloquent, artful, and aspiring. By these qualities he rose to the first dignities in the Gallican church: while another of finer fancy and better heart (Fenelon), humble, holy, and sincere, was censured at Rome, and disgraced at the French court. Both were intrusted with the education of princes, and acquitted themselves of those duties in a very different manner. The one endeavoured to make his royal pupil noble, virtuous, and just, a father to his people, ana a friend to mankind, by the maxims of his inimitable Telemaque. The other in his discourses upon universal history, is perpetually turning his prince’s eyes from mankind to the church, as the sacred object of his care, from whose everlasting stem whoever separates is lost: and for whose interests, in the extirpation of heresy, and aggrandizement of her ministers, he is, like his father Lewis XIV. to exert all the power he has received from God.

His celebrated “Exposition of the Roman Catholic Faith,” mentioned above, was designed to show the protestants, that their reasons against returning to the Romish church might be easily removed, if they would view the doctrines of that church in their true light, and not as they had been erroneously represented by protestant writers. Nine years, however, passed before this book could obtain the pope’s approbation. Clement X. refused it positively; and several catholic priests were rigorously treated and severely persecuted, for preaching the doctrine contained in the exposition of Bossuet, which was likewise formally condemned by the university of Louvain in the year 1685, and declared to be scandalous and pernicious. All this we should have thought a proof of the merit of the work, if it had not been at length licensed and held up as unanswerable by the protestants. The artifice, however, employed in the composition of it, and the tricks that were used in the suppression and alteration of the first edition, have been detected with great sagacity by archbishop Wake in the introduction to his “Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England,” and in his two “Defences” of that Exposition, in which the perfidious sophistry of Bossuet is unmasked and refuted in the most satisfactory manner. There was also an excellent answer to Bossuet' s book by M. de la Bastide, one of the most eminent protestant ministers in France. Of this answer the French prelate took no notice during eight years: at the end of which he published an advertisement, in a new edition of his “Exposition,” which was designed to remove the objections of La Bastide. The latter replied in such a demonstrative manner, that the learned bishop, notwithstanding all his eloquence and art, was obliged to quit the field of controversy. There is a very interesting account of this insidious work of Bossuet, and the controversies it occasioned, in the “Bibliotheque des Sciences,” published at the Hague, vol. XV Ih. This account, which is curious, ample, accurate, and learned, was given partly on occasion of a new edition of the “Exposition” printed at Paris in 1761, and accompanied with a Latin translation by Fleury, and partly on occasion of Burigny’s “Lite of Bossuet,” published the same year at Paris.

Had the French press, however, remained open, the controversy between the catholics and protestants might have soon been brought to a conclusion: but other measures were to be adopted, more characteristic of the genius of popery. Bossuet has been praised by most French writers for his laudable attempts to promote an union between the catholic and reformed churches of France. The basis of this union was not very promising. The reformed were to give up every thing, the catholics nothing, and the subsequent practice was worse than this principle. In the “Memoirs pour servira I'histoire des Refugies Francois dans les etats du Roi,” or Memoirs of the French refugees in the dominions of the king of Prussia, by Messrs. Erman and Reclam, published at Berlin in 1782, we have a curious developement of the plan of union, as detected by the celebrated Claude. The reformed church of Paris, which was a considerable edifice, was to be surrounded with troops; the archbishop of Paris and the bishop of Meaux (Bosquet) accompanied with a train of priests and the lieutenant of the police, were to march thither in procession, during divine service: one of these prelates was to mount the pulpit and summon the congregation to submit to the mother church and re-unite; a number of Roman Catholics, posted for the purpose in different parts of the church, as if they belonged to it, were to answer the prelate’s summons, by crying out “re-union!” after which the other prelate was to give the congregation a public absolution from the charge of heresy, and to receive the new pretended converts into the bosom of the church; and this scandalous farce was to be imposed upon the world for an actual re-union. This plan affords a tolerable specimen of Bossuet as a prelate, and a man of candour; and it is worthy of notice, that his associate in this expedition, was the libertine Harlai, archbishop of Paris, whose life and death were so scandalous, that not a single curate could be found, among the most unprincipled part of the Romish clergy, who would undertake to preach his funeral sermon.

, a monk of St. Edmund’s bury in the fourteenth century, and who is thought to have died in 1410, was one of the first collectors of the lives of English writers, and the precursor of Leland, Bale, and Pitts. He searched indefatigably all the libraries of the kingdom, and wrote a catalogue of the authors, with short opinions of them. Archbishop Usher had the most curious ms copy of this book, which became afterwards Mr. Thomas Gale’s property. Wood mentions another smaller catalogue of his writing. He wrote also “Speculum ccenobitarum,” in which he gives the origin and progress of monachism; and a history of his own monastery. “De rebus cœnobii sui,” which last is lost, but the former was printed at Oxford 1722, 8vo, by Hall at the end of “Trivet. Annal.”

, a popular and learned Scotch divine, was born in the town of Dunse, March 17, 1676, and educated at the grammar school of that place, where he was taught the elements of Latin, Greek, rhetoric, and arithmetic. In 1692, he went to the university of Edinburgh, where he went through the usual courses for three years, and entered on the study of divinity. In 1695, he returned home with ample testimonials of his diligence and good character. Next year he taught school at Glencairn for a short time, and then was appointed tutor to a young gentleman of family at Edinburgh, where he continued the study of divinity, until he accompanied his pupil into the country. In 1699, after the usual trials before the presbytery, he was licenced to preach the gospel, as a probationer for the ministry, agreeably to the forms of the church of Scotland, and in September of that year was ordained to the Jiving of Simprin, one of the smallest in Scotland. In the following year he married Katherine Brown, whom he describes as a woman possessed of many valuable qualifications. In May 1707, he exchanged the living of Simprin for that of Etterick, on which he remained until his death. About this time he began to improve his knowledge in the Hebrew, having before only read the Psalter, but 1771 was, according to his own account, “the happy year wherein he was first master (possessor) of a Hebrew Bible, and began the study of it;” and some day, which he forgot, in Oct 1712, was the Happiest day in his life, for he then borrowed “Cross’s Taghmical Art.” More than half his cares and anxieties alter this related to the Hebrew accents. About this time, he was one of the clergy of Scotland, who refused taking the oath of abjuration, and in dread of the penalty, made over his little property to one of his sons, and another person, but it does not appear that the penalty was ever levied. Returning in 1715 to the study of the “Taghmical Art,” after incredible pains, he found that he could make nothing of it; but still persevering, he became persuaded that the accents are the key to the true version of the Hebrew text, and the intrinsic light which illuminates it. Compared to this, as to him, the digging in the mines of Peru was but a trifle. From this time he began to write, as leisure permitted, a work on the accents, accompanying his labours with constant prayer, particularly that he might be instructed in the secrets of double accentuation, which he had not been able to comprehend. All this zeal and industry at length produced an “Essay on the Hebrew accentuation,” which he exhibited in manuscript to some learned friends, who gave him various degrees of encouragement, but he often met with delays and evasions which occasioned great uneasiness to the good man. It being supposed that there were few persons in Great Britain very much interested in the Hebrew accents, he was advised to translate it into Latin that it might circulate among the learned on the continent. Accordingly he began his translation, and as a help to his style, he mentions the following expedient, which perhaps others have made use of on similar occasions. “As I went on, I read something of Cicero, in my leisure hours, for the language, and noted in a book some terms and phraser, taken from him and others: particularly out of Calepin’s dictionary, which Providence had in the year 1724 laid to my hand, when 1 knew not for what use it was designed, and to this collection 1 had frequent recourse, while I wrote that book: and found it to be of good use to me. I had formerly, upon occasion of appearing in print, done the same as to the English tongue: by which means my style, that I had been careless of before, was now somewhat refined.” This work, which he pursued with uncommon enthusiasm, and which was to prove the antiquity and divine authority of the Hebrew accents, was occasionally interrupted by his public services, and the publication of some of his practical works, particularly “The Fourfold State,” in 1720. That on the Hebrew accents did not appear until 1738, when it was published at Amsterdam under the care of the learned David Mill, professor of Oriental languages in the university of Utrecht, in a quarto volume entitled “Thomæ Boston ecclesiæ Atricensis apud Scotos pastoris, Tractatus Stigmologicus Hebraeo-Biblicus,” dedicated to sir Richard Ellys, who had been very friendly to Boston in the prosecution of his studies on this subject. Mr. Boston died May 20, 1732. His works in practical divinity, which are still well known and popular in Scotland, were collected in a large fol. volume in 1768, and since that time others, particularly his “Body of Divinity,” 3 vols. 8vo. 1773, have been published from his Mss. but this last mentioned work is eked out by extracts from other authors witnout acknowledgment, a disingenuous artifice of which the author never would have been guilty. The most remarkable of his posthumous pieces is the “Memoirs of his Lite, Time, and Writings,” written by himself, a closely printed octavo volume, 1776. This is in the form of a diary, tedious and minute beyond all precedent, but evincing a wonderful simplicity of heart, ignorance of the world, and a mind continually harrassed by conscientious scruples about the merest trifles; much of it, however, may be interesting to curious inquirers, as exhibiting characteristics of the manners and sentiments of the Scotch clergy of the seventeenth and part of the eighteenth century.

, the friend and biographer of Dr. Johnson, was the eldest son of Alexander Boswell, lord Auchinleck, one of the judges in the supreme courts of session and justiciary in Scotland. He was born at Edinburgh, Oct. 29, 1740, and received the first rudiments of education in that city. He afterwards studied civil law in the universities of Edinburgh and Glasgow. During his residence in these cities, he acquired by the society of the English gentlemen who were students in the Scotch colleges, that remarkable predilection for their manners, which neither the force of education, or national prejudice, could ever eradicate. But his most intimate acquaintance at this period was the rev. Mr. Temple, a worthy, learned, and pious divine, whose well-written character of Gray has been adopted both by Dr. Johnson and Mason in the life of that poet. Mr. Boswell imbibed early the ambition of distinguishing himself by his literary talents, and had the good fortune to obtain the patronage of the late lord Somerville. This pobleman treated him with the most flattering kindness; and Mr. Bosvvell ever remembered with gratitude the friendship he so long enjoyed with this worthy peer. Having always entertained an exalted idea of the felicity of London, in the year 1760 he visited that capital; in the manners and amusements of which he found so much that was congenial to his own taste and feelings, that it hecanie ever after his favourite residence, whither he always returned from his estate in Scotland, and from his various rambles in different parts of Europe, with increasing eagerness and delight; and we find him, nearly twenty years afterwards, condemning Scotland as too narrow a sphere, and wishing to make his chief residence in London, which he calls the great scene of ambition and instruction. He was, doubtless, confirmed in this attachment to the metropolis by the strong predilection entertained towards it by his friend Dr. Johnson, whose sentiments on this subject Mr. Boswell details in various parts of his life of that great man, and which are corroborated by every one in pursuit of literary and intellectual attainments.

The politeness, affability, and insinuating urbanity of manners, which distinguished Mr. Boswell, introduced him into the company of many eminent and learned men, whose acquaintance and friendship he cultivated with the greatest assiduity. In truth, the esteem and approbation of learned men seem to have been one chief object of his literary ambition; and we find him so successful in pursuing his end, that he enumerated some of the greatest men in Scotland among his friends even before he left it for the first time. Notwithstanding Mr. Boswell by his education was intended for the bar, yet he was himself earnestly bent at this period upon obtaining a commission in the guards, and solicited lord Auchinleck’s acquiescence; but returned, however, by his desire, into Scotland, where he received a regular course of instruction in the law, and passed his trials as a civilian at Edinburgh. Still, however, ambitious of displaying himself as one of the “manly hearts who guard the fair,” he visited London a second time in 1762; and, various occurrences delating the purchase of a commission, he was at length persuaded by lord Auchinleck to relinquish his pursuit, and become an advocate at the Scotch bar. In compliance, therefore, with his father’s wishes, he consented to go to Utrecht the ensuing winter, to hear the lectures of an excellent civilian in that university; after which he had permission to make his grand tour of Europe. The year 1763 may be considered the most important epocha in Mr. Boswell’s life, as he had, what he thought a singular felicity, an introduction to Dr. Johnson. This event, so auspicious for Mr. Boswel!, and eventually so fortunate for the public, happened on May 16, 1763. Having continued one winter at Utrecht, during which time he visited several parts of the Netherlands, he commenced his projected travels. Passing from Utrecht into Germany, he pursued his route through Switzerland to Geneva; whence he crossed the Alps into Italy, having visited on his journey Voltaire at Ferney, and Rousseau in the wilds of Neufchatel. Mr. Bosweli continued some time in Italy, where he met and associated with lord Mountstuart, to whom he afterwards dedicated his Theses Juridicae. Having visited the most remarkable cities in Italy, Mr. Bosweli sailed to Corsica, travelled over every part of that island, and obtained the friendship of the illustrious Pasquale de Paoli, in whose palace he resided during his stay at Corsica. He afterwards went to Paris, whence he returned to Scotland in 1766, and soon after became an advocate at the Scotch bar. The celebrated Douglas cause was at that time a subject of general discussion. Mr. Boswell published the “Essence of the Douglas cause;” a pamphlet which contributed to procure Mr. Douglas the popularity which he at that time possessed. In 1768 Mr. Bosweli published his “Account of Corsica, with memoirs of General Paoli.” Of this printed performance Dr. Johnson thus expresses himself: “Your journal is curious and delightful. I know not whether I could name any narrative by which curiosity is better excited or better gratified.” This book has been translated into the German, Dutch, Italian, and French languages; and was received with extraordinary approbation. In the following winter, the theatre-royal at Edinburgh, hitherto restrained by party -spirit, was opened. On this occasion Mr. Bosweli was solicited by David Ross, esq. to write a prologue.‘ The effect of this prologue upon the audience was highly flattering to the author, and beneficial to the manager; as it secured to the latter, by the annihilation of the opposition which had been till that time too successfully’exerted against him, the uninterrupted possession of his patent, which he enjoyed till his death, which happened in September 1790. Mr. Bosweli attended his funeral as chief mourner, and paid the last honours to a man with whom he had spent many a pleasant hour. In 1769, was celebrated at Stratford on Avon the jubilee in honour of Shakspeare. Mr. Boswell. an enthusiastic admirer of the writings of our immortal bard, a. id ever ready to join the festive throng, repaired thither, and appeared at the masquerade ay an armed Corsican chief; a character he was eminently qualified to support. This year he married miss Margaret Montgomery, a lady who, to the advantages of a polite education, united admirable good sense and a brilliant understanding. She was daughter of David Montgomery, esq. related to the illustrious family of Eglintoune, and representative of the antient peerage of Lyle. The death of this amiable woman happened in June 1790. Mr. Boswell has honoured her memory with an affectionate tribute. She left him two sons and three daughters; who, to use Mr. Boswell' s own words, “if they inherit her good qualities, will have no reason to complain of their lot. Dos magna parentum virtus.” In 1782 lord Auchinleck died. In 1783, Mr. Boswell published his celebrated Letter to the People of Scotland; which is thus praised by Johnson in a letter to the author; “I am very much of your opinion your paper contains very considerable knowledge of history and the constitution, very properly produced and applied.” Mr. Boswell communicated the pamphlet to Mr. Pitt, who naturally gave it his approbation. This first letter was followed by a second, in which I.Ii. Bosweil displayed his usual energy and political abilities. In 1785, Mr. Boswell published “A journal of a tour to the Hebrides” with Dr. Johnson; which met a success similar to his entertaining account of Corsica, and to which we owe his life of that illustrious character. This year Mr. Boswell removed to London, and was soon after called to the English bar, but his professional business was interrupted by preparing his most celebrated work, “The life of Samuel Johnson, LL. D.” which was published in 1790, and was received by the world with extraordinary avidity. It is a faithful history of Johnson’s life; and exhibits a most interesting picture of the character of that illustrious mom list, delineated with a masterly hand. The preparation of a second edition of this work was the last literary performance of Mr. Boswell. Mr. Boswell undoubtedly possessed considerable intellectual powers; as he could never have displayed his collection of the witticisms of his friend in so lively a manner as he has done, without having a picturesque imagination, and a turn for poetry as well as humour. He had a considerable share of melancholy in his temperament; and, though the general tenor of his life was gay and active, he frequently experienced an unaccountable depression of spirits. In one of these gloomy moods he wrote a series of essays under the title of “The Hypochondriac,” which appeared in the London Magazine, and end with No. 63 in 1732. These he had thoughts of collecting into a volume, but they would have added little to his reputation, being in general very trifling. Soon after his return from a visit to Auchinleck, he was seized with a disorder which put an end to his life, at his house in Portland-street, on the 19th of June 1795, in the 55th year of his age. Of his own character he gives the following account in his journal of the tour to the Hebrides: “I have given a sketch of Dr. Johnson. His readers may wish to know a little of his fellow-traveller. Think, then, of a gentleman of ancient blood; the pride of which was his predominant passion. He was then in his 33d year, and had been about four years happily married: his inclination was to be a soldier; but his father, a respectable judge, had pressed him into the profession of the law. He had travelled a good deal, and seen many varieties of human life. He had thought more than any body supposed, and had a pretty good stock of general learning and knowledge. He had all Dr. Johnson’s principles, with some degree of relaxation. He had rather too little than too much prudence; and, his imagination being lively, he often said things of which the effect was very different from the intention. He resembled sometimes * The best good maH, with the worstnatured muse.‘ He cannot deny himself the vanity of finishing with the encomium of Dr. Johnson, whose friendly partiality to the companion of this tour represents him as one ’ whose acuteness would help my enquiry, and whose gaiety of conversation, and civility of manners, are sufficient to counteract the inconveniencies of travel, in countries less hospitable than we have passed'.”

His character in all its lights and shades is, however, best delineated in his life of Dr. Johnson, a work of uncommon merit and of still increasing popularity. An anonymous biographer has justly said of it, that it was “found to exhibit an inimitably faithful picture of the mingled genius and weakness, of the virtues and the vices, the sound sense and the pedantry, the benignity and the passionate harshness, of the great and excellent, although not consummately perfect man, the train of whose life it endeavoured to untold. It appeared to be filled with a rich store of his genuine dictates, so eloquent and vvise^ that they need hardly shun comparison with the most elaborate of those works which he himself published. Johnson was seen in it^ not as a solitary figure, but associated with those groupes of his distinguished contemporaries with which it was his good fortune, in all the latter and more illustrious years of his life, often to meet and to converse. It displayed many fine specimens of that proportion, in which, in the latter part of the eighteenth century, literature and philosophical wisdom were liable to be carelessly intermingled in the ordinary conversation of the best company in Britain. It preserved a thousand precious anecdotical memorials of the state of arts, manners, and policy among us during this period, such as must be invaluable to the philosophers and antiquaries of a future age. It gave, in the most pleasing mode of institution, and in many different points of view, almost all the elementary practical principles both of taste and of moral science. It showed the colloquial tattle of Boswell duly chastened by the grave and rounded eloquence of Johnson. It presented a collection of a number of the most elaborate of Johnson’s smaller occasional compositions, which might otherwise perhaps have been entirely lost to future times. Shewing Boswell’s skill in literary composition, his general acquaintance with learning and science, his knowledge of the manners, the fortunes, and the actuating principles of mankind, to have been greatly extended and improved since the time when he wrote his account of Corsica, it exalted the character of his talents in the estimation of the world; and was reckoned to be such a master-piece in its particular species, as perhaps the literature of no other nation, ancient or modern, could boast. It did not indeed present its author to the world in another light than as a genius of the second class; yet it seemed to rank him nearer to the first than to the third. This estimation of the character of Boswell’s life of Johnson, formed by the best critics soon after its publication, seems to have been since fully confirmed.”

, an eminent physician of Piedmont, who flourished about the middle of the 16th century, was a disciple of Fallopius, and took his degree of doctor in medicine at Padua. It appears by his writings, that he was a diligent observer, and enjoyed a considerable share of practice. He was in succession physician and aulic counsellor to Charles IX. Henry II. of France, and to William prince of Orange. He was also skilled in the practice of surgery, and published, “De curandis vulneribus sclopetorum,” Venet. 1560, 8vo. This has been frequently reprinted, and continued, for a long time, to be esteemed the most useful manual that had been published on the subject. He wrote also “Commentarioli duo, alter de medici, alter de aegvoti, munere,” Lion. 1565, 8vo; containing rules for the conduct of the physician, the surgeon, and the apothecary, in their attendance upon the sick. But the work by which he is most known, and which produced an important revolution in the practice of medicine, is his “De curatione per sanguinis missione, de incidendae venae, cutis scarificandae, et hirudinum arrigendarum modo,” Antw. 1583, 8vo. Though bleeding had always been occasionally used in the cure of diseases, yet in his time it was nearly constantly superseded by purging medicines, or it was too sparingly used, and seldom repeated. Our author made frequent recourse to it, with complete success, he says, in diarrhoea, dysentery, in fever, the plague, and during pregnancy; and flattered with success, he became, as he advanced in life, more and more bold and free in the use of the lancet, and bleeding became a general remedy all over Europe; but in no country was it carried to such excess as in France, where the professors of medicine, for their too frequent recurrence to it, were held up to ridicule by Le Sage, in his inimitable novel of Gil Bias. The works of Botallus were collected, and published under the title of “Opera Omnia,” in 1660, at Leyden, by I. V. Home.

, were two eminent Dutch painters and engravers; John was born at Utrecht, in 1610, and was the disciple of Abraham Bloemart, who at the same time instructed Andrew; but to perfect themselves in a good taste of design, they went together to Rome, and resided there for a great many years. The genius of John directed him to the study of landscape, in which he rose almost to the highest perfection, making the style of Claude Lorraine his model; and by many his works are mentioned in competition even with those of Claude. The warmth of his skies, the judicious and regular receding of the objects, and the sweetness of his distances, afford the eye a degree of pleasure, superior to what we feel on viewing the works of almost any other artist. John and Andrew had very different talents, and each of them were admirable in their different way. The former excelled in landscape, the latter inserted the figures, which he designed in the manner of Bamboccio; and those figures are always so well adapted, that every picture seemed only the work of one master. The works of these associate brothers are justly admired through all Europe; they are universally sought for, and purchased at very large prices. Most of his pictures are, for size, between two and five feet long; but in those that are smaller, there is exquisite neatness. They generally express the sunny light of the morning, breaking out from behind woods, hills, or mountains, and diffusing a warm glow over the skies, trees, and the whole face of nature; or else a sun-set, with a lovely tinge in the clouds, every object beautifully partaking of a proper degree of natural illumination. And it is to be observed, that even the different hours of the day are perceptible in his landscapes, from the propriety of the tints which he uses. By some connoisseurs he is censured for having too much of the tawny in his colouring, and that the leafings of his trees are too yellow, approaching to saffron; but this is not a general fault in his pictures, though some of them, accidentally, may justly be liable to that criticism, for he corrected that fault; and many of his pictures are no more tinged with those colours, than truth and beautiful nature will justify; and his colouring obtained for him the distinction which he still possesses, of being called Both of Italy.

Descamps, in the life of Both, after having said that John painted landscapes, and Andrew figures, in the manner of Bamboccio, asserts that Andrew was drowned in a canal at Venice, and John returned to Utrecht; in which account he appears to follow Sandrart; though other writers agree, that it was the landscape-painter who was drowned, and Andrew, returning to his own country, painted conversations and portraits as long as he lived, of which the other was incapable. The two brothers mutually assisted each other till the death of John in 1650; and then Andrew retired from Italy, settled at Utrecht, and continued to paint sometimes portraits, sometimes landscapes, in the manner of his brother, and also conversations, and players at cards, in the manner of Bamboccio. Both of those masters had extraordinary readiness of hand, and a free, light, sweet pencil; and that they were expeditious, may be evident from the great number of pictures which they finished. Andrew, during the remainder of his life, had as much employment as he could possibly execute; but was so affected by the melancholy death of his brother, that he survived him only a few years, dying in 1656. Strutt mentions a few engravings by both these artists, but neither arrived at any great perfection in the art.

, or William Worcester, an ancient English writer, acquainted with history, antiquities, heraldry, physic, and astronomy, was born at Bristol about 1415; his father’s name was Worcester, and his mother’s Botoner, hence he often names himself William Wyrcester, alias Botoner; and hence the error in Pits, and others, of making two distinct persons of the two names. He studied at Hart-hall, Oxford, 1434. He had been exercised in wars above 44 years; and had so faithfully served sir John Fastolff that he left him one of his executors. He wrote many books, the first of which, that was printed, was his translation from the French, of “Cicero de Senectute,” which he addressed to William Wainfleet, bishop of Winchester. He tells us that he presented it to the bishop at Asher [JSsher] August 10, 1475, but received no reward (nullum regardum recepide episcopo). He wrote also “Antiquities of England;” “Abbreviations of the Learned;” “Medicinal collections;” a book of Astrology; another of Astronomy; besides a particular treatise, gratefully preserving the life and deeds of his master, under the title of “Acta Domini Johannis Fastolff;” “the Acts of John duke of Bedford;” “Polyandrium Oxoniensium, or memoirs of Oxford Students;” and other lesser pieces; of which see Tanner Bibl. Brit. p. 115. His “Annals of England” were printed by Hearne at the end of his “Liber Niger Scaccarii,” p. 424 451. His “Itinerary” was published from a ms. not improbably the original, in the library at Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, by Mr. James Nasmith, fellow of the said college, Cantab. 1778, 8vo. Fuller cites a book of Botoner’s, containing all the ancient gentry of the county of Norfolk, long preserved in the county, but not now extant. He also wrote something in poetry, as that htimoroirs ballad in Nasmith’s edition of his Itinerary, called " Comedia a<i Monasterium Hulme/' &c. and a long chronographical epitaph in verse, on the lady Milicent Fastoif; in the possession of Richard Poley, esq. late prothonotary of the common pleas. He is supposed to have died about 1490. The son of this Worcester, among other things, also made a collection of several authentic instruments relating to the English wars and government in France; which he dedicated to king Edward IV. containing a catalogue of the princes, dukes, earls, barons, bannerets, knights, and other persons of eminence, who were of the regent’s court. A copy of this collection, in quarto, was some time in the custody of the late Brian Fairfax, esq. one of the commissioners of the customs.

, an architect, who was born in France in 1670, of protestant parents, quitted his country early in life, and went into the service of William of Orange, afterwards king of Great Britain. After the death of that prince, he attached himself to the elector of Brandenbourg, who gave him a post of captain of the guards, which did not slacken his industry in architecture. His first edifice was the arsenal at Berlin, and he afterwards signalized himself by various monuments of his art. Frederic I. being dead, Bott conciliated the favour of Frederic William, who raised him to the rank of major-general. The fortifications of Wesel, of which place he was commandant, were constructed under his direction. In 1728 he went into the service of the king of Poland, elector of Saxony, in quality of lieutenant-general and chief of the engineers. In Dresden are several edifices of his erection, where he died in 1745, with great reputation for probity, intelligence, and valour.

, an English clergyman of ingenuity and learning, was descended from an ancient family in Staffordshire, and born at Derby in 1688. His grandfather had been a major on the parliament side in the civil wars; his father had diminished a considerable paternal estate by gaming; but his mother, a woman of great prudence, contrived to give a good education to six children. Thomas the youngest acquired his grammatical learning at Derby; had his education among the dissenters; and was appointed to preach to a presbyterian congregation at Spalding in Lincolnshire. Not liking this mode of life, he removed to London at the end of queen Anne’s reign, with a view of preparing himself for physic; but changing his measures again, he took orders in the church of England, soon after the accession of George I. and was presented to the rectory of Winburg in Norfolk. About 1725 he was presented to the benefice of Reymerston; in 1734, to the rectory of Spixworth; and, in 1747, to the rectory of Edgefield; all in Norfolk. About 1750, his mental powers began to decline; and, at Christmas 1752, he ceased to appear in the pulpit. He died at Norwich, whither he had removed, in 1753, with his family, Sept. 23, 1754, leaving a wife, whom he mafried in 1739; and also a son, Edmund Bott, esq. of Christ church in Hampshire, a fellow of the Antiquarian society, who published, in 1771, A collection of cases relating to the Poor laws. Dr. Kippis, who was his nephew by marriage, has given a prolix article on him, and a minute character, in which, however, there appears to have been little of the amiable, and in his religious opinions he was capricious and unsteady. His works were, 1. “The peace and happiness of this world, the immediate design of Christianity, on Luke ix. 56,” a pamphlet in 8vo, 1724. 2. A second tract in defence of this, 1730, 8vo. 3. “The principal and peculiar notion of a late book, entitled, The religion of nature delineated, considered, and refuted,” 1725. This was against Wollaston’s notion of moral obligation. 4. A visitation sermon, preached at Norwich, April 30th, 1730. 5. A 30th of January sermon, preached at Norwich, and printed at the request of the mayor, &c. 6. “Remarks upon Butler’s 6th chapter of the Analogy of Religion, &c. concerning Necessity,” 1730. 7. Answer to the first volume of Warburton’s Divine Legation of Moses.

Among other learned acquaintance of Mr. Bott was Dr. Samuel Clarke, of whom he relates, that he was not only of a cheerful, but of a playful disposition. Once, when Mr. Bott called upon him, he found him swimming upon a table. At another time, when several of them were amusing themselves with diverting tricks, Dr. Clarke, looking out of the window, and seeing a grave blockhead approaching, called out, “Boys, boys, be wise; here comes a fool.” We have heard the like of Dr. Clarke from other quarters, and are not sure that the “grave blockhead” may not have been the most decorous character.

, a very learned prelate of the court of Rome, was born at Florence, Jan. 15, 1689, and became early distinguished for the purity of his style, and his intimate knowledge of the Tuscan dialect. He studied rhetoric and Latin uiuier Antonio-Maria Biscioni, who was afterwards dictator of the Mediceo-Lorenzian library. (See Biscioni). He then studied philosophy, divinity, mathematics, and Greek, the latter under the learned Salvini. His proficiency in these branches of knowledge soon made him noticed, and he was appointed by the academy della Crusca, to superintend the new edition of their dictionary, in which labour he was assisted by Andrea Alamaorni and Rosso Martini. He had afterwards the direction of the printing-ofBce belonging to the Grand Duke, from which several of his works issued. Clement XII. made him librarian of the Vatican, in which he arranged a cabinet of medals, which that pope wished to be considered as a part of the library. On his death, Bottari entered the conclave Feb. 6, 1740, with the cardinal Neri Corsini. Next year was published by P. Marmoreus, the edition of Virgil^ Rome, 1741, fol. a fac-simile of the famous Codex Vaticanus, to which Bottari prefixed a learned preface. He was the first who had the curiosity to examine this valuable manuscript, which belonged formerly to Pontanus, afterwards to Bembus, and lastly to Fulvius Ursinus, who deposited it in the Vatican, when he became librarian there. Benedict XIV. being elected pope, who had long been the friend of Bottari, he conferred on him the canonry of St. Maria-Transteverini, and that he might reside in his palace, appointed him his private almoner. He was also a member of all the principal academies of Italy; and Fontanini, Apostolo Zeno, Gori, and others, have written his eloges, having all profited, in the publication of their works, by his valuable communications. His long and studious life terminated June 3, 1775, in his eighty-sixth year. Among his works, of which Mazzuchelli has given a long list, are, 1. Vita di Francesco Sacchetti,“Vicenza (Naples) 1725, with Sacchetti’s” Novelle,“8vo. 2.” L'Ercolano, dialogodi Benedetto Varchi,“Florence, 1730, 4to. 3.” Lezione tre sopra il tremuoto,“Rome, 1733 and 1748, 4to. 4.” Sculture, e Pitture sacre estratte dai cimeteri di Roma, &c.“Rome, 1737, 1747, 1753, 3 vols. fol. 5.” Vocabularia della Crusca,“Florence, 1738, 6 vols. 6. The Virgil already noticed. 7.” De Museo Capitolino,“1750, 3 vols fol. 8.” Raccolta di lettere sulla Pittura, Sculrura, ed Architettura,“Rome, 1754, 1757, and 1759, 3 vols. 4to; and again, an enlarged edition at Naples, 1772. 9.” Dialog hi sopra tre arti del Disegno," Lucca, 1754, 4to. He also contributed to a new edition oi Vasari and Passori’s Lives of the Painters.

an Italian painter and engraver, was born at Florence, in 1437; and being placed as a disciple with Filippo Lippi, he imitated that master, as well in his design as colouring. He performed several considerable works at Florence, and several at Rome, by which he gained great reputation; at the former, a Venus rising from the sea, and also a Venus adorned by the graces; and at the latter, he painted sacred subjects from the New Testament, which at that time were very much commended. He obtained great honour by his performances in the chapel of Sixtus IV. for which he was very amply rewarded; and for the family of the Medici he finished some portraits, and many historical compositions. It was customary with this master to introduce a great number of figures in all the subjects he designed, and he disposed them with tolerable judgment and propriety; but in one of his designs, representing the Adoration of the Magi, the variety and multitude of his figures are astonishing. He received large sums of money for his works, all of which he expended, and died in 1515 in great distress, and far advanced in years.

Mr Strutt has introduced him in chap. VI. of his “Origin and Progress of Engraving,” to which we refer the reader. Baldini, according to the general report, communicated to him the secret of engraving, then nt-wiy discovered by their townsman Finiguerra. The curious edition of Dante printed at Florence in 1481 (or 1488) and to which, according to some authors, Botticelli undertook to write notes, was evidently intended to have been ornamented with prints, one for each canto: and these prints (as many of them as were finished) were designed, if not engraved, by Botticelli. Mr. Roscoe, however, says, that they were designed by Botticelli, and engraved by Baldini. It is remarkable, that the first two plates only were printed upon the leaves of the book, and for want of a blank space at the head of the first canto, the plate belonging to it is placed at the bottom of the pag'e. Blank spaces are left for all the rest, that as many of them as were finished might be pasted on. Mr. Wilbraham possesses the finest copy of this book extant in any private library; and the number of prints in it amounts to nineteen, the first two, as usual, printed on the leaves, and the rest pasted on; and these, Mr. Strutt thinks, were all that Botticelli ever executed. Mr. Roscoe describes another copy as in his possession, formerly in the Pinelli library.

, a physician, descended of an illustrious family of Parma, was born at Padua in the beginning of the sixteenth century, and in 1555 became professor of medicine in that city, where he was esteemed for his talents and success as a practitioner. He died in 1596, leaving behind him an immense property, an elegant house, &c. He published, l.“De Vita conservanda,” Padua, 1582, 4to. 2. “De morbis muliebribus,” ibid. 1585, and twice reprinted, besides in the collections of Bauhine and Spachius. 3. “Consilia medica,” Francfort, 1605, 4to. in Lautenbach’s collection. 4. “De modo discurrendi circa morbos eosdem curandi tractatus,” ibid. 1607, 12mo. with the Pandects of John George Schenck. An edition was afterwards published at Francfort in 1695, 8vo, with the title, “Methodus medicinales duae,” &c.

, the son of Nicholas Bottom, a celebrated philosopher and physician of Leontini, in Sicily, was born the 6th of October 1641, and received his education under Peter Castello. In 1658, he was admitted to the degree of doctor, and was soon after made physician to the marquis De Villa Franca, viceroy of Sicily, physician to the royal hospital of Messina, and superintendant of the physicians there, with a pension of 50 crowns per month. He afterwards enjoyed a similar situation under the viceroy of Naples. In 1697, he was made corresponding jor honorary member of the royal society of London, to which he had previously sent his “Idea historico-physica tie magno trinacrisc terras motu,” which is published in their transactions. He was the first Sicilian physician who had received that honour. He wrote also “Pyrologia topograpuica, id est, de igne dissertatio, juxta loca, cum eorun. doscriptione,” Neapoli, 1692, 4to. “Febris rheumaticse malignae, historia medica,” Messina, 1712, 8vo. “Preserve salutari contro il contagioso malore,” Messina, 1621, 4to. He died about the year 1731.

, a French sculptor, was the son of a sculptor and architect, and born at Chaumont in Bassigni in 1698. He was drawn by an irresistible passion for these two arts, but confined himself at length to the former. After having passed some time at Paris under the younger Coustou, and obtained the prize at the academy in 1722, he was carried to Rome at the king’s expence. Upon his return from Italy, where his talents had been greatly improved, he adorned Paris with his works: a list of them may be seen in a life of him, published in 1762, 12mo, by the count de Caylus, but some of them no longer exist, particularly his fine equestrian statue of Louis XV. formerly in the square named after that monarch. In 1744 he obtained a place in the academy; and, two years after, a professorship. He died July 17, 1762, a loss to the arts, and much lamented; for he is described as a man of great talent, disinterested spirit, and of most amiable manners. Music was his object in the hours of recreation, and his talents in this way were very considerable. Count Caylus, in his “Tableaux tires de l‘Iliade et de l’Odysse d'Homere,” mentions Bouchardon, with honour, among the tew artists who borrowed their subjects from Homer, and relates the following anecdote: “This great artist having lately read Homer in an old and detestable French translation, came one day to me, his eyes sparkling with fire, and said, * Since I have read this book, men seem to be fifteen feet high, and all nature is enlarged in my sight'.” This anecdote, however, does not give a very high idea of the education of a French artist, and a professor of the art.

, a law-writer of great reputation in France, was born at Paris, April 16, 1719, of an honourable family. His father, who was also a lawyer, spared no expence in his education. From the age of sixteen he studied jurisprudence with such perseverance and success as to be admitted to a doctor’s degree in 1747. Being employed to prepare the articles on jurisprudence and canon law for the Encyclopaedia, he wrote those on council, decretals, &c. but, for what reason we are not told, they gave offence to the encyclopedists, who became on that account his enemies, and prevented him for some time from attaining the rank of professor, which wag the object of his ambition. Bouchaud, however, consoied himself by cultivating a taste for modem poetry. He translated several of the dramas of Apostolo Zeno into French, and published them in 1758, 2 vols. 12mo, and in 1764 he translated the English novel of “Lady Julia Mandeville.” In the interval between these two, he published “Essai sur la poesie rhythmique,” 1763, which was thought a work of great merit. This was followed by the first of his more professional labours, “Traité de Timpot du vingtieme sur les successions, et de l'impot sur les marchandises chez les Romains,” a very curious history of the taxes which the ancient emperors imposed. In 1766, on the death of M. Hardron, he was elected into the French academy, notwithstanding the opposition of the encyclopedists, whose dislike seems not ill calculated to give us a favourable idea of the soundness of his principles. This was followed by a law professorship, and some years after he was advanced to the professorship of the law of nature and nations in the royal college of France. He was nominated to this by the king in 1774, and was the first professor, it being then founded. On this he wrote in the memoirs of the academy, a curious paper concerning the societies that were formed hy the Roman publicans for the receipt of the taxes. The body of the publicans was taken from the order of knights, and had great influence and credit. They were called by Cicero “the ornament of the capital,” and the “pillars of the state.” Th“knights, though rich, entered into associations, when the taxes of a whole province were farmed out by the senate, because no individual was opulent enough to be responsible for such extensive engagements; and the nature of these societies or associations, and the various conventions, commercial a>id pecuniary engagements, occupations, and offices, to which they gave rise, form the subject of this interesting paper, which was followed by various others on topics of the same nature. In 1777 he published his” Theorie des traits de commerce entre les nations,“the principles of which seem to be founded on justice and reciprocal benefits. In 1784 appeared another curious work on the ancient Roman laws and policy, entitled,” Recherches historiques surla Police des Romains, concernant les grands chemins, les rues, et les marches.“His” Commentaire sur les lois des clouze tables," first published in 1767, was reprinted in 1803, with improvements and additions, at the expense of the French government, and he was employed in some treatises intended for the national institute, when he died, Feb. 1, 1804, regretted as aprofound and enlightened law-writer. It is remarkable that in his essay on commercial treaties abovementioned, he contends for our Selden’s Mare Clausum, as the opinion of every man who is not misled by an immoderate zeal for his own country.

, first painter to Louis XV. was born at Paris in 17u6, and was educated under Le Moine, after which he studied at Rome. On his return to Paris, he employed himself on every species of the art, but especially in the light and agreeable. His Infant Jesus sleeping, is finely coloured, and designed with a most flowing contour. The Shepherd asleep on the knees of his shepherdess, is a little landscape of singular merit. Many of his other landscapes are peculiarly happy. His other most noted pieces are pastorals for the manufacture of tapestry, at Beauvais; the muses in the king’s library; the four seasons, in the figure of infants, for the ceiling of the council-room at Fontainbleau; a hunt of tigers, &c. He was usually called the painter of the graces, and the Anacreon of painting; but his works did not justify these high encomiums, and seem to have rather sunk in the estimation of his countrymen. He died of premature old age in 1770.

, a learned English clergyman and philologer, was horn at Blencogo, in the county of Cumberland, March 12, 1738; and after receiving his education at Wigton, under the rev. Joseph Blaine, went in his sixteenth year to North America. At the proper age he returned to England to be ordained, previously to which, in 1761, the vestry of the parish of Hanover, in the county of King George, Virginia, had nominated him to, the rectory of that parish. He afterwards exchanged this for the parish of St. Mary’s in Caroline county, Virginia. When the late sir Robert Eden, bart. became governor of Maryland, he appointed Mr. Boucher rector of St. Anne’s in Annapolis, and afterwards of Queen Anne’s in Prince George’s county, where he faithfully and zealously discharged the duties of a minister of the church until 1775.

Of his exemplary conduct in the discharge of his ministerial functions in the western hemisphere, abundant proof is furnished by a work published by him in the year 1797, intituled, “A View of the Causes and Consequences of the American Revolution, in thirteen discourses, preached in North America between the years 17t.3 and 1775.” In the preface to that work, which contains anecdotes and observations respecting the writers and most eminent persons concerned in the American Revolution, he observes, that, “cast as his lot was by Providence, in a situation of difficult duty, in such an hour of danger, it would have been highly reproachful to have slept on his post. Investigations on the important subjects of religion and government, when conducted with sobriety and decorum, can never be unseasonable; but they seem to be particularly called for in times like those in which these discourses were written times when the kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers took counsel against the Lord and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bonds asunder^ and cast away their cords from us.” He adds, in the words of Bishop Wetenhall’s preface to his Royal Sermons, printed in Ireland in 1695, that his Discourses in America were preached by him “with a sincere intention of conscientiously performing his duty, and approving himself to God, in his station, by doing what lay in him (at a time of exigence) to confirm the wavering, to animate the diffident, to confirm, excite, and advance all in their loyalty and firm adhesion to. his gracious majesty, our present, alone, rightful liege lord and sovereign.” Indeed, these sermons unequivocally demonstrate that their pious author was not to be deterred, by the personal difficulties in which the schism and faction that then pre^ vailed had placed him, from maintaining, with undaunted resolution, those doctrines, political and religious, in which he had been educated.

In 1784, long after his return to England, he was presented by the rev. John Parkhurst, editor of the Greek and Hebrew Lexicons, to the vicarage of Epsom in Surrey; but the same year he had the misfortune to lose his first wife, who was a native of Maryland, of genteel connections, and of the same name and family as the celebrated Joseph Addison, whom in many of the great points of his character she resembled. Through life Mr. Boucher enjoyed the society and friendship of men of erudition and science; and on various occasions employed his pen, not only in defence of those political principles on which the British monarchy is founded, but in critical inquiries, and in theological duties. Of his discourses from the pulpit in Great Britain, two Assize Sermons, preached in 1798, have been printed, and fully justify the request of the Grand Juries to whom we are indebted for their publication. He vas also an ample contributor to Mr. Hutchinson’s History of Cumberland. The account of the parish of Bromfield, and the very interesting biographical sketches of eminent Cumberland men, published in the same work, and marked “Biographia Cumbriensis,” were written by him. Mr. Boucher was a patriot in the best sense of the word: he was ever anxious to promote the happiness of his fellow countrymen; and in many instances personally contributed, either by pecuniary or literary exertions, to meliorate the condition pf society. In 1792, he published an anonymous pamphlet, ^ubscribed “A Cumberland Man,” which was reprinted in the Appendix to sir Frederick Morton Eden’s “State of the Poor,” published in 1797. This pamphlet is addressed to the inhabitants of Cumberland, and has for its object the improvement of that county in every point which can render a country opulent and happy.

During the last fourteen years of his life, Mr. Boucher’s literary labours were chiefly dedicated to the compilation of a Glossary of Provincial and Archaeological words, intended as a “Supplement to Dr. Johnson’s Dictionary,” the proposals for which he issued in 1802, under the title of “Linguæ Anglican Veteris Thesaurus.” The printed aid which he collected for this work appeared sufficiently by the library he left, and which was sold by auction after his death. Few collections are more copious in early printed literature. A part of this undertaking was published in 1807, containing words under the letter A. by which it appeared that the author’s plan, including Scotch words, was more extensive than originally intended. The encouragement given to this specimen has not been sufficient to induce his relatives to publish more, or to encourage any gentleman of adequate talents to attempt the completion of the work. Mr. Boucher died April 27, 1804, leaving eight children by his second wife Mrs. James, widow of the rev. Mr. James, rector of Arthuret, &c. in Cumberland, whom he married in 1789.

, a lady, who merits some notice as a specimen of French female piety in former days, was born Jan. 8, 1618. Her parents, who were of noble rank, and distinguished for their piety, gave her a suitable education, and from the age of five she was brought up with one of her aunts in the abbey royal of the Holy Trinity at Caen. When eleven, at her own earnest request, she was admitted to take the habit, and such was her wise conduct, that only four years after, she was appointed mistress of the novices. She was soon after chosen prioress, and then commenced her great work, the “Annee Benedictine,” or lives of the saints, the application to which, however, did not make her relax from the duties of her office. One of the consequences of her biographical labours, was a more enlarged sense of what, in her opinion, she ought to do, and to be, after the example of the Saints whose lives she was writing. She blushed, we are told, to praise and to record what she did not practise (not a common feeling among biographers), and although she knew that the kingdom of heaven was not to be gained by abstinence from certain meats, yet she firmly believed that in order to be the exact imitator of St. Benedict, she must join that privation to her other rules: and had an occasion to bring her principles to the test, when the duchess of Mecklenburgh formed the design of a new establishment at Chatillon of the female Benedictines of the Holy Sacrament, and requested her to be one of the number. Madame Bouette assented, although then sixty years old, and from the rank of prioress in the abbey of St. Trinity, condescended to the humble state of a novice in this new establishment, and afterwards preferred the lowest place in it to the rank of abbess which was afterwards offered to her. In her last days, her strength, bodily and mental, decayed: she became blind, and lame, and lost the use of speech, in which state she died March 24, 1696, leaving the following momuments of her industry: 1. “L‘ Annie Benedictine, ou, Les Vies des Saints de l’ordre de St. Benoit,” Paris, 1667, 7 vols. 4to. 2. “Eloges de plusieurs personnes illustres en piete de l'ordre de St. Benoit,” 2 vols. 4to. 3. “Vie de Fourrier de Matin court.” 4. “Exercices de la Mort.” 5. “Vies des Saintes,” 2 vols. fol. 6. “Monologue historique de la Mere de Dieu,” Paris, 1682, 4to. These works are written with some degree of elegance of style, but her lives are replete with those pious fables which amused the religious houses, and those superstitious austerities which regulated their conduct in former times.

, peer and maréchal, distinguished in the French history, was born Jan. 10, 1644. His dispositions for the art of war having displayed themselves at a very early period, he was chosen in 1669 to be colonel of a regiment of dragoons, at the head of which he demonstrated his bravery under the marechal de Crequi, and under Turenne. He received a dangerous wound at the battle of Voerden; and another in the affair of Entsheim, to the capture whereof he contributed much, by the confession of Turenne. After several signal exploits, he gained immortal renown by the defence of Lille in 1708. The siege lasted near four months. Bouflers said to his officers, “Gentlemen, I trust to you; but I answer for myself.” Prince Eugene carried on the siege with so much vigour that it was obliged to submit. “I am very vain,” said he to Bouflers, “on having taken Lille; but I had rather still have the glory of having defended it like you.” The king rewarded him for this service as if he had gained a battle. He was created a peer of France; had the honours of first gentleman to the king, and the reversion of the government of Flanders for his eldest son. When he entered the parliament for his first reception in it, turning to a crowd of officers who had defended Lille with him, he said, “It is to you that I am indebted for all the favours that are heaped upon me, and on you I reflect them I have nothing to glory in but the honour of having been at the head of so many brave men.” During the siege, one of his party having proved tojiim that he could easily kill prince Eugene, “Your fortune is made,” returned Bouflers, “if you can take him prisoner: but you shall be punished with the utmost severity if you make an attempt on his life; and if I but suspected that you had any such intention, I would have you shut up for the rest of your life.” This generosity, which formed a part of his character, induced him to ask permission to serve under the orders of marechal de Villars, though he was his senior. At the battle of Malplaquet in 1709, he made the retreat in such good order, that he left behind him neither cannon nor prisoners. The marquis de Bouflers united the virtues of a good citizen with the activity of a general; serving his prince as the ancient Romans served their republic; accounting his life as nothing when the safety of his country was in question. The king having ordered him to go and succour Lille, and having left to himself the choice of his lieutenants; he set out that instant, without settling his affairs, or taking leave of his family, and chose for his officers a man that had been disgraced, and a prisoner of the Bastille. His magnificence was equal to his love for his country and his sovereign. When Louis XIV. formed the camp of Compiegne, to serve as a lesson to his grandson the duke of Burgundy, and as a spectacle to the court, Bouflers lived there in such a splendid style, that the king said to Livri, his maitre-d'hotel, “The duke of Burgundy must not keep a table; we cannot outdo the marechal; the duke of Burgundy shall dine with him when he goes to the camp.” This patriot general died at Fontainbleau, Aug. 22, 1711, aged 68. “In him (writes madame de Maintenon) the heart died last.” We read in the continuation of the history of England by Rapin, an anecdote too honourable to the memory of this great man to be passed over here in silence. King William having taken Namur, in 169, made Bouflers prisoner, in violation of the articles that had been agreed on. Surprised at so unjust a proceeding, the marechal, fresh from the glorious defence he had made, demanded the reason of this perfidious treatment. He was answered that it was by way of reprisals for the garrison of Dixmude and of Deinse, which the French had detained contrary to capitulation. “If that be the case (said Bouflers), then my garrison ought to be arrested, and not I.” “Sir (he was answered), you are valued at more than ten thousand men.”

, born at Paris Dec. 1, 1722^ was educated with great care. His talents thus improved procured him celebrity at an early period, and obtained for him the places most flattering to literarymen at Paris. He became pensionary and secretary to the royal academy of inscriptions, member of the French academy, and some other foreign societies, censor-royal, keeper of the hall of antiquities at the Louvre, and one of the secretaries in ordinary to the duke of Orleans. His extraordinary industry impaired his health, and brought on premature old age, of which he died at the chateau de Loches, June 22, 1763, at the age of forty-one. His talents and personal virtues acquired him zealous patrons and affectionate friends. In his writings, as in his man­'ners, all was laudable, and yet nothing shewed the desire of being praised. With the talents that contribute to fame, he principally aspired at the honour of being useful. Nevertheless, literary ambition, which is not the weakest of ambitions, found him not insensible. Accordingly he was desirous of being admitted of the French academy; he made vigorous application to Duclos, at that time secretary; mentioning, among other things, that he was afflicted with a disorder that was sapping his constitution, and that consequently his place would soon be vacant again; the secretaiy, an honest man, but of a hard and rough character, replied, with more wit than feeling, that it was not the business of the French academy to administer extreme unction. He wrote, 1. A translation of the AntiLucretius of the cardinal de Polignac, 2 vols. 8vo, or one vol. 12mo, preceded by a very sensible preliminary discourse. 2. Parallel between the expedition of Kouli Khan in the Indies, and that of Alexander, a work of great learning, abounding in ideas, flights of imagination and eloquence; but sometimes rather bombastic. He also wrote several papers of very superior merit in the Memoirs of the French Academy. In his twenty-fifth year he wrote a tragedy on the death of Philip, father of Alexander, which is said to evince considerable talents for poetry; and in the Magazin Encyclopedique was lately published a metrical translation by him of the Hymn of Cleanthes, which appears to have suggested to Pope his Universal Prayer.

, a French historian and miscellaneous writer, was born at Quimper, Nov. 4, 1690, and entered among the Jesuits in 1706. In 1710, after finishing his course of philosophy, he taught Latin at Caen, and afterwards rhetoric at iSevers. From that time he remained principally in the college of Louis le Grand at Paris, until his death, Jan. 7, 1743, employing himself in writing. Besides the part which he took for many years in the “Memoires de Trevoux,” he wrote: i. “Anacr^on and Sappho,” dialogues in Greek verse, Caen, 1712, 8vo. 2. “Recueil d' observations physiques tirees des meilleurs ecrivains,” Paris, 1719, 12mo, to which were added two more volumes, 1726 and 1730, by Grozelier. 3. “Histoire des guerres et des negociations qui precederent le traite de Westphalie sous le regne de Louis XIII. &c.” 1727, 4to, and 2 vols. 12mo, taken from the Memoirs of count d'Avaux, the French ambassador. This history still enjoys high reputation in F.rance. 4. “Exposition de la Doctrine Chretienne par demandes et par reponses,” 1741, 4to, and some other theological tracts that are now forgotten. 5. “Histoire du traite de Westphalie,” 2 vols. 4to, and 4 vols. 12mo, a superior work to that mentioned before, and highly praised by all French historians. It did not appear until after his death, in 1744. Besides these he wrote several pieces of a lighter kind, as an ingenious romance, entitled “Voyage Merveilleux du prince FanFeredin dans la Romancie, &c.” 1735, 12mo “Amusement philosophique sur le Langagedes Betes,”1739,12mo, which, being censured for its satire, the author was banished for some time to la Fleche, and endeavoured to defend himself in a letter to the abbe Savaletta. He wrote also some comedies of very little merit, but his reputation chiefly rests on his historical works.

, a French biographer, descended from an honourable family in Provence, was a priest of the oratory, and born at Aix in 1680, where he was also educated. The love of a retired life induced him to become a member of the congregation of the oratory, where he taught the belles lettres with fame and success, and filled the several posts of his profession with great credit. Happening to be at Marseilles during the plague in 1719 and 1720, he risked his life in administering relief to the diseased. He appears to have been in that city also in 1726, but some time after came to Paris, where he passed his life in the house belonging to his order, in high esteem with all who knew him. He died of a stroke of apoplexy, March 19, 1753. Just before his death he had prepared for the press his lives of the illustrious men of Provence, which was to have formed four volume?, 4to, and was to be published by subscription, but we do not find that the scheme was carried into execution by his friends. During his life he published in the literary journals, various memoirs of eminent men, and, in separate publications, the Life of Gassendi, Paris, 1737, of John Peter Gibert, ibid. 1737, 12mo; and apart of his great work, under the title of “Memoires pour servir a l'histoire des homines illustres de Provence,” ibid. 1752, 12mo, containing fourteen lives.

, a celebrated French mathematician, was born at Croisic, in Lower Bretagne, the 10th of February 1698. He was the son of John Bouguer, professor royal of hydrography, a tolerable good mathematician, and author of “A complete Treatise on Navigation.” Young Bouguer was accustomed to learn mathematics from his father, from the time he was able to speak, and thus became a very early proficient in those sciences. He was sent soon after to the Jesuits’ college at Vannes, where he had the honour to instruct his regent in the mathematics, at eleven years of age. Two years after this he had a public contest with a professor of mathematics, upon a proposition which the latter had advanced erroneously; and he triumphed over him; upon which the professor, unable to bear the disgrace, left the country. Two years after this, when young Bouguer had not yet finished his studies, he lost his father, whom he was appointed to succeed in his office of hydrographer, after a public examination of his qualifications, being then only fifteen years of age; an occupation which he discharged with great respect and dignity at that early age.

In 1727, at the age of twenty-nine, he obtained the prize proposed by the academy of sciences, for the best way of masting of ships. This first success of Bouguer was soon after followed by two others of the same kind; he successively gained the prizes of 1729 and 1731; the former, for the best manner of observing at sea the height of the stars, and the latter, for the most advantageous way of observing the declination of the magnetic needle, or the variation of the compass. In 1729, he gave an “Optical Essay upon the Gradation of Light;” a subject quite in which he examined the intensity of light, and determined its degrees of diminution in passing through different pellucid mediums, and particularly that of the sun in traversing the earth’s atmosphere. JVIairati gave an extract of this first essay in the Journal des Savans, in 1730. In this same year, 1730, he was removed from the port of Croisic to that of Havre, which brought him into a nearer connection with the academy of sciences, in which he obtained, in 1731, the place of associate geometrician, vacant by the promotion of Maupertuis to that of pensioner; and in 1735 he was promoted to the office of pensioner-astronomer. The same year he was sent on the commission to South America, along with messieurs Godin, Condamine, and Jeussieu, to determine the measure of the degrees of the meridian, and the figure of the earth. In this painful and troublesome business, of ten years duration, chiefly among the lofty Cordelier mountains, our author determined many other new circumstances, beside the main object of the voyage such as the expansion and contraction of metals and other substances, by the sudden and alternate changes of heat and cold among those mountains; observations on the refraction of the atmosphere from the tops of the same, with the singular phenomenon of the sudden increase of the refraction, when the star can be observed below the line of the level; the laws of the density of the air at different heights, from observations made at different points of these enormous mountains; a determination that the mountains have an effect upon a plummet, though he did not assign the exact quantity of it; a method of estimating the errors committed by navigators in determining their route; a new construction of the log for measuring a ship’s way; with several other useful improvements. Other inventions of Bouguer, made upon different occasions, were as follow: the heliometer, being a telescope with two object-glasses, affording a good method of measuring the diameters of the larger planets with ease and exactness: his researches on the figure in which two lines or two long ranges of parallel trees appear his experiments on the famous reciprocation of the pendulum and those upon the manner of measuring the force of the light &c. &c.

The close application which Bouguer gave to study, undermined his health, and terminated his life the 15th of August 1758, at 60 years of age. His chief works, that have been published, are, 1. “The Figure of the Earth, determined by the observations made in South America,” 1749, in 4to. 2. “Treatise on Navigation and Pilotage,” Paris, 1752, in 4to. This work was abridged by M. La Caille, in 1 vol. 1768, 8vo, and was reprinted in 1769 and 1781, and in 1792 with the notes of Lalande. 3. '“Treatise on Ships, their construction and motions,” 1756, 4to. 4. “Optical treatise on the Gradation of Light,” first in 1729; then a new edition in 1760, in 4to.

In his earlier years, Mr. Bouguer had lived in a state of seclusion from general intercourse with the world, and he had thus acquired a cast of temper, which marked his character in more advanced life. Although he was universally acknowledged to possess superior talents, and to be distinguished by an assiduity and zeal, no less successful than indefatigable, in various departments of useful science, he indulged a degree of suspicion and jealousy, with regard to his reputation, which disgusted some of those with whom he was under a necessity of associating, and which disquieted his own mind. Fully sensible of the importance and utility of his own performances, he was apt to consider others, who were engaged in similar pursuits, as competitors with himself, and to grudge them the reputation which they justly acquired, from an apprehension that his own credit would be thus diminished. Hence arose his disputes with La Condamine, one of the companions of his voyage, and associate in his labours in America; and the mortification he experienced from the public suffrage that seemed to have been bestowed on that academician. His character in other respects was distinguished for modesty and simplicity. The truths of religion were instilled into him along with the first principles of geometry, and had made such an impression upon his mind, r r to regulate and adorn his moral conduct. On his death-bed he cherished the same views which had thus guided him through life, and he closed his career with philosophical fortitude, and with a piety and resignation truly Christian. In the year 1784, a very singular book was published at Paris, entitled “Relation de la conversion et de mort de Bouguer,” by P. La Berthonie. His piety naturally offended Lalande, who, in noticing this book, ascribes his piety to fear; this was a common opinion with the French deists, and had very pernicious influence on the minds of their disciples. Laiande, however, if our information be not incorrect, lived to experience the fear he once ridiculed.

, president a mortier of the parliament of Dijon, and a member of the French academy, was born March 16, 1673. He began his studies under the direction of his father (who was also president a mortier of the same parliament) at the Jesuits’ college of Dijon, and finished them in 1638 with great approbation. Being as yet too young for the law schools, he studied the elements of that science in private, and perfected himself at the same time in the Greek language. He also learned Italian, Spanish, and acquired some knowledge of the Hebrew. After two years thus usefully employed, he went through a course of law at Paris and Orleans; and in 1692 he became counsellor of the parliament of Dijon. In 1704 he was appointed president, the duties of which office he executed until 1727, and with an assiduity and ability not very common. In this latter year he was elected into the academy, on the condition that he would quit Dijon and settle at Paris, to which condition he acceded, but was unable to perform his promise, for want of health. Though remote, however, from the capital, he could not remain in obscurity; but from the variety and extent of his learning‘, he was courted and consulted by the literati throughout Europe: and many learned men, who had availed themselves of his advice, dedicated their works to him. At length, his constitution being worn out with repeated attacks of the gout, he died March 17, 1746. A friend approaching his bed, within an hour of his death, found him in a seemingly profound meditation. He made a sign that he wished not to be disturbed, and with difficulty pronounced the words J’epie la mort “I am watching death.” Notwithstanding his business and high reputation as a lawyer, he contrived to employ much of his time in the cultivation of polite literature, and wrote many papers on Critical and classical subjects in the literary journals. Separately he published, 1. A poetical translation, not inelegant, but somewhat careless, of Petronius on the Civil War between Coesar and Pompey, with two epistles of Ovid, &c. Amst. 1737, 4to. Alluding to the negligence which sometimes appears in his poetry, his wife, a very ingenious lady, used to say, “Confine yourself to thinking, and let me write.” 2. “Remarques sur les Tusculanes de Ciceron, avec une dissertation sur Sardanapale, dernier roi d'Asyrie,” Paris, 1737, 12mo. 3. “Des Lettres sur les Therapeutes,” 1712. 4. “Dissertations sur Herodote,” with memoirs of the life of Bouhier, 1746, Dijon, 4to. 5. “Dissertation sur le grand pontifical des empereurs Remains,” 1742, 4to. 6. “Explications de quelques marbres antiques,” in the collection of M. Le Bret, 1733, 4to. 7. “Observations sur la Coutume de Bourgogne,” Dijon, 2 vols. fol. A complete edition of his law works was published in 1787, fol. by M. de Bevy. He wrote a very learned dissertation on the origin of the Greek and Latin letters, which is printed in Montfaucon’s Palaeography, Paris, 1708, p. 553 and his “Remarques sur Ciceron” were reprinted at Paris in 1746.

, a celebrated French critic, was born at Paris in 1628; and has by some been considered as a proper person to succeed Malherbe, who died about that time. He entered into the society of Jesuits at sixteen, and was appointed to read lectures upon polite literature in the college of Clermont at Paris, where he had studied; but he was so incessantly attacked with the head-ach, that he could not pursue the destined task. He afterwards undertook the education of two sons of the duke of Longueville, which he discharged to the entire satisfaction of the duke, who had such a regard for him, that he would needs die in his arms; and the “Account of the pious and Christian death” of this great personage was the first work which Bouhours gave the public. He was sent to Dunkirk to the popish refugees from England; and, in, the midst of his missionary occupations, found time to compose and publish many works of reputation. Among these were “Entretiens d‘Ariste & d’Eugene,” a work of a critical nature, which was printed no less than five times at Paris, twice at Grenoble, at Lyons, at Brussels, at Amsterdam, at Leyden, &c. and embroiled him with a great number of critics, and with Menage in particular; who, however, lived in friendship with our author before and after. There is a passage in this work which gave great oifence in Germany, where he makes it a question, “Whether it be possible that a German could be a wit” The fame of it, however, and the pleasure he took in reading it, recommended Bouhours so effectually to the celebrated minister Colbert, that he trusted him with the education of his son, the marquis of Segnelai. The Remarks and Doubts upon the French language has been reckoned one of the most considerable of our author’s works; and may be read with great advantage by those who would perfect themselves in that tongue. Menage, in his Observations upon the French language, has given his approbation of jt in the following passage: “The book of Doubts,” says he, “is written with great elegance, and contains many fine observations. And, as Aristotle has said, that reasonable doubt is the beginning of all real knowledge; so we may say also, that the man who doubts so reasonably as the author of this book, is himself very capable of deciding. For this reason perhaps it is, that, forgetting the tide of his work, he decides oftener than at first he proposed.” Bouhours was the author of another work, “The art of pleasing in conversation,” of which M. de la Grose, who wrote the eleventh volume of the Bibliotheque Universelle, has given an account, which he begins with this elogium upon the author “A very little skill,” says he, “in style and manner, will enable a reader to discover the author of this work. He will see at once the nice, the ingenious, and delicate turn, the elegance and politeness of father Bouhours. Add to this, the manner of writing in dialogue, the custom of quoting himself, the collecting strokes of wit, the little agreeable relations interspersed, and a certain mixture of gallantry and morality which is altogether peculiar to this Jesuit. This work is inferior to nothing we have seen of father Bouhours. He treats in twenty dialogues, with an air of gaiety, of every thing which can find a way into conversation; and, though he avoids being systematical, yet he gives his reader to understand, that there is no subject whatever, either of divinity, philosophy, law, or physic, &c. but may be introduced into conversation, provided it be done with ease, politeness, and in a manner free from pedantry and affectation.” He died at Paris, in the college of Clermont, upon the 27th of May 1702; after a life spent, says Moreri, under such constant and violent fits of the head-ach, that he had but few intervals of perfect ease. The following is a list of his works with their dates: 1. “Les Entretiens d‘Ariste et d’Eugene,” 1671, 12ro. 2. “Remarques et Doutes sur la langue Franchise,” 3 vols. 12mo. 3. “La Manier de bien penser sur les ouvrages d' esprit,” Paris, 1692, 12mo. 4. “Pensees ingenieuses des anciens et des modernes,” Paris, 1691, 12mo. In this work he mentions Boileau, whom he had omitted in the preceding; but when he expected Boileau would acknowledge the favour, he coolly replied, “You have, it is true, introduced me in your new work, but in very bad company,” alluding to the frequent mention of some Italian and French versifiers whom Boileau despised. 5. “Pensees ingenieuses des Peres de l'Eglise,” Paris, 1700. This he is said to have written as an answer to the objection that he employed “too much of his time Oh profane literature. 6.” Histoire du grandmaitre d'Aubusson,“1676, 4to, 1679, and lately in 1780. 7. The lives of St. Ignatius, Paris, 1756, 12mo, and of St. Francis Xavier, 1682, 4to, or 2 vols. 12mo. Both these are written with rather more judgment than the same lives by Ribadeneira, but are yet replete with the miraculous and the fabulous. The life of Xavier was translated by Dryden, and published at London in 1688, with a dedication to king James II. 's queen. Dryden, says Mr. Malone, doubtless undertook this task, in consequence of the queen, when she solicited a son, having recommended herself to Xavier as her patron saint. 8.” Le Nouveau Testament," translated into French from the Vulgate, 2 vols. 1697 1703, 12mo.

, a French nobleman, and officer of bravery and honour, was a native of Auvergne, and a relative of the marquis La Fayette. After having served in the dragoons, he became colonel of the regiment of Vexin infantry. Having attained the rank of majorgeneral, the king appointed him governor-general of the Windward islands. In 1778 he took possession of Dominica, St. Eustatk, and soon after St. Christopher’s, Nevis, and Montserrat. His conduct while in that command was allowed by the English commanders to be honourable and disinterested. On his return, he was made lieutenantgeneral. On the breaking out of the revolution in 1789, finding that he commanded in the three bishoprics, he brought back to its duty the revolted garrison of Metz, and on that occasion saved the life of M. de Pont, intendant of the province. He afterwards caused Francois de Neufchateau, and two other electors, arrested by order of the king’s attorney, to be set at liberty. On the 5th of September the same year, the national assembly was informed by one of its members, Gregoire, that M. de Bouille had not administered the civic oath individually, and a decree was passed obliging him to do so. In 1790, he was commissioned to bring under subjection the garrison of Nancy, which had risen against its chiefs; accordingly he advanced upon the town with four thousand men, and succeeded in this enterprize, in which he shewed much bravery, and which at first gained him great praises from the national assembly, and afterwards as many reproaches. Being chosen by the unfortunate Louis XVI. to facilitate his escape from Paris in June 1791, he marched at the head of a body of troops to protect the passage of the royal family; but this design failed from reasons now well known, and which he has faithfully detailed in his memoirs: and the marquis himself had some difficulty in making his escape. From Luxembourg he wrote his memorable letter to the assembly, threatening, that if a hair of the king’s head were touched, he would not leave one stone upon another in Paris. This served only to irritate the revolutionists, who decreed that he should be tried for contumacy; but he was fortunately out of their reach. From Vienna whither he had at first gone, he passed to the court of Sweden, where he was favourably received by Gustavus III. but after his death, M. de BoniHe“found it necessary to retire to England, where he passed the remainder of his days in security, and much esteemed for his fidelity to his sovereign. He died in London Nov. 14, 1800. In 1797 he published in English,” Memoirs relating to the French Revolution," 8vo; one of those works of which future historians may avail themselves in appreciating the characters and events connected with that important period of French history.

, a French medical writer, was born at Servian, in the diocese of Beziers, May 14, 1690, and created doctor in medicine, at Montpellier, in 1717. Enjoying, during the course of a long life, a considerable portion of reputation, he was, in succession, made professor in mathematics, and secretary to the academy at Beziers, member of the royal society at Montpeliier, and corresponding member of the academy of sciences at Paris. He was also author of several ingenious dissertations: “On the properties of Rhubarb,” published at Beziers, 1717, 4to, probably his “Inaugural Thesis.” “Sur la cause de la Pesanteur,” 1720, 12mo, which obtained for him a prize from the academy at Bourdeaux; “Avis et remedes, contre la Peste,” Beziers, 1721, 8vo. “On Asthma and on the Gout,” in which complaints he recommends the Venice soap as a powerful auxiliary; “Sur la maniere de traiter la Petite Verole,” Beziers, 1736, 4to; and some years after, “On the best method of preserving the district of Beziers from that disease;” “Recueil des lettres, et autres pieces pour servir a I'histoire de Pacademie de Beziers,” 1736, 4to, with several other publications. He died in 1770, leaving a son, Henry Nicholas Bouillet, who was made doctor in medicine at Montpeliier, and member of the academy of Beziers. He published, in 1759, in 4to, “Observations sur l'anasarque, le hydropesies de poitrine, des pericarde, &c.”

, the historian of the university of Paris, was born at St. Ellier or Helier, and became professor of rhetoric in the college of Navarre, and afterwards register, historiographer, and rector of the university of Paris, where he died Oct. 16, 1678. Of all his works, his history of the university of Paris, “Historia Universitatis Parisiensis,” 6 vols. 1665 1673, fol. contributed most to his fame. The publication of this vast undertaking was at first interrupted by some objections from the theological faculty of Paris, who carried their remonstrances to the king; but the commissioners, whom his majesty employed to inspect the work, having reported that they saw no reason why it should not be continued, he proceeded to its completion, and in 1667 published an answer to their objections, entitled “Notue ad censuram.” Not entirely satisfied with this triumph, he also published a poetical satire against them, with the title of “Ad Zoilosycopuantam, sive Bulaeistarum obtrectatorem,” a work of considerable spirit and elegance of style. His history is an useful repository of facts and lives of learned men connected with the revival of literature, and especially the progress of learning in that eminent university, and is blameable only for the fabulous accounts, in which our own university-historians have not been wanting, respecting the early history of schools of learning. Boulai’s other writings are, 1. “Tresor des antiquues Romanies,” Paris, 1650, fol. 2. “Speculum eloquentia?,” ibid. 1658, 12mo. S. “De Patronis quatuor nationum universitatis Parisiensis,” Paris, 1662, 8vo. 4. “Remarques sur la dignite, rang, preseance, autorite, et jurisdiction du recteur de Tuniversite de Paris,” ibid. 1668, 4to. 5. “Recueil des Privileges de PUniversite de Paris accordes par les rois de France depuis sa fondation., &c.” ibid. 1674, 4to. 6. “Fondation de l'universite, &e,” 1675, 4to. Boulai was frequently involved in disputes with the members of the university respecting the election of officers, &c. which occasioned the publication of many papers on these subjects, which, if we may judge from his extensive labours, he must have understood very accurately; and from these disputes, and the general bent of his researches, he appears to have very closely resembled the celebrated historian of the university of Oxford.

, comte de St. Saire, where he was born October 21, 1658, of a noble and ancient family, was educated at Juilli, by the rithers of the oratory, and gave proofs of genius and abilities from his childhood. His chief study was history, which he afterwards cultivated assiduously. He died January 23, 1722, at Paris, having been twice married, and left only daughters. He was author of a History of the Arabians, and Mahomet, 12mo, “Memoires sur l'ancien Governement de France; ou 14 lettres sur les anciens Parlemens de France,” 3 vols. 12mo; “Histoire de France jusqu'a Charles VIII.” 3 vols. 12mo; and “l'Etatde la Fiance,” 6 vols. 12mo, in the Dutch edition, and eight in the edition of Trevoux, “Memoire presente a M. le due d‘Orleans, sur l’Administration des Finances,” 2 vols. 12mo “Histoire de la Pairie de France,” 12mo “Dissertations sur la Noblesse de France,” 12mo. Ah his writings on the French history have been collected in 3 vols. fol. They Sire riot written (says M. de Montesquieu) with all the free-. dom and simplicity of the ancient nobility, from which he descended. M. Boulainvilliers left some other works in ms. known to the learned, who have, with great reason, been astonished to find, that he expresses in them his doubts of the most incontestable dogmas of religion, while he blindly gives credit to the reveries of juticial astrology an inconsistency common to many other infjdels. Mosheim informs us that Boulainvilliers was such an admirer of the pernicious opinions of Spinosa, that he formed the design of expounding and illustrating it, as is done wth respect to the doctrines of the gospel in books of piety, accommodated to ordinary capacities. This design he attually executed, but in such a manner as to set the atheim and impiety of Spinosa in a clearer light than they hid ever appeared before. The work was published by lenglet du Fresnoy, who, that it might be bought with avdity, and read without suspicion, called it a Refutation of theErrors of Spinosa, artfully adding some separate pieces, to which this title may, in some measure, he thought applicabk. The whole title runs, “Refutation des Erreurs de Beioit de Spinosa, par M. de Fenelon, archeveque de Cambay, par le Pere Lauri Benedictin, et par M. Le Comte de Bulainvilliers, avec la Vie de Spinosa, ecrite par Jean COerus, minister de l‘Eglise Lutherienne de la Haye, augnsntée de beaucoup de particularites tirees d’une vie manucrite de ce philosophe, fait par un de ses amis,” (Luczs, the atheistical physician), Brussels, 1731, 12mo. The account and defence of Spinosa, given by Boulainviliers, under the pretence of a refutation, take up the greatest part of this book, and are placed first, and not last in order, as the title would insinuate and the volume concludes with what is not in the title, a defence of Spinosa by Iredenburg, and a refutation of that defence by Orobio. a Jew of Amsterdam. It remains to be noticed, that his Life of Mahomet, which he did not live to complete, vas published at London and Amsterdam, in 1730, 8vo and about the same time an English translation of it appeared His letters, also, on the French parliaments, were translated and published at London, 1739, 2 vols.-8vo.

, one of the earliest French infidels, who assumed the name of philosophers was born at Paris in 1722, and died therein 1759, aged only thirty -seven. During his education, he is said to have come out of the college of Beauvais almost as ignorant as he went in; hut, struggling hard against his inaptitude to study, he at length overcame it. At seventeen years of age he began to apply himself to mathematics and architecture; and,n three or lour years made such progress as to be usefrl to the baron of Thiers, whom he accompanied to thearmy in quality of engineer. Afterwards he had the supervision of the highways and bridges, and executed severa public works in Champagne, Burgundy, and Lorrain. Ii cutting through mountains, directing and changing tie courses of rivers, and in breaking up and turning ov<r the strata of the earth, he saw a multitude of different substances, which (he thought) evinced the great antiquity of it, and a long series of revolutions which it must hav undergone. From the revolutions in the globe, he passei to the changes that must have happened in the manner?of men, in societies, in governments, in religion and fomed many conjectures upon all these. To be farther saisfied, he wanted to know what, in the history of ages, lad been said upon these particulars; and, that he might be informed from the fountain-head, he learned first latin, and then Greek. Not yet content, he plunged into clebrew, Syriac, Chaldaic, and Arabic and from these studies accumulated a vast mass of singular and paradoxical opinions which he conveyed to the public in the followng works: 1. “Traite du Despotisme Oriental,” 2 vols. 2mo, 2. “L'antiquite devoile, par ses usages,” 3 vols. 12mo. This was posthumous. 3. Another work, entitle! “Le Christianisme demasqu6,” 8vo, is attributed to Hm, but it is not certain that he was the author of it. 4. le furnished to the Encyclopedic the articles Deluge, C-rvde, and Societe. 5. A dissertation on Elisha and Eioch. 6. He left behind him in ms. a dictionary, which my be regarded as a concordance in antient and modern Jjnguages. Voltaire, the baron D'Holbach, and other disgminators of infidelity, made much use of Boulanger’s works, and more of his name, which, it is supposed, they prefixed to some of their own compositions. Barruel gives some reason for thinking that Boulanger retracted his opinions before his death. His name, however, still remained of consequence to the party; and as late as 1791, an edition of his works, entitled the Philosophical Library, was published at the philosophic press in Swisserland.