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

Enter either the ID of an entry, or one or more words to find. The first match in each paragraph is shown; click on the line of text to see the full paragraph.

Currently only Chalmers’ Biographical Dictionary is indexed, terms are not stemmed, and diacritical marks are retained.

republicans and cavaliers had formed designs against his person. Of the former, major John Wildman, who had been an intimate friend of his, was seized while penning

The opening of 1655 proved but cloudy: the dissolution of the parliament created much discontent in the kingdom; so that Cromwell found himself beset with conspiracies on all sides, and by all parties; but he had the good luck to discover them before they could be executed. Upon Feb. 13, he went to Guildhall; and declared, that the republicans and cavaliers had formed designs against his person. Of the former, major John Wildman, who had been an intimate friend of his, was seized while penning a paper, entitled “A declaration of the people of England against the tyrant Oliver Cromwell;” and other violent men of that party he imprisoned, but was afraid of doing more. As to the royalists, he suffered them to go on a little; for, by the help of one Manning, who was his spy in the court of Charles II. he was so well acquainted with their projects, as to put them upon measures which turned to his own account. And this is a true solution of that insurrection which broke out at Salisbury, where the king was proclaimed, and Cromwell’s judges seized; which act of open force left no doubt with the public, that there were designs against the protector. For this insurrection several persons suffered death; and hence the protector, who had hitherto shewn an inclination to govern as a lawful prince if he could, seemed to lay aside his disposition, and no longer to make any difficulty of supporting his authority in any manner and by any means; In the spring of this year was carried into execution that famous expedition, by which the protector hoped to make himself master of the Spanish West Indies; where, though his forces did not succeed in their main design, yet they made themselves masters of Jamaica, which island has remained ever since part of the British dominions. The alliance which had been so long in treaty with the crown of France, was signed Nov. 24, 1655, and proclaimed the 28th; by which it was stipulated, that Cromwell should send over a body of English troops, to act in conjunction with the French agaiust the Spaniards in the Low Countries; and that, on the other hand, the French king should oblige the royal family to quit his dominions. The new king of Sweden sent over an ambassador to compliment the protector. He was most graciously received; but the intended visit of queen Christina, who had just resigned the crown, he judged proper to avoid. The glorious successes of admiral Blake in the Mediterranean, and the great sums he recovered from several powers for depredations committed by their subjects on the English merchants, did much honour to the protector’s government; and to conclude the transactions of this year, it must be allowed, that how much soever Ire might be disliked at home, his reputation at this time was very great abroad.

hot for corresponding with Thurloe, was most effectually repaired by a person of superior character, who was chancellor Hyde’s great correspondent, and supposed to be

The loss he sustained in the discovery of Manning, whom king Charles caused to be shot for corresponding with Thurloe, was most effectually repaired by a person of superior character, who was chancellor Hyde’s great correspondent, and supposed to be one of the most active and determined royalists in England. Though the war with Spain under Blake’s management had brought two millions of money into the protector’s coffer, he still felt some wants, which he judged nothing but a parliament could supply; and having concerted more effectual methods, as he conceived, for bending them to his will, than had been practised before the last, he fixed the meeting of that assembly Sept. 19, 1656. It met accordingly; but with a guard posted at the door of the house, who suffered none to enter till they had taken the oaths prepared for them, by which many were excluded. The parliament, however, chose a speaker; passed an act for disannulling the king’s title, another for the security of his highness’s person, and several money bills: for all which the protector gave them his most gracious thanks. About the close of this year a new plot was either discovered or invented, for which one Miles Sindercombe was condemned; but he disappointed the protector, by poisoning himself the night before he was to be executed. In the spring of 1657 it plainly appeared what the protector aimed at, by the pains he had taken with the parliament; for now a kind of legislative settlement of the government was upon the carpet, under the title of “The humble Petition and Advice ;” in which there was a blank for the supreme governor’s title, and a clause prepared to countenance the establishing something like peers, under the name of the other house. At length the whole came to light; for one alderman Pack, a forward, time-serving, money-getting fellow, deep in all the jobs of the government, moved that the first blank might l)e filled with the word King. This was violently opposed by the army-members; but at length, after various debates, carried, as well as the clause empowering him. to make something like lords; and in this form the petition was presented to his highness, who desired some time to consider before he gave his answer. The protector would have been glad to have had the kingship forced upon him, but that he found some of his best friends and nearest relations averse to it; who carried their opposition so far, as to promote a petition from the army to the parliament against it. This determined Cromwell to refuse that honour which he had been so long seeking; and, therefore, May 8, 1657, he told them in the banqueting-house, that he could not with a good conscience accept the government under the title of king. The parliament then thought proper to fill up the blank with his former title of protector; and his highness himself, that all the pains he had taken might not absolutely be thrown away, resolved upon a new inauguration, which was accordingly performed June 26, 1657, in Westminster-hall, with all the pomp and solemnity of a coronation. After this, the house of commons adjourned to Jan. 20th following, in order to give the protector time to regulate all things according to the new system; with a view to which he summoned his two sons, and others, to take their seats in the other house. This year he was extremely disconcerted with a small treatise, which captain Titus, under the name of William Allen, published with this title, “Killing no Murder:” in which w r as shewn so plainly, that one who had violated all laws, could derive protection from no law, that Oliver thenceforward believed himself in continual danger. But his attempt to apprehend the true author failed of success.

It is impossible to have a better account of his last sickness, than that given by Dr. Bates, who was his physician. After mentioning the circumstance of making

It is impossible to have a better account of his last sickness, than that given by Dr. Bates, who was his physician. After mentioning the circumstance of making his will, he tells us, that the next morning early, when one of his physicians came to visit him, he asked him, “why he looked so sad?” and, when answer was made, that so it became any one, who had the weighty care of his life and health upon him; “Ye physicians,” said he, “think I shall die: I tell you, I shall not die this time; I am sure of it. Do not think,” said he to the physician, looking more attentively at him on these words; “do not think that I am mad; I speak the words of truth upon surer grounds than Galen or your Hippocrates furnish you with. God Almighty himself hath given that answer, not to my prayers alone, but also to the prayers of those who entertain a stricter commerce and greater interest with him. Go on cheerfully, banishing all sadness from your looks; and deal with me as you would do with a serving-man. Ye may have a skill in the nature of things, yet nature can do more than all physicians put together; and God is far more above nature.” He was then desired to take his rest, because he had not slept the greatest part of the night; and this physician left him. But as he was coming out of the chamber, he accidentally met another; to whom said he, I am afraid our patient will be light-headed. “Then (replied the other) you are certainly a stranger in this house. Do not you know what was done last night? The chaplains, and all who are dear to God, being dispersed into several parts of the palace, have prayed to God for his health: and have brought this answer, he shall recover.” Nay, to such a degree of madness they came, that a public fast heing for his sake kept at Hampton-court, they did not so much pray to God for his health, as thank him for the undoubted pledges of his recovery; and they repeated the same at Whitehall. These oracles of his deluded chaplains were the cause that the physicians spake not a word of his danger. Being removed to London, he became much worse, grew first lethargic, then delirious; and after recovering a little, but not enough to give any distinct directions about public affairs, he died Sept. 2, 1658, aged somewhat more than 59 years. A little before his death, the physicians awakened the privy-council, by representing the danger he was in; and at an appointed time he was urged to name his successor. But when in a drowsy fit he answered out of purpose, they again asked him, if he did not name Richard his eldest son for his successor To which he answered, Yes. Then being asked where his will was, which heretofore he had made concerning the heirs of the kingdom, he sent to look for it in his closet and other places; but in vain for he had either burnt it, or somebody had stolen it. It has been imagined that Cromwell was poisoned, but without any reason. Dr. Bates gives us the following account of his disorder: “His body being opened, in the animal parts the brain seemed to be overcharged in the vitals the lungs a little inflamed but in die natural, the source of the distemper appeared the spleen, though sound to the eye, being within filled with alter like to the lees of oil. Nor was that inconsistent the disease he had for a long time been subject to; since, for t least thirty years, he had at times complained of hypochondriaeal indispositions. Though his bowels were taken out, and his body filled with spices, wrapped in a fourfold cere-cloth, put first into a coffin of lead, and then into one of wood, yet it purged and wrought through all, so that there was a necessity of interring it before the solemnity of the funeral.” A very pompous funeral was ordered at the public ex pence, and performed from Somerset-house, with a splendour superior to any that has been bestowed on crowned heads. Some have related, that his body was, by his own particular order, secretly buried in Naseby field; others that it was wrapped in lead, and sunk in the deepest part of the Thames, to prevent any insult that might be offered to it; others that it was taken from the gallows after the restoration, and deposited in the family-vault of the Claypoles, at Narborough near Peterborough. From the account of what passed upon, the order to disinter him after the restoration, it seems that his body was interred at Westminster. “In the middle aile of Henry VII's chapel,at the east end, in a vault, was found his corpse. In the inside of the coffin, and upon the breast of the corpse, was laid a copper-plate finely gilt, inclosed in a thin case of lead; on the side whereof were engraven the arms of England, impaled with the arms of Oliver; and on the reverse the following legend: Oli verius protector reipublicæ Angliæ, Scotiæ, & Hiberniæ, uatus 25 April 1599, inauguratus 16 Decembris 1653, mortuus 3 Septembris ann. 1658. Hic situs est.” But this in some writers is considered as a delusion; and that some other, if not the body of Charles I. was inclosed in this coffin, which is still a greater delusion and absurdity, as a very recent discovery proves. It has also been said, that the body of his daughter Claypole was found at the same time and place, with a silver plate with an inscription; but the workmen quarrelling about this plate, it was thrown into the vault again. The inscription on it, however, was shewn to the Society of Antiquaries, 1738, by Dr. Cromwell Mortimer, whose father married to his first wife a daughter of Richard Cromwell. The plate on Oliver’s coffin was in 1773 in the possession of the hon. George Hobart, of Nocton, in Lincolnshire, and shewn to the same society by Mr. Wills, and is engraved in Mr. Noble’s Memoirs .

ost beautiful. It is said, that cardinal Mazarine styled him a fortunate madman: but father Orleans, who relates this, dislikes that character, and would substitute

Odious as Cromwell’s reign had been, many marks of public approbation were bestowed upon his memory. The poems of Waller, Sprat, and Dryden, though the authors lived to change their sentiments, give a very high idea of him, but allowance must be made for poetical evidence. In his life-time his actions had been celebrated by the learned abroad, as well as by his own secretary Milton at home; and with these panegyrics he seems not to have been displeased. We have indeed various characters of him from persons of various sentiments; yet in most of these there seems to be a mixture of flattery or prejudice. His panegyrists knew not where to stop their praises; and his enemies were as extravagant in their censures. Lord Hollis, in his “Memoirs,” will hardly allow him any great or good qualities; and one principal design of Ludiow’s Memoirs is to represent him as the vilest oi men. Cowley seems to have excelled all others, as well in respect to the matter as the manner of representing him in the different lights of praise and censure; so that his performance may justly be esteemed the most perfect of any, as it is beyond comparison the most beautiful. It is said, that cardinal Mazarine styled him a fortunate madman: but father Orleans, who relates this, dislikes that character, and would substitute in its place that of a judicious villain. Clarendon calls him a brave, wicked man: and Burnet is of opinion, that “his life and his arts were exhausted together; and that, if he had lived longer, he would scarce have been able to preserve his power.” But this only proves, that the bishop did not discern what resources he had. “how blameworthy soever the protector might have been in the acquisition of his high office, or how wickedly soever he acquired it, certain it is, he rivalled the greatest of the English monarchs in glory, and made himself courted and dreaded by the nations around him. The peace he gave the Dutch was honourable to himself and the nation; and whether he acted prudently or not in breaking with Spain, and allying himself with France, the inequality between the two crowns was far from being as visible then as it has since appeared, and Cromwell always had it in his power to throw himself into the opposite scale if necessary; and he distinguished himself by his interposition in behalf of the persecuted subjects of the French crown. His own government was, however, far from being free from blame. His edict against the episcopal clergy was very cruel, as it deprived them in a good measure of their maintenance, and liberty of worshiping God in a way that appeared best to their own understandings. The cavaliers had hard measure from him, as they were almost without exception subjected to heavy taxes and other inconveniences, on account of the rashness and imprudence of some of their party. Nor must we forget his institution of major-generals, who, in a variety of instances, lorded over an oppressed country; nor his sometimes making use of packed juries, and displacing judges for refusing to follow his directions, establishing high-commission courts, and so frequently violating the privileges of parliament.” Concessions like these make part of the character of Oliver Cromwell, as drawn by Mr. Harris, a professed advocate: but when he attempts to vindicate his illegal and tyrannical actions, on the ground of his being disappointed of regal power, and that had he accepted the kingship, which was offered by his parliament, a firmer settlement and a milder administration might have taken place, there seems little reason to doubt but the support even of that rank, considering the dangerous and uncertain terms on which he must have held it, would have urged him to the same violent and unwarrantable measures. Such biographers as Harris are generally employed in striking a balance between good and bad deeds; but it is not a few of the former that can redeem the character of Cromwell, who has been more justly said to be the strangest compound of villainy and virtue, baseness and magnanimity, absurdity and good sense, that we find upon record in the annals of mankind.

r; and perhaps the English honour never stood higher. The queen of Sweden paid great respect to him, who, to express his regard for her on the other side, hung her picture

For his conduct towards foreign courts, it is certain that he carried his authority very far; and perhaps the English honour never stood higher. The queen of Sweden paid great respect to him, who, to express his regard for her on the other side, hung her picture in his bed-chamber. He treated very haughtily the kings of Denmark and Portugal; and obliged the ambassador of the latter to come and sign the peace at Whitehall, the very morning his brother was executed on Tower-hill. He refused the title of cousin from the French king, expecting that of brother; and so artfully played the Spaniard with him at a critical conjuncture, that the two crowns contended for his friendship with an earnestness which made them both ridiculous. Their advances were so extraordinary, and their acts of submission so singular, that the Dutch struck a medal, with the bust of Cromwell and his titles on one side, with Britannia on the other, and Cromwell laying his head in her lap with his breeches down and his posteriors bare, the Spanish ambassador stooping to kiss them, while the French ambassador holds him by the arm, with these words inscribed, “Retire toi, l'honneur appartient au roi mon maitre:” that is, “Keep back; that honour belongs to the king my master.

he first distinguished himself in opposing the project for draining of the fens. Yet there were some who knew and understood him thoroughly, before his extraordinary

Very little of Cromwell’s private life is known; he being near forty years of age when he first distinguished himself in opposing the project for draining of the fens. Yet there were some who knew and understood him thoroughly, before his extraordinary talents were made known to the world; and in particular his cousin Hampden, of which the following was a remarkable instance. When the debates ran high in the house of commons, and Hampden and lord Digby were going down the parliament stairs, with Cromwell just before them, who was known to the latter only by sight: “Pray,” said his lordship to Hampden, “who is that man, for I see that he is on our side, by his speaking so warmly to-day?” “That sloven,” replied Hampden, “whom you see before us, who has no ornament in his speech; that sloven, I say, if we should ever come to a breach with the king, which God forbid! in such a case, I say, that sloven will be the greatest man in England.” This prophecy, which was so fully accomplished, rose chiefly from the sense Hampden had of Cromwell’s indefatigable diligence in pursuing whatever he undertook. He had another quality, which was equally useful to him; that of discerning the temper of those with whom he had to deal, and dealing with them accordingly. Before he became commander in chief, he kept up a very high intimacy with the private men: taking great pains to learn their names, by which he was sure to call them; shaking them by the hand, clapping them on the shoulder; or, which was peculiar to him, giving them a slight box on the ear; which condescending familiarities, with the warm concern he expressed for their interests, gave him a power easier conceived than described. He tried to inveigle the earl of Manchester; but finding that impracticable, he fell upon him in the house of commons, and procured his removal. He carried himself with so much respect to Fairfax, that he knew not how to break with him, though he knew that he had betrayed him. He not only deceived Harrison, Bradshaw, and Ludlow, but outwitted Oliver St. John, who had more parts than them all; and he foiled sir Henry Vane with his own weapons. In short, he knew men perfectly, worked them to his purposes as if they had been cattle, and, which is still more wonderful, did that often while they conceived that they were making a tool of him. He had a reach of head, which enabled him to impose even upon the greatest bodies of men. He fed the resentment of the house of commons agai.ibi the army, till the latter were in a flame, and very angry with him; yet, when he came tothe army, it was upon a flea-bitten nag, all in a foam, as if he had made his escape from that house; in which trim he signed the engagement of Triploe heath, throwing himself from his horse upon the grass, and writing his name as he lay upon his belly. He had yet another faculty beyond these; and that was, the art of concealing his arts. He dictated a paper once to Ireton, which was imposed upon the agitators as if founded upon their instructions; who sent it express by two of their number to Cromwell, then lieutenant-general, at his quarters at Colchester. He was in bed when they came; but they demanded and obtained admittance. When they told him their commission, he asked them, with the greatest rage and resentment in his look, how they durst bring him papers from the army? They said, that paper contained the sense of the army, and they were directed to do it. “Are you sure of that?” said he, with the same stern countenance, “Let me see it.” He spent a long time in reading it; and, as it seemed to them, in reflecting upon it: then, with a mild and devout look, he told them it was a most just thing, and he hoped that God would prosper it; adding, “I will stand by the army in these desires with and fortune.

ey was eye and ear-witness. In the course of his life he was temperate and sober, and despised those who were not so. In his family he shewed great kindness, but without

With such arts and qualities as these, joined to his great military skill and reputation, we may account for all his successes, and that prodigious authority to which he raised himself, without having-recourse to that contract of his with the devil, of which, as Echard pretends, colonel Lindsey was eye and ear-witness. In the course of his life he was temperate and sober, and despised those who were not so. In his family he shewed great kindness, but without any diminution of his authority. He was very respectful to his mother, and very tender to his wife; yet neither had any influence over him. He expressed a deep sense of the concern which the former discovered for his danger, heard whatever she said to him patiently, but acted as he thought proper, and, in respect to her burial, directly against her dying request. His wife is said to have made a proposition tending to restore the king; but he rejected it unmoved, as he had shewn himself before, when his son Richard threw himself at his feet, to dissuade him from taking the king’s life. He did not seem offended at applications of the same kind from other persons, as from Whitlocke, though that gentleman thought he lost his confidence by it; from the marquis of Hertford, whom he treated very respectfully; and from Dr. Brownrig, bishop of Exeter, to whom he shewed more kindness than to any other man of his rank and profession. Asking advice once of this prelate, “My advice,” said he to him, “must be in the words of the Gospel: ' Render to Citsar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s:” to which Cromwell made no reply. He shewed a great respect for learning and learned men, without affecting to be learned himself. His letters, however, are the best testimonies of his parts; for they are varied in their style in a wonderful manner, exactly adapted to the purposes for which they were written, and the persons to whom they were addressed. A great number of them are to be found in Thurloe’s and Nichols’s collections, as well as in Rushworth and Whitlocke. His public speeches were long, dark; and perplexed; and though mixed with the cant of the times, yet have sentiments in them which shew a superiority of understanding. Several of these are in Whitlocke’s “Memorials.” In his conversation he was easy and pleasant, and could unbend himself without losing his dignity. He made an excellent choice in those he cmployed, but trusted none of them farther than was necessary.

different parties, as we have before noticed. It is idle indeed to dispute on the religion of a man who rose to greatness by a succession of actions, both in conception

It may seem strange, that in drawing together his character, there should be nothing said of his principles as to government or religion; but the real truth is, that neither run be discovered with certainty. We know that he hated a commonwealth, and the prtsbyterians; but what his sentiments were in other respects, it is not possible to say. When he recollected himself after the follies of his youth, there seems to be no doubt that he had serious impressions of religion; and there seem to be very strong proofs that he was afterwards tinctured with enthusiasm. It is impossible to suppose him a fanatic in the time of his elevavation; it were more reasonable to suppose him gradually to have lost all sense of religion, and only to have preserved the mask of it, for the better carrying on his designs, and managing the different parties, as we have before noticed. It is idle indeed to dispute on the religion of a man who rose to greatness by a succession of actions, both in conception and execution, radically criminal. Clarendon mentions his speaking kindly of bishops, as if there was something good in that order, it the dross was scoured off; and seems to think he was in earnest. But the whole of his life proves that he was not steady to any form of religion, supposing him to have retained any principles at the bottom; and there seems to be little doubt that the true meaning of these flattering words, was, his design to return to the old form of government; for whatever he intended, this was his great aim. He did not overturn the constitution to leave it in ruins, but to set it up again, and himself at the head of it; and though he compared his own government at first to that of a high constable, yet all he laboured at afterwards, was plainly to get the chaos new formed, and his own authority sanctified by the regal title, and the appearance of a legal parliament.

just ground. He married him to a daughter and coheir of Richard Major, of Hunley, in Hampshire, esq. who brought him a good fortune. He suffered him to pursue the bent

He had many children, of whom six, Richard, Henry, Bridget, Elizabeth, Mary, and Frances, survived to advanced age. Richard, his eldest son, was born Oct. 4, 1626. His father has been censured for keeping him at a distance from business, and giving him no employment but for this perhaps there was not any just ground. He married him to a daughter and coheir of Richard Major, of Hunley, in Hampshire, esq. who brought him a good fortune. He suffered him to pursue the bent of his inclinations, and to lead the life of a plain, honest, country gentleman; which for a time was highly suitable to his own interest, as it seemed to correspond with the terms of the Instrument of Government; and with the dislike which the protector, when first so called, had expressed of hereditary right. When he had afterwards brought about a change in affairs, he altered his conduct towards his son; named him the first lord in his other house; resigned to him the chancellorship of Oxford; and conferred upon him all the honours he could. His weak and harmless reign is well known. On his dismission from the protectorate, he resided some time at Pezenas, in Languedoc, and afterwards went to Geneva. Sometime in 1680, he returned to England, and for some time took the name of Richard Clark, and resided at Cheshunt, in Hertfordshire, where he died July 13, 1712. In 1705 he lost his only son, and became in right of him possessed of the manor of Horsley, which had belonged to his mother. Richard, then in an advanced age, sent or.c of his daughters to take possession of the estate for him. She kept it for herself and her sisters, allowing her father only a small annuity out of it, till she was dispossessed of it by a sentence of one of the courts of Westminster-hall. It was requisite for this purpose, that Richard should appear in person; and tradition says, that the judge who presided, lord Cowper, ordered a chair for him in court, and desired him to keep on his hat: this last circumstance appears wholly incredible. As Richard was returning from this trial, curiosity led him to see the house of peers, when, being asked by a person to whom he was a stranger, if he had ever seen any thing like it before, he replied, pointing to the throne, “Never since I sat in that chair.

s youngest daughter, was married first to Mr. Robert Rich, grandson to the earl of Warwick, in 1657, who died Feb. 16th following; and, secondly, to sir John Russel,

Oliver’s second son, Henry, born Jan. 20, 1627, he sent over into Ireland, where he raised him gradually to the post of lord lieutenant. Though in this he seemed to give him the preference to Richard, yet in reality he used him more harshly; for though his abilities were good, his manners irreproachable, and his submission exemplary, yet he paid no great deference to his recommendations, and allowed him as little power as could well be imagined. This son died March 25, 1674, having married a daughter of sir Francis Russel, of Chippenham, in Cambridgeshire. He was buried in the church of Wicken, in the same county, in which Spinney-abbey, his mansion-house, stood, and has this simple epitaph in the chancel: “Henricus Cromwell de Spinney obiit 23 die Martii, anno Christi 1673, unnoque ætatis 47.” His lady died April 7, 1687, aged 52, and was buried by him. Cromwell married all his daughters well, and was kind to their husbands; but it is said that he gave them no fortunes. Bridget, his eldest, first married commissary-general Ireton, and after his decease, lieutenantgeneral Fleetwood. Cromwell is said never to have had but one confidant, and that was Ireton, whom he placed at the head of affairs in Ireland, where he died of the plague in 1651. This daughter was a republican, as were her two husbands, and consequently not quite agreeable to her father; otherwise a woman of very good sense, and regular in her behaviour. By Ireton she had one daughter of her own name, married to Mr. Benclish. Elizabeth, his second and favourite daughter, was born in 1630, and married John Claypole, esq. a Northamptonshire gentleman, whom the protector made master of the horse, created a baronet in 1657, and appointed him one of his lords. Mary, his third daughter, born in 1636, was married with great solemnity to lord Fauconberg, Nov. 18, 1657; but the same day more privately by Dr. Hewett, according to the office in the common prayer-book. She was a lady of great beauty, and of a very high spirit; and, after her brother Richard was deposed, is thought to have promoted very successfully the restoration of king Charles; for it is remarkable, that all Cromwell’s daughters, except the eldest, had a secret kindness for the royal family, of which, however, he was not ignorant. Lord Fauconberg was sent to the Tower by the committee of safety, and was in very high favour with Charles II. He was raised to the dignity of an earl by king William, and died Dec. 31, 1700. His lady survived him to March, 1712, and distinguished herself to her death, by the quickness of her wit and the solidity of her judgment. Frances, the protector’s youngest daughter, was married first to Mr. Robert Rich, grandson to the earl of Warwick, in 1657, who died Feb. 16th following; and, secondly, to sir John Russel, of Chippenham, in Cambridgeshire, by whom she had several children, and lived to a great age.

, a Swedish mineralogist, and one of the first who improved that science by applying chemistry in the decomposition

, a Swedish mineralogist, and one of the first who improved that science by applying chemistry in the decomposition of mineral substances, was born in Sudermania in 1722, and educated at the university of Upsal, where he joined to his other studies, an uncommon predilection for natural history, and especially mineralogy, which was the cause of his being much employed in the royal college of mines, and being frequently sent to inspect those of Sweden and Norway. In 1753 he was elected a member of the academy of Stockholm, and contributed several papers on mineralogical subjects, particularly on nickel, which, by some experiments made in 1751 and 1754, he showed to contain a new semi-metal, or at least that a regulus different from all others was obtainable from its ore. Cronstedt died Aug. 19, 1765. His principal work, which is well known in this country by translations, was “An Essay towards a System of Mineralogy,” originally published in 1758, translated from the Swedish by Engestrom, and from that into English by Emanuel da Costa, 1770, 8vo. Of this a second edition, greatly improved by the addition of the modern discoveries, and by a new arrangement of the articles, was published at London in 1788, by John Hyacinth de Magellan, 2 vols. 8vo.

s Europa, and other celebrated pieces, very successfully. He must be distinguished from Lewis Cross, who died 1724, and of whom it is recorded that he re-painted a little

, an English artist, and famous copier of paintings, flourished in the reigns of Charles I. and Charles II. Being employed by the first of these kings to copy several eminent pieces in Italy, and having leave of the state of Venice to copy the celebrated Madonna of Raphael in St. Mark’s church, he performed the task so admirably well, that he is said to have put a trick upon the Italians, by leaving his copy, and bringing away the original; and that several messengers were sent after him, but that he had got the start of them so far as to carry it clear off. This picture was afterwards, in Oliver Cromwell’s days, bought by the Spanish ambassador, when the king’s collection was exposed to sale. Cross copied likewise Titian’s Europa, and other celebrated pieces, very successfully. He must be distinguished from Lewis Cross, who died 1724, and of whom it is recorded that he re-painted a little picture of Mary queen of Scots, in the possession of the duke of Hamilton, and was ordered to make it as handsome as he could. He made the face a round one. For many years it was believed an original, and innumerable copies have been made from it.

blished in the Philosophical Transactions, and have been drawn up by the most eminent physiologists, who were members of the society, and contain a great collection

, an eminent physician and benefactor to the science, was born in London, and educated at Emanuel college, Cambridge, where he was admitted a pensioner May 13, 1647, and took the degree of B. A. in 1650. In 1651 he was elected a fellow, and commenced M. A. in 1654. In 1659, being now settled as a physician in London, he was chosen rhetoric professor in Gresham college, and at the first meeting of the royal society, Nov. 28, 1660, was (though absent) appointed their register, whose business was to make minutes of what passed at their meetings. In this office he remained till the grant of their charter, when Dr. Wilkins and Mr. Oldenburg were nominated joint secretaries. On Oct. 7, 162, he was created M. D. at Cambridge, by royal mandate; and in May 1663 was chosen one of the first fellows of the royal society, and frequently afterwards was one of the council. The same year he was admitted a candidate of the college of physicians. In 1665 he travelled into France, and became acquainted with several eminent and learned men of that nation. In August 1670, he was chosen by the company of surgeons their lecturer on anatomy, which he held to his death; but this year he resigned his Gresham professorship, which could be held only by a bachelor, and soon after married Mary, daughter of John Lorimer, of London, esq. In 1674 and 1675 he read his “Theory of Muscular Motion,” in the theatre of Surgeous’-hall, an abstract of which was afterwards published by Mr. Hooke in his “Philosophical Collections.” In July 1675, he was admitted a fellow of the college of physicians, after he had waited for a vacancy upwards of twelve years. He was much esteemed as a physician, and came into great practice in the latter part of his life, on which account the loss of him was much regretted by the citizens of London. He died of a fever Oct. 12, 1684, and was buried in St. Mildred’s church in the Poultry, in a vault belonging to the Lorimer family, with an inscription on black marble, on the pavement in the chancel. His funeral sermon was preached by Dr. John Scott, rector of St. Peter-le-Poor, Broad-street, in which he gives him. a very high character, not only for learning, but those more amiable attributes of a physician, tenderness and kindness to the poor. He tiled rich, and besides many benevolent legacies, left his medical books to the college of physicians, and his mathematical collection to Emanuel college. His printed works are in the Philosophical Transactions; and many of his Mss. are in the British Museum (see Ayscough’s Cat. under the articles Crone, Croon, and Croun). He printed separately only one tract, “De ratione motus musculorum,” Lond. 1664, 4to Amst. 1667, 12mo, without his name in either edition. He left to Emanuel and six other colleges at Cambridge, a sum of money to found algebra lectures, which took place in 1710. This legacy, although a contingent on the death of his wife, was liberally settled by her in her life-time. He also left a plan of an annual lecture on museular motion before the royal society, which was also carried into execution by Mrs. Croun. The first lecture was read in 1738, by Dr. Alexander Stuart, physician to the queen, and has been continued ever since. These lectures, for a considerable number of years, have been regularly published in the Philosophical Transactions, and have been drawn up by the most eminent physiologists, who were members of the society, and contain a great collection of very curious and important facts, respecting the muscles and their motions. The Crounian lecture is endowed with the protits of a house in Old Fish-street.

s studies, yet left school at the age of thirteen with the reputation of a good scholar. His father, who intended him for the army, had him educated in the branches

, an eminent philosopher and mathematician, descended from a noble family, was born at Lausanne, April 13, 1663. His father was Abraham de Crousaz, colonel of a regiment of fusileers: in his youth being of a very delicate habit, he was not too closely confined to his studies, yet left school at the age of thirteen with the reputation of a good scholar. His father, who intended him for the army, had him educated in the branches of knowledge necessary for that profession; but finding him averse to any pursuit unless that of literature, he allowed him to follow his inclination. In his fifteenth year he completed his course of philosophy, and distinguished himself by his theses, but being dissatisfied with the philosophy then taught, he had recourse to the writings of Des Cartes, which he studied with avidity, and applied at the same time to mathematics, but scholastic theology had no more charms for him than the philosophy he had been taught. In his sixteenth year, however, he entered as a student of divinity, attended the best professors, both at Geneva and Lausanne, and read the opinions of other eminent divines on the subjects most involved in controversy. In March 1682 he went to Lcyden, made himself acquainted with the theological disputes, and endeavoured to investigate how far they could be determined by the sacred scriptures. Leaving Holland, he entered France, became acquainted with those celebrated protestant divines Claude and Menard, at Charenton, and fathers Malebranche and le Vassor at Paris, who in vain endeavoured to bring him over to the Roman catholic church, which Vassor himself forsook some years after. On his return to his native country, in J 684, Crousaz married the daughter of John Lewis Loys, comptroller-general, and soon after was ordained, and made honorary professor. He officiated as pastor in the church of Lausanne for fourteen years. During this time, in 1691, he was appointed to dispute for the professorship of Hebrew at Berne, which he performed with great credit. In 1699 he was made professor of Greek and philosophy, and although also nominated to the chair of divinity in 1700, he preferred that of philosophy. In 1706 he was appointed rector of the college, which office he held three years, and was again appointed in 1722, but held it then only two years, as it interfered too much with his literary engagements. It was during this second rectorate, that contests arose at Lausanne respecting the obligation of signing the Consensus, a formulary of faith and doctrine maintained in the protestant churches of Swisserland, an account of which may be seen in “Memoires pour servir a l‘histoire des troubles arrives en Suisse a I’occasion du Consensus,” Amst. 1726; and more briefly in Mosheim’s History. In 1705, from his own theses, and those published at the expence of the lords of Berne, he compiled a system of logic, in twenty ­two theses, 4to, and in the same and two following years published an abridgment of this. In 1712 he published in French, a system of logic, entitled “Systeme de reflexions qui peuvent coutribuer a la netteté et a Petude de nos connoissances,” Amst. 2 vols. 8vo, reprinted there in 1720, 3 vols. 12mo; in 1725, in 4 vols. and in 1741, in 6 vols. In 1724 he published an abridgment of it in Latin, at Geneva, “Systema Logicæ, juxta principia ab autore in Gallico opere posita.” Some conversations on the subject of beauty in art, led him to an investigation of the subject, and produced in 1715, his “Traité du Beau, ou Ton montre en quoi consiste ce que l'on nomnie ainsi, par des examples tirés de la plupart des arts et des sciences,” reprinted at Amst. 2 vols. 12mo. In 1718, he published an ironical work, “Nouvelles maximes sur l'Education des enfans,” Amst. 8vo; but in 1722, his more serious and better known work on Education, Hague, 1722, 2 vols. 12mo. In 1718 he answered the deistical Collins’s discourse of Freethinking, in “Examen du traite de la Hberté de penser,” Amst. 8vo. In the same year he published his first mathematical work, “Geometric des lignes et des surfaces rectilignes et circulaires,” Arnst. 2 vols. 8vo.

Sweden sent him a very polite letter of acknowledgement for the services he had rendered the prince, who was the king’s nephew, and prince William of Hesse-Cassel, father

In 1724 he was invited to the professorship of mathematics and philosophy at Groningen, with a salary of 1500 Dutch florins; and when the lords of Berne granted him permission to accept this office, they also allowed his son to fill the chair at Lausanne for a year; during which he might see whether the air of Groningen agreed with him. He departed accordingly, and in October took possession of his new professorship with a discourse “De logic-ce cum physica, et de mathesceos cum utraque, et utriusque cum mathesi reciproco nexu,” which was afterwards printed. In 1726 he was chosen a foreign associate of the royal academy of sciences at Paris, and the same year was selected as tutor to prince Frederick of Hesse Cassel, which occasioned him to remove to Cassel; and he superintended the education of his illustrious pupil until 1732, in which year the king of Sweden made him counsellor of his embassies. In September of the same year he went to Geneva with his pupil, and after a year’s residence there returned to Lausanne. The king of Sweden sent him a very polite letter of acknowledgement for the services he had rendered the prince, who was the king’s nephew, and prince William of Hesse-Cassel, father to prince Frederick, continued to Crousaz his pension of 884 crowns as long as he lived. In 1735 Crousaz was chosen a member of the royal academy of sciences at Bourdeaux; and in 1737 he was unanimously elected to the vacant professorship of philosophy at Lausanne; and the lords of Berne permitted him to employ a deputy when he found age and infirmities creep on, and continued to him his title of professor and his salary, even when he was obliged to decline all its duties. As late as 1740, however, we find that he continued to enjoy health and activity, but died in May 1750, deeply regretted as one of the ablest men of his time, a man of great piety, and an acute and successful opponent of infidelity in every shape.

e English interlined: also observations on the French, Italian, and English Poetry,“1741, 8vo. Pope, who had got the principles of the Essay from Bolingbroke, and did

Two of M. de Crousaz’s publications yet remain, and require particular notice: his “Examen de l‘Essai sur l’homme, poeme de M. Pope,” Lausanne, 1737; and “Commentaire sur la traduction en vers de M. l‘abbé du Resnel, de l’essai de M. Pope,” Geneva, 1738, 12mo. In these M. Crousaz accuses Mr. Pope of Spinosism and naturalism, and the first of them was immediately translated into English by the celebrated Miss Carter, with some assistance from Dr. Johnson, and published under the title of “An Examination of Mr. Pope’s Essay on Man containing a succinct view of the system of the fatalists, and a confutation of their opinions with an illustration of the doctrine of free-will, and an inquiry what view Mr. Pope might have in touching upon the Leibnitzian philosophy and fatalism,1738, 8vo. The other was translated under the title of “A Commentary on Mr. Pope’s Principles of Morality, or Essay on Man. By M. Crousaz; with the abbe” dn Resnel’s translation of the Essay into French verse, and the English interlined: also observations on the French, Italian, and English Poetry,“1741, 8vo. Pope, who had got the principles of the Essay from Bolingbroke, and did not understand them, would have made but a sorry figure in this controversy had he not found in Warburton a vigorous defender, although it is said that he had once written a censure of the doctrines of the Essay on Man. He now stept forth, however, with a defence, which was first published in a monthly literary journal (The Republic of Letters), but was afterwards collected into a volume (1742, 12mo), written with more asperity than argument.” Crousaz,“says Dr. Johnson,” was no mean antagonist; his mind was one of those in which philosophy and piety are happily united. He was accustomed to argument and disquisition, and, perhaps, was grown too desirous of detecting faults; but his intentions were always right, his opinions were solid, and his religion pure. His incessant vigilance for the promotion of piety disposed him to look with distrust upon all metaphysical systems of theology, and all schemes of virtue and happiness purely rational; and therefore it was not long before he was persuaded that the positions of Pope, as they terminated for the most part in natural religion, were intended to draw mankind away from revelation, and to represent the wholecourse of things as a necessary concatenation of indissoluble fatality; and it is undeniable, that in many passages a religious eye may easily discover expressions not very favourable to morals or to liberty.“The consequence to Pope was, that his eyes were opened, and he was not a little pleased that by” any mode of interpretation he could be made to mean well." To Warburton the consequences were more important; Pope courted him, and ultimately got him a. ricli wife and a bishopric.

les II. to write “The Masque of Calisto.” This nomination was procured him by the earl of Rochester, who designed by that preference to mortify Dryden. Upon the breaking

, an American, was the son of an independent minister in Nova Scotia. Being a man of some genius, and impatient of the strict education he received in that country, he resolved upon coming to England to try if he could not make his fortune by his wits. When he first arrived here, his necessities were extremely urgent; and he was obliged to become gentleman usher to an old independent lady; but he soon grew as weary of that office as he was of the discipline of Nova Scotia. He set himself therefore to writing; and presently made himself so known to the court and the town, that he was nominated by Charles II. to write “The Masque of Calisto.” This nomination was procured him by the earl of Rochester, who designed by that preference to mortify Dryden. Upon the breaking out of the two parties, after the pretended discovery of the popish plot, the favour Crowne was in at court induced him to embrace the tory party; about which time he wrote a comedy called the “City Politics,” in order to expose the whigs. The lord chamberlain, Bennet earl of Arlington, though secretly a papist, was unaccountably a friend to the whigs, from his hatred to the treasurer lord Darnley. Upon various pretences the play was withheld from the stage; at last Crowne had recourse to the king himself, and by his majesty’s absolute command the play was acted. Though Crowne ever retained a most sincere affection to his royal master, he was honest enough to despise the servilities of a court. He solicited the payment of money promised him, which as soon as he obtained he became remiss in his attendance at St. James’s. The duchess of Portsmouth observed this conduct, and acquainted the king with it. The gay monarch only laughed at the accusation, and perhaps in his mind justified Crowne’s sincerity.

romise; when, upon the last day of the rehearsal, he met Underbill the player coming from the house, who informed him of the king’s death. This event ruined Crowne;

About the latter end of this reign, Crowne, tired out with writing, and desirous of sheltering himself from the resentment of many enemies he had made by his “City Politics,” ventured to address the king himself, for an establishment in some office, that might be a security to him for life. The king answered, “he should be provided for;” but added, “that he would first see another comedy.” Crowne endeavoured to excuse himself by telling the king, that “he plotted slowly and awkwardly.” His majesty replied, that “he would help him to a plot” and put into his hand the Spanish comedy called “Non pued esser,” out of which Crowne took the comedy of “Sir Courtly Nice.” The play was just ready to appear, and Crowne extremely delighted to think that he was going to be made happy the remaining part of his life, by the performance of the king’s promise; when, upon the last day of the rehearsal, he met Underbill the player coming from the house, who informed him of the king’s death. This event ruined Crowne; who had now nothing but his wits to live on for the remaining part of his life. On them, however, he contrived to live at least until 1703, but it is not certain when he died. He was the author of seventeen plays, some of which were acted with great success; of a romance called “Pandion and Amphigeria;” and a burlesque poem called “Dceneids,1692, 4to, partly imitated from Boileau’s “Lutrin,” which last he translated in Dryden’s Miscellany. The editor of the Biographia Dramatica assigns him the third rank in dramatic merit, which seems rather more than his plays will justify. His merit, such as it was, lay in comedy, for his tragedies are wretched. Dryden, who, notwithstanding his high fame, was not wholly free from the jealousy of rivals, and even of such a rival as Crowne, used to compliment him when any of his plays failed, but was cold to him it he met with success. He used also to say that Crowne had some genius, but then he always added, that “his father and Crowne’s mother were very well acquainted.” For this bit of gossip, related first by Jacob Tonson, we are indebted to Spence’s Anecdotes. Dry den was evidently in good humour when he thus endeavoured to account for Crowne’s genius.

ge. It is said, that while he was at the university he became enamoured of Mrs. Anna Maria Mordaunt, who first inspired his breast with love; and to whom he dedicates

, was the son of Samuel Croxall, rector of Hanworth in Middlesex, and Walton upon Thames in Surrey, in the last of which places his son was born. He received his early education at Eton school, and thence was sent to St. John’s college, in Cambridge. It is said, that while he was at the university he became enamoured of Mrs. Anna Maria Mordaunt, who first inspired his breast with love; and to whom he dedicates “The Fair Circassian,” in a bombastic style, bordering on prophaneness. Croxall was designed for orders, and had probably entered them when he published this poem, which made him cautious of being known to be the author of a piece so ludicrously written, and yet taken from a book which makes a part of the canon of scripture. The first specimen of this poem, under the title of “Solomon’s Song, chap, iv.” appeared in Steele’s Miscellany, 1713. The first edition of the whole poem appeared in 1720, when it might have been expected he had acquired more reverence for the scriptures, or respect for his profession.

ed the vicarage of Selleck in Herefordshire. He died at an advanced age, Feb. 13, 1752. Dr. Croxall, who principally governed the church of Hereford during the old age

Croxall had not long quitted the university before he was instituted to the vicarage of Hampton, in Middlesex; and afterwards^ Feb. 1731, to the united parishes of St. Mars-­Somerset and St. Mary Mounthaw, in London, both which he held till his death. He was also chancellor, prebendary, canon residentiary, and portionist of the church of Hereford; in 1732 was made archdeacon of Salop and chaplain to the king; and in Feb. 1734 obtained the vicarage of Selleck in Herefordshire. He died at an advanced age, Feb. 13, 1752. Dr. Croxall, who principally governed the church of Hereford during the old age of bishop Egerton, pulled down the old stone chapel adjoining to the palace, of which a fine plate was published by the society of antiquaries in 1737, and with the materials built a house for his brother, Mr. Rodney Croxall. Having early imbibed a strong attachment to the whig-interest, he employed his pen in favour of that party during the latter end of queen Anne’s reign; and published “Two original cantos, in imitation of Spenser’s Fairy Queen,” as a satire on the earl of Oxford’s administration. In 17 15 he addressed a poem to the duke of Argyle, upon his obtaining a victory over the rebels; and the same year published “The Vision,” a poem, addressed to the earl of Halifax. In 1720 he published “The Fair Circassian,” in 4to in 1722, a collection of “Fables of jÆsop and others, translated into English,” a work which continues to be popular, probably from its homely and almost vulgar style. He wrote all the dedications prefixed to the “Select Novels,” printed for Watts, 1729; and was the author of “Scripture Politics,1735, 8vo. This is an account intended for common readers of the historical part of the Old Testament. His latest publication was “The Royal Manual;” in the preface of which he endeavours to shew that it was composed by the famous Andrew Marvel, found among his Mss. but it was generally believed to be written by himself.

the character of a corrupt and wicked minister of state, he was supposed to mean sir Robert Walpole, who had intercepted some ecclesiastical dignity which he wished

As a divine, Dr. Croxall seems entitled to little respect. He owed his preferments to his political services. He published, however, six single sermons, and while house chaplain to the palace at Hampton court, preached a sermon on a public occasion, in which, under the character of a corrupt and wicked minister of state, he was supposed to mean sir Robert Walpole, who had intercepted some ecclesiastical dignity which he wished to obtain. It was expected that for this offence he would have been removed from his chaplainship: but the court over-ruled it, as he had always manifesed himself to be a zealous friend to the Hanover succession. To the list of his poems may be added, an “Ode.” inscribed to king George the First, on his landing to receive the crown; and “Colin’s Mistakes,” formerly ascribed to Prior, but printed as Croxall’s in Mr. Nichols’s Collection. His having written the dedications to the “Select Novels,” printed for Watts in 1729, suggested to some bookseller to affix his name to a compilation called “The Tea-table Miscellany,1766.

, a learned French writer, was born at Nantes, Dec. 4, 1661. His father, who was a merchant, was also a man of letters, and bestowed much

, a learned French writer, was born at Nantes, Dec. 4, 1661. His father, who was a merchant, was also a man of letters, and bestowed much pains on the education of his son, who answered his expectations by the proficiency he made in classical studies. He had, however, provided him with a private tutor, who happened to disgust him by the severity of his manners, and upon this account partly, at the age of fourteen, he desired to take a voyage to some of the West India islands, to which his father traded; but his principal inducement was what he had read in books of voyages, and the conversation of persons who had been in America, all which raised his curiosity to visit the new world. He embarked on board a French ship, with no other books than Erasmus’s Colloquies, and the Gradus ad Parnassum. His passage was not unpleasant, and during his residence at Guadeloupe he borrowed all the Latin books he could discover, and read them with avidity; but the chief advantage he seems to have derived here was an opportunity to learn the English, Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese San^uasres. To these he afterwards added an acquaintance with the German, Sclavonic, and AngloSaxon; and studied with much attention the ancient and modern Greek, the Hebrew, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Hebrew, Arabic, and even the Chinese. On his return to Nantes in 1677, he found his father’s affairs somewhat deranged, and was obliged to take a part in the business. Medicine appears to have been first suggested to him as a profession, but he found little inclination for that study; and some conferences he happened to have with the Benedictines of the congregation of St. Maur determined him to enter their society. He accordingly made his noviciate in 1673, and applied himself to the study of theology. In 1682 he formally became a member of the congregation. His residence at Paris, in the abbey of St. Germain des Pres, the vast number of books within his reach, and particularly of manuscripts, increased his knowledge and his thirst for knowledge, and some of his earliest labours were bestowed in preparing materials, collecting Mss. &c. for new editions of the works of St. Clement of Alexandria, and St. Gregory Nazianzen. But these were interrupted by certain differences which occurred in the abbey to which he belonged, and of which we have various accounts. The prior of St. Germain, father Loo, had a great aversion to the study of classical and polite literature, and was for confining the members to the strict religious duties of the house. This could not fail to be disgusting to a man of La Croze’s taste: but, according to other accounts, which seem more prohable, he began to entertain religious scruples about this time (lr.96), which induced him to withdraw himself. It is said that his superiors found among his papers a treatise against transubstantiation in his hand-writing, and which they believed to be his composition; but they discovered afterwards that it uas a translation from the English of Stillingfleet. Some other manuscripts, however, sufficiently proved that he had changed his opinion on religious matters; and the dread of persecution obliged him to make his escape to Basil, which he successfully accomplished in May 1696. Here he renounced the Roman catholic religion, and as his intention was to take up his residence, he was matriculated as a student of the college of Basil. He remained in this place, however, only till September, when he departed, provided with the most honourable testimonies of his learning and character from Buxtorf, the Hebrew professor, and Werenfels, dean of the faculty of theology. He then went to Berlin, where his object was to secure a iixed residence, devote himself to study, and endeavour to forget France. In order to introduce himself, he began with offering to educate young men, the sons of protestant parents, which appears to have answered his purpose, as in 1697 we find him appointed librarian to the king of Prussia; but his biographers are not agreed upon the terms. To this place a pension was attached, but not sufficient to enable him to live without continuing his school; and some assert that he was very poor at this time. The probability is, that his circumstances were improved as he became better known, and his reputation among the learned was already extensive. In June of 1697 he went to Francfort to visit the literati of that place, and their fine library, and visited also Brandenburgh for the same purpose. In November 1697 (or, as Chaufepie says, in 1702), he married Elizabeth Rose, a lady originally of Dauphiny, and thus, adds one of his Roman catholic biographers, completed the abjuration of the true religion. In 1698 he first commenced author, and from time to time published those works on which his fame rests. Soon after he became acquainted with the celebrated Leibnitz, with whom he carried on an intimate correspondence. In 17 13 he went to Hamburgh, where he paid many visits to the learned Fabricius, and in his letters speaks with great warmth of the pleasure this journey afforded; but this year, 17 J 3, was not in other respects a vei'y fortunate one to La Croze, and he formed the design of quitting Germany. He had been appointed tutor to the margrave of Schwel, and this employment terminating in 1714, he lost the pension annexed to it, and was reduced to considerable difficulties, of which he wrote to Leibnitz, as to a friend in whom he could confide. Leibnitz, by way of answer, sent him a copy of a letter which he had written to M. BernsdorfT, prime minister to the elector of Hanover, in his behalf. The object likely to be attained by this interest was a professorship at Helmstadt; but as it required subscription to the articles of the Lutheran church, M. la Croze, notwithstanding the persuasions Leibnitz employed, declined accepting it. His affairs, however, soon after wore a more promising aspect, partly in consequence of a prize he gained in the Dutch lottery. In 1717 he had the honour to be engaged as private tutor to the princess royal of Prussia, afterwards margravine of Bareoth. In 1724, for several months his studies were interrupted by a violent fit of the gravel; and on his recovery, the queen of Prussia, who always patronized La Croze, obtained for him the professorship of philosophy in the French college at Berlin, vacant by the death of M. Chauvin. This imposed on him the necessity of drawing up a course of philosophy, but as he never intended to print it, it is said not to have been executed with the care he bestowed on his other works. In 1713 father Bernard Pez, the Benedictine, made him liberal offers if he would return to the church he had forsaken, but this he declined with politeness, offering the arguments which influenced his mind to remain in the protestant church. In 1739 an inflammation appeared on his leg, which inApril put on appearances of mortification, hut did not prove fatal until May 21. About a quarter of an bour before his death he desired his servant to read the 51st and 77th psalms, during which he expired, in the seventy -first year of his age. He was reckoned one of the most learned men of his time, and was frequently called a living library. So extensive was his reading, and so vast iiis memory, that no one ever consulted him without obtaining prompt information. In dates, facts, and references he was correct and ready. We have already noticed how many languages he had learned, but it appears that he made the least progress in the Chinese, to which Leihnitz, in his letters, is perpetuiiy iirging him. The greater part of his life was employed in study, and he had no other pleasures. There was scarcely a book in his library whicli he had not perused, and he wrote ms notes on most of them. His conversation could not fail to be acceptable to men of literary research, as his memory was stored with anecdotes, which he told in a very agreeable manner. He was conscientiously attached to the principles of the reformed religion. He had always on his table the Hebrew Psalter, the Greek Testament, and Thomas a Kempis in Latin: the latter he almost had by heart, as well as Buchanan’s Psalms. His consistent piety and charity are noticed by all his biographers.

o notice that he has been sometimes confounded, and especially in Germany, with Conrand de la Croze, who lived for some time in Holland, and wrote part of the first

It may be necessary to notice that he has been sometimes confounded, and especially in Germany, with Conrand de la Croze, who lived for some time in Holland, and wrote part of the first nine volumes of the “Bibliotheque Universelle,” and the whole of vol. XI. From these a 4to volume was published in London in 1693, under the title of “Memoirs for the ingenious,” but the two authors were nowise related.

der Mosellanus and Richard Croke (See Croke), and had for his fellow student the learned Camerarius, who says, that although he appeared to his companions of a didl

, one of the contributors to the reformation in Germany, was born at Leipsic, Jan. 1, 1504. In his youth he was of a retired melancholy cast, but made great progress in classical learning, and afterwards in divinity, which he studied at Wittemberg under Mosellanus and Richard Croke (See Croke), and had for his fellow student the learned Camerarius, who says, that although he appeared to his companions of a didl capacity, he laid in a greater stock of learning than any of them. In 1524 he went to Magdeburgb, and taught school for two years; and on his return to Wittemberg he was appointed to expound the scriptures, and to preach in the church near the castle, and was admitted to his doctor’s degree. Here he also applied his mind to the study of medicine, pharmacy, and botany, and laid out two gardens with a great variety of curious and useful plants. Having contracted an intimacy with Luther, he joined him in his efforts to promote the reformation, and assisted him in the translation of the Bible. In 1,540, in the dispute at Worms with Eckius, &c. he was chosen secretary; and Glanvil, who represented the emperor in this assembly, said of him that he had more learning than all the Pontificians, or Romanists. In disputing he aimed at great perspicuity, and disliked new and ambiguous expressions. To his other studies he joined a very intimate acquaintance with mathematics, was a master of Euclid, anil himself invented or improved various astronomical instruments. In 1546 he was chosen rector of the college of Wittemberg, and sustained almost alone the whole weight of managing its concerns, by which, added to his unremitting studies, his health became injured, and his strength so much impaired, that he died of a decline Nov. 16, 1548, in the forty-fourth year of his age. During his sickness, he employed himself in reading, and exhorting his family and friends, who came to see him, to adhere to the principles he had professed and taught. He published some commentaries on the gospel of St. John, the epistle to Timothy, and the Psalms in German “Ermrrationes in duns articltlos Symboll Niceni;” and “Oratio cle ordine discendi.” Some of these are to be found among Mclanchton’s works.

d for public remuneration. The first edition was published in 1737, and dedicated to queen Caroline, who had led the editor to expect her patronage but her majesty

, author of an excellent “Concordance of the Bible,” was born in 1701 at Aberdeen, where he received his grammar learning: he afterwards studied at Marischal college, with a view of entering the church. Unfortunately, before the period arrived when he could be admitted to officiate as a public instructor, such decided symptoms of insanity appeared in his conduct, as rendered confinement necessary. This afterwards settled in a kind of belief that he was delegated by Heaven to reform a guilty world; and his conduct in a thousand instances demonstrated an ardour and zeal for the good of his fellow-creatures, that merited the highest applause. Thrice, however, he was shut up in a private madhouse, in which, if the nature of his disease did not lead him to exaggeration, he was cruelly treated. Once indeed he brought his action against a respectable physician, and other persons connected with him; the cause was tried, and Cruden was unable to make out a case. The verdict was given in favour of the defendants; and his appeal to the public was not of a kind to set aside that verdict, although he certainly suffered much more harsh treatment than was necessary. On his release from his first confinement, which was in his native place, he came to London, and engaged in some respectable families as private tutor. In the same employment he spent some years in the isle of Man; and in 1732 he opened a shop in London, under the Royal Exchange, as bookseller, and employed all his vacant time as a corrector of the press. In the following year he began to compile his great work, viz. “A complete Concordance of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament.” We can scarcely conceive any literary work that required more patient labour than this, and few have been executed with greater accuracy. He had nearly executed the whole before he looked for public remuneration. The first edition was published in 1737, and dedicated to queen Caroline, who had led the editor to expect her patronage but her majesty unfortunately died a few days before the work could be got ready. The author’s affairs were now embarrassed; he had none to look to for assistance, and in a fit of despondence he gave up his trade, and became a prey to melancholy. Shortly after this, he assumed the title of “Alexander the Corrector,” maintained that he was divinely commissioned to reform the manners of the age, and restore the due observance of the sabbath, appealing to prophecy, in which he fancied he saw his own character delineated. He sought, however, for earthly honours, and requested of his majesty the dignity of knighthood, and earnestly solicited his fellow-citizens to elect him member for the city of London. Both were deaf to his entreaties, and he turned from public offices to duties for which he was better qualified. He laboured almost incessantly, sometimes in works of pure benevolence, and at others as corrector of the press, and seldom allowed himself more than four or five hours for sleep. In 1770, after paying a visit to Aberdeen, he returned to London, and took lodgings at Islington, where he died November the first. In private life Mr. Cruden was courteous and affable, ready to assist all that came within his reach, as well with his money as with his advice, and most zealous in serving the distressed. One of his boldest efforts of this kind was in the case of Richard Potter, a poor ignorant sailor, who was condemned at the Old Bailey for uttering a forged seaman’s will, and who, in Mr. Cruden’s opinion, was so justly an object of the royal clemency, that he never ceased his applications to the secretary of state until he had obtained a pardon. The following year, 1763, he published a very interesting account of this affair, under the title of “The History of Richard Potter,” 8vo. His other publications were, “An Account of the History and Excellency of the Scriptures,” prefixed to a “Compendium of the Holy Bible,” 24-mo; and “A Scripture Dictionary, or Guide to the Holy Scriptures,” Aberdeen, 2 vols. 8vo; printed a short time after his death. He also compiled that very elaborate Index which belongs to bishop Newton’s edition of Milton, an undertaking inferior only to that of his “Concordance,” and which he undertook at the request of auditor Benson. Of his Concordance an edition was published in 1810, which may be justly pronounced the most correct that has appeared since the author’s time, every word with its references having been most carefully examined by Mr. Deodatus Bye, formerly a respectable printer in St. John’s gate, who voluntarily employed some years in this arduous task, for which he is richly entitled to the thanks of the public.

to London, and by the recommendation of Dr. D. Pitcairn he became librarian to the late Dr. Hunter, who had applied to the professors of Glasgow for a young man of

, an eminent surgeon and anatomist, was born in 1745 at Edinburgh, where his father was examiner in the Excise-office, and had him christened William Cumberland in compliment to the hero of Culloden, but the latter name our anatomist seldom used. The earlier part of his life was spent in Scotland, and at the age of fourteen he went to the university of Edinburgh, with a view of studying divinity. Feeling, however, a strong propensity for anatomy and physic, he studied those sciences, with great assiduity, for eight years at the university of Glasgow. In 1771 he came to London, and by the recommendation of Dr. D. Pitcairn he became librarian to the late Dr. Hunter, who had applied to the professors of Glasgow for a young man of talents to succeed Mr. Hewson; and this connection was the principal means of raising Mr. Cruikshank to that conspicuous situation which he afterwards so well merited. During the life of Dr. Hunter, Mr. Cruikshank became successively his pupil, anatomical assistant, and partner in anatomy; and on the death of that celebrated man, Mr. Cruikshank and Dr. Baillie received an address from a large proportion of Dr. Hunter’s students, full of affection and esteem; which induced them to continue in Windmill-street the superintendance of that anatomical school which has produced so many excellent scholars. Mr. Cruikshank, besides supporting with great reputation his share in this undertaking, made himself known to the world by some excellent publications, which have insured to him a high character as a perfect anatomist, and a very acute and ingenious physiologist. In 1780 he published his principal work, the “Anatomy of the Absorbent Vessels in the Human Body,” in which he not only demonstrated, in the clearest manner, the structure and situation of these vessels, but collected, under one point of view, and enriched with many valuable observations, all that was known concerning this important system in the human body. Besides this work, the merit of which has been fully acknowledged by translations into foreign languages, he wrote a paper, which was presented to the royal society several years ago, entitled, “Experiments on the Nerves of Living Animals,” in which is shewn the important fact of the regeneration of nerves, after portions of them have been cut out; illustrated by actual experiments on animals. This paper was read before the society, but not then printed, owing, as was said, to the interference of the late sir John Pringle, who conceived that it controverted some of the opinions of Haller, his intimate friend. It appeared, however, in the Society’s Transactions for 1794. In 1779 he made several experiments on the subject of “Insensible Perspiration,” which were added to the first editions of his work on the “Absorbent Vessels;” and were collected and published in a separate pamphlet in 1795. In 1797, the year in which he was elected F. R. S. he published an account of appearances in the ovaria of rabbits, in different stages of pregnancy; but his fame rests upon, and is best supported by, his “Anatomy of the Absorbents,” which continues to be considered as the most correct and valuable work on the subject now extant.

pathetic heart, and literally “went about doing good.” He was one of those liberal medical gentlemen who attended Dr. Johnson in his last illness. Mr. Cruikshank’s death

Mr. Cruikshank was not without some share of personal as well as intellectual vanity; but he had a generous and sympathetic heart, and literally “went about doing good.” He was one of those liberal medical gentlemen who attended Dr. Johnson in his last illness. Mr. Cruikshank’s death was occasioned by a disorder, the fatal consequences of which had been predicted by one of his pupils about sixteen years before that event. He used at certain times to complain of an acute pain in the apex of his head, and his pupil gave it as his opinion that the pain arose from extravasated blood, which was settled upon the sensorium; and that as no relief could be given without the greatest care in point of regimen, it would increase until it was too heavy for the tender nerves or organs of the medulla oblongata to bear; of course, it would occasion a rupture, and end in dissolution. When Mr. Cruikshank found himself in most excruciating pain, he sent for this gentleman, and every assistance was given; but the seat of the complaint, being directly under the pia mater, could not be touched. In this situation he breathed his last, July 27, 1800. The pericranium being afterwards opened, a quantity of extravasated blood was found upon the sensorium t some of the tender vessels of which were ruptured.

place in Saxony where he could pursue his studies in comfort. For this purpose he consulted Gesner, who promised him every assistance; and in 1751, on the death of

, professor of eloquence at Wittemberg, and an eminent philologer, was born at Wolbech, where his father was a clergyman, in 1715. He was first educated at Hall, whence he removed to Leipsic, and studied polite literature under Mascovius. His principal attachment was to the classics, which he read with the eye of a critic and antiquary. While at Leipsic, he contributed some of his first remarks on classical history and antiquities to the “Acta Eruditorum.” In 1738 he left Leipsic for Dresden, where he became acquainted with Juncker, and by his persuasion went to St. Petersburg, and became a member of the academy of history founded by Peter the Great, and afterwards succeeded Beyer in the same academy. His situation here was for some time agreeable, and his fame spread; but the stipend affixed to his place in the academy being irregularly paid, and Crusius being little attentive to pecuniary matters, his studies became interrupted, and his mind harassed, and his object now was to procure some place in Saxony where he could pursue his studies in comfort. For this purpose he consulted Gesner, who promised him every assistance; and in 1751, on the death of Berger, he was elected professor of eloquence at Wittemberg. Here for some time he fulfilled the utmost hopes of the friends by whose interest he had been elected; but having while at St. Petersburgh contracted habits too social for a man of learning, he now indulged them to such a degree as to obstruct his usefulness, expose himself to ridicule, and lessen his authority. He died Feb. 1767, according to Klotz his biographer, regretting his past imprudence, and with pious resignation. The failings of this accurate critic are much to be lamented, as but for them be would have probably attained the highest class in philology. His writings are: 1. “Commentarius de originibus pecunise a pecore ante nummum signatum: accedit ejusdem oratio habita in conventu Academico, cum auspicaret munus Professoris,” Petrop. 1748, 8vo. 2. “Probabilia critica, in quibus veteres Graeci et Latini scriptores emendantur & declarantur,” Leipsic, 1753, 8vo. This collection of criticisms and emendations on the classics, chiefly contributed to our author’s fame. 3. “Opuscula ad historiam et humanitatis literas spectantia,” Altenburgh, 1767, with a biographical preface by Klotz, to which we are indebted for this sketch of the life of Crusius. Besides these, Crusius contributed various dissertations to the German journals, a list of which may be seen in Harles.

ch scholar, but was most distinguished for his acquairt nee with the modern Greek, and was the first who taught it in Germany. Of his numerous works, the following are

, a learned German scholar and antiquary, was born at Grebern, in the bishopric of Bamberg, Sept. 19, 1526, and after some elementary instruction from his father, a minister of the Lutheran church, was sent to Dim, where he studied Greek and Latin under Gregory Leonard, and by his diligence and progress obtained a pension from the senators of UJm, which enabled him to pursue his studies without expense to his father. In 1545 he went to Strasburgh, where, after applying for some time to polite literature, he learned Hebrew, and went through a course of divinity, Still liberally maintained by the city of Ulm; and in 1547 was appointed tutor to a person of rank. Some years after, he presided over the school at Memmingen, and raised its reputation very considerably. In 1559 he was chosen professor of moral philosophy and Greek at Tubingen; but in 1566 was obliged to leave it on account of the plague, and did not return, along with the other professors, until 1568. At the age of eighty -one, perceiving that he was near his end, he assembled the whole university, with the rector at its head, and after entertaining them sumptuously, gave them a goblet worth an hundred florins. He died Feb. 25, 1607, leaving a library which was valued at 2000 florins. Besides the learned languages, he was a good French scholar, but was most distinguished for his acquairt nee with the modern Greek, and was the first who taught it in Germany. Of his numerous works, the following are the most important: 1. “Turco-Graecias libri octo, utraque lingua edita. Quibus Graecorum status sub imperio Turcico, in politia et ecclesia, ceconomia et scholis, jam hide ab amissa Constantinopoli, ad haec usque tempora, luculenter describitur,” Basil, 1584, folio. 2. “Acta et Scripta Theologorum Wirtembergensium, et Patriarchs Constantinopolitani D. Hieremiae quas utrique ab anno 1576 usque ad annum 1581 de Augustana Confessione inter se miserunt,” Gr. & Lat. 1584, fol. 3. “ Germano-Graeciae libri sex > in quorum prioribus tribus, Orationes, in reliquis Carmina, Gr. & Lat. continentur,” fol. without date, but from the dedication, probably 1585. 4. “Annales Suevici, sive Chronica rerum gestarum antiquissimae et inclytae Suevicas Gentis quibus quicquid fere de ea haberi potuit, ex Lat. & Graec. aliarumque linguarum auctoribus, scriptisque plurimis, non editis, comprehenditur, &c.1595 and 1596, 2 vols. fol. These works, which are now rare, are highly esteemed, and throw much light on history, and particularly on the history of the modern Greeks. One other work of Martin Crusius may be mentioned as a curiosity: “Corona Anni, hoc est, explicatio Evangeliorum et Epistolarum quae diebus dominicis et festis in ecclesia proponuntur; e Tubingeiisium, et aliorum Theologorum eonckmibus, conscripta,” Wittemberg, 1602, 4 vols. 4to. From 1563 he had been accustomed to write in the church the sermons of the preachers of Tubingen, which he did first in Latin, but when professor of Greek, he thought it his duty to use that language, and with such indefatigable perseverance, that, "between 1563 and 1601, he had made a collection of those discourses, amounting to 6174, and published some of them in other volumes, and would have published more, if he could have found any persons who would defray the expence. The work before us he had in vain offered to the booksellers at different times for seven years, and at length the court of Saxony bore the expence of printing. It contains 516 sermons in Greek and Latin, in double columns. This singular undertaking had not, as may be supposed, much success; and the few copies which exist are considered rather as objects of curiosity than utility.

, an ancient historian, was a native of Cnidos, who accompanied Cyrus the son of Darius in his expedition against

, an ancient historian, was a native of Cnidos, who accompanied Cyrus the son of Darius in his expedition against his brother Artaxerxes; by whom he was taken prisoner about 400 B. C. But curing Artaxerxes of a wound he received in the battle, he became a great favourite at the court of Persia, where he continued practising physic for seventeen years, and was employed in several negotiations. He wrote the “History of Persia,” in 23 books; and a “History of the Indies;” but these works are now lost, and all we have remaining of them is an abridgment compiled by Pbotius. Although the most judicious among the ancients looked upon Ctesias as a fabulous writer, several of the ancient historians and modern Christian writers have adopted in part his chronology of the Assyrian kings; but Dr. Vincent, a writer of the first authority, after a careful examination of his character and writings, decides that he must still be classed among the fabulous historians. In Gale’s Herodotus, Lond. 1679, fol. we have “Excerpta e Ctesise Persicis et Indicis,” and Henry Stephens published “Ex Ctesia, Agatharcide, et Memnone excerpta,1557.

which is said to be in the Vatican library; but he must be distinguished from Ctesibius of Chalcis, who was a cynic philosopher, of a sportive disposition and a cheerful

, of Alexandria, a famous mathematician about 120 years B. C. was, it is reported, the first inventor of the pump, which he discovered by accident. On lowering a mirror that was in his father’s shop, he observed that the weight which helped it in moving upwards and downwards, and which was inclosed in a cylinder, made a noise, produced by the friction of the air violently forced by the weight. He set about examining into the cause of this sound, and thought it might be possible to avail himself of it in making an hydraulic organ, in which the air and the water should form the sound; an undertaking which he executed with success. Encouraged by this production, Ctesibius thought of using his mechanical skill in measuring time. He constructed a clepsydra, or waterclock, formed with water, and regulated by cogged wheels; the water by falling turned these wheels, which communicated their motion to a column on which were marked the characters for distinguishing the months and the hours. At the same time that the cogged wheels were put in motion, they raised a little statue, which with a wand pointed to the months and hours marked upon the column. He was also the author of “Geodesia, or the art of dividing and measuring bodies,” which is said to be in the Vatican library; but he must be distinguished from Ctesibius of Chalcis, who was a cynic philosopher, of a sportive disposition and a cheerful temper, who had the art of being agreeable to the great, without submitting to the vile arts of flattery, and made them hearken to truth, and gave them a taste for virtue, under the name of amusement.

and his mother marrying again, his education was superintended by his father-in-law, Dr. Stoughton, who was very attentive to the promising genius of his scholar. In

, a learned English divine and philosopher, was son of Dr. Ralph Cudworth, and born at Alley, in Somersetshire, of which place his father was rector. His mother was of the family of Machell, and had been nurse to prince Henry, eldest son of James I. His father dying when he was only seven yeaVs of age, and his mother marrying again, his education was superintended by his father-in-law, Dr. Stoughton, who was very attentive to the promising genius of his scholar. In 1630, he was admitted pensioner of Emanuel college, Cambridge; of which, after taking the degrees of B. A. and M. A. he was chosen fellow, and became an eminent tutor. Among his pupils, who were numerous, was Mr. William Temple, afterwards the celebrated baronet, statesman, and writer. About 1641 he was presented to the rectory of North Cadbury, in Somersetshire. In 1642 he published “A discourse concerning the true notion of the Lord’s Supper,” printed at London, in 4to, with only the initial letters of his name. In this he contends that the Lord’s supper is not a sacrifice, but a feast upon a sacrifice; and endeavours to demonstrate, that “the Lord’s supper in the Christian church, in reference to the true sacrifice of Christ, is a parallel to the feasts upon sacrifices, both in the Jewish religion and heathenish superstition.” Bochart, Spencer, Selden, and other eminent writers, quote this discourse with great commendations, but his opinions have been controverted by the majority of divines. The same year likewise appeared his treatise entitled “The Union of Christ and the Church, in a shadow, by R. C.” printed at London, in 4to.

in ms. The same year he was appointed master of Clare hall, in Cambridge, in the room of Dr. Paske, who had been ejected by the parliamentary visitors. The year after,

In 1644 he took the degree of B. D. upon which occasion he maintained the two following theses: that, The reasons of good and evil are eternal and indispensable; and that There are incorporeal substances by their own nature immortal. From these questions it has been thought that he was even at that time examining and revolving in his mind those important subjects, which he afterwards introduced in his “Intellectual System,” and other works still preserved in ms. The same year he was appointed master of Clare hall, in Cambridge, in the room of Dr. Paske, who had been ejected by the parliamentary visitors. The year after, Dr. Metcalf having resigned the regius professorship of Hebrew, Cudworth was unanimously nominated by the seven electors to succeed him. From this time he applied himself chiefly to his academical employments and studies, especially to that of the Jewish antiquities. March 31, 1647, he preached before the house of commons at Westminster, upon a day of public humiliation, a sermon upon 1 John ii. 3, 4, for which he had the thanks of that house returned him the same day. This sermon was printed the same year at Cambridge, in 4to, with a dedication to the house of commons; in which he told them, that the scope of it was not to contend for this or that opinion, but only to persuade men to the life of Christ, as the pith and kernel of all religion; without which all the several forms of religion in the world, though we please ourselves never so much with them, are but so many several dreams.

iament, to be consulted about the English translation of the Bible. The lord commissioner Whitlocke, who had the care of this business, mentions him among others and

In 1651 he took the degree of D. D. and in 1654 was chosen master of Christ’s college, in Cambridge; in which year also he married. He spent the remainder of his life in this station, proving highly serviceable to the university, and the church of England. Jan. 1657, he was one of the persons nominated by a committee of the parliament, to be consulted about the English translation of the Bible. The lord commissioner Whitlocke, who had the care of this business, mentions him among others and says, that “this committee often met at his house, and had the most learned men in the oriental tongues, to consult with in this great business, and divers learned and excellent observations of some mistakes in the translation of the Bible in English, which yet was agreed to be the best of any translation in the world.” Our author had a great share in the friendship and esteem of John Thurloe, esq. secretary of state to the protectors Oliver and Richard Cromwell; who frequently corresponded with him, and consulted him about such persons in the university as were proper to be employed in political and civil affairs. Besides several letters of recommendation remaining in ms. there is a printed one in Thurloe’s “State Papers” in which he recommends to the secretary, for the place of chaplain to the English merchants at Lisbon, Mr. Zachary Cradock, afterwards provost of Eton college, and famous for his uncommon learning and abilities as a preacher. Upon the restoration of Charles II. he wrote a copy of verses, which were published in “Academic Cantabrigiensis Σωτηρια, sive ad Carolum II. reducem, &c. gratulatio;” and in 1662 he was presented by Sheldon, then bishop of London, to the vicarage of Ashwell, in Hertfordshire. In 1678 he was installed a prebendary of Gloucester; and in this year it was that he published at London, in folio, his celebrated work entitled “The true Intellectual System of the Universe; the first part, wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and its impossibility demonstrated.” The imprimatur by Dr. Samuel Parker, chaplain to archbishop Sheldon, is dated May 29, 1671, seven years before the publication of this work, owing to the opposition of some people at court, who used all their endeavours to destroy its reputation on account of certain singularities in it, which brought some of his opinions under suspicion. He appeared indeed so much to affect impartiality, as to incur the imputation of betraying the cause he meant to defend, which certainly was far from his intention. Dryden tells us, that “he raised such strong objections against the being of a God and providence, that many thought he had not answered them:” and lord Shaftesbury says that “though the whole world were no less satisfied with his capacity and learning, than with his sincer ty in the cause of the Deity; yet was he accused of giving the upper hand to the atheists, for having only stated their reasons and those of their adversaries fairly together.” Bayle, in his “Continuation des pensees diverses sur les Cometes,” observed, that Cud worth by his plastic nature gave great advantage to the atheists; and laid the foundation of a warm dispute between himself and Le Clerc upon this subject. Le Clerc frequently expressed his wishes, that some man of learning would translate the “Intellectual System” into Latin; but this design, though formed or entertained and attempted by several persons in Germany, was never executed till 1733, when the learned Mosheim published his translation of it. A second edition of the English was published by Birch, 1743, in 2 vols. 4to, in which were first supplied, chiefly from Mosheim’s Latin edition, references to the several quotations in the “Intellectual System,” which before were very obscure and imperfect, but Mosheim had been at the pains to search them all out, and to note them very accurately. In Birch’s edition, there are, besides the “Intellectual System,” the following pieces of our author, viz. the “Discourse concerning the true notion of the Lord’s Supper,” and “Two Sermons,” on 1 John ii. 3, 4, and 1 Cor. xv. 57, to all which is prefixed an account of the life and writings of the author, by Dr. Birch.

controversy above mentioned between Bayle and Le Clerc. Cudworth stands at the head of those divines who, considering the belief in a triune God as a fundamental article

Cudworth died at Cambridge, June 26, 1688, and was interred in the chapel of Christ’s college. He was a man of very extensive erudition, excellently skilled in the learned languages and antiquity, a good mathematician, a subtle philosopher, and a profound metaphysician. The main design of his celebrated work, “The Intellectual System,” is to refute the principles of atheism, and in this he has successfully employed a vast fund of learning and reading. But his partiality for the Platonic philosophy, in judging of which, after the example of his contemporaries, he paid too much respect to the writings of the modern Alexandrian Platonists, led him into frequent mistakes. In physics he adopted the atomic system; but, abandoning Democritus and Epicurus as the first patrons of impiety, he added to the doctrine of atoms that of a certain middle substance between matter and spirit, to which he gave the appellation of plastic nature, which he supposed to be the immediate instrument of the divine operation; and this hypothesis gave rise to the controversy above mentioned between Bayle and Le Clerc. Cudworth stands at the head of those divines who, considering the belief in a triune God as a fundamental article of Christian belief, maintain that both the Platonic, and all the other Pagan trinities are only corruptions and mutilations of certain primaeval revelations and patriarchal traditions relative to the asserted distinction in the divine nature; and he has very ably discussed this important subject in his Intellectual System. A great number of writers commend Cudworth’s piety and modesty; and Burnet having observed, that Dr. Henry More studied to consider religion as a seed of a deiform nature, and in order to this, set young students much on reading the ancient philosophers, chiefly Plato, Tully, and Plotinus, and on considering the Christian religion as a doctrine sent from God, both to elevate and sweeten human nature, tells us, that “Cudworth carried this on with a great strength of genius, and a vast compass of learning; and that he was a man of great conduct and prudence; upon which his enemies did very falsely accuse him of craft and dissimulation.” He left several manuscripts which seem to be a continuation of his “Intellectual System,” of which he had given the world only the first part. One of these was published by Chandler, bishop of Durham, 1731, in 8vo, under this title, “A Treatise concerning eternal and immutable Morality.” This piece was levelled against the writings of Hobbes and others, who revived the exploded opinions of Protagoras; taking away the essential and eternal differences of moral good and evil, of just and unjust, and making them all arbitrary productions of divine or human will. He left also several other Mss. with the following titles“: 1. A discourse of moral good and evil.” 2. Another book of morality, wherein Hobbes’s philosophy is explained. 3. A discourse of liberty and necessity, in which the grounds of the atheistical philosophy are confuted, and morality vindicated and explained. 4. Another book “De libero arbitrio.” 5. Upon Daniel’s prophecy of the 70 weeks, wherein all the interpretations of the Jews are considered and confuted, with several of some learned Christians. 6. Of the verity of the Christian religion, against the Jews. 7. A discourse of the creation of the world, and immortality of the soul. 8. Hebrew learning. 9. An explanation of Hobbes’s notion of God, and of the extension of spirits. The history of these Mss. is somewhat curious. Having been left to the care of his daughter, lady Masham , they for a long time quietly reposed in the library at Oates, in Essex. But, about the year 1762, when the late lord Masham married his second lady, his lordship thought proper to remove a number of volumes of ancient learning, which had been bequeathed to the family by Mr. Locke, and the manuscripts of Dr. Cudworih, to make room for books of polite amusement. For this purpose, he sold either the whole, or a considerable part of them, to Mr. Robert Davis, then a bookseller in Piccadilly. Mr. Davis being told, or having concluded, that the manuscripts were the productions of Mr. Locke, it became an object of consideration with him, how to convert them, as a tradesman, to the best advantage. They contained, among other things, sundry notes on scripture. About the same time, a number of manuscript scriptural notes by Dr. Waterland came into the possession of the booksellers. It was therefore projected, by the aid of such celebrated names as Mr. Locke and Dr. Waterland, to fabricate a new Bible with annotations. At a consultation, however, it was suggested, that, though these names were very important, it would be necessary, to the complete success of the design, to join with them some popular living character. The unfortunate Dr. Dodd was then in the height of his reputation as a preacher, and was fixed upon to carry on the undertaking. This was the origin of Dr. Dodd’s Bible, and part of the materials put into his hands the doctor made use of in the “Christian Magazine.” When the manuscripts were returned to Mr. Davis, he carried them down to Barnes in Surry, which was his country retirement, and threw them into a garret, where they lay exposed to the dangers of such a situation. About the beginning of the year 1777, a gentleman, who had a veneration for the name of Mr. Locke, and was concerned to hear that any of his writings were in danger of being lost, went to Barnes, to see these manuscript*; and being positively assured by Mr. Davis, that they were the real compositions of that eminent man, he immediately purchased them fur forty guineas. He was, however, soon, convinced, after an examination of them, that the authority of the bookseller was fallacious, and having remonstrated against the deception, the vender condescended to take them again, upon being paid ten guineas for his disappointment in the negociation. In the investigation of the manuscripts, the gentleman having discovered, by many incontestable proofs, that they were the writings of Dr. Cudworth, he recommended them to the curators of the British Museum, by whom they were purchased; and thus, at last, after many perils and mutilations, they are safely lodged in that noble repository.

ter in any religious office: he therefore pronounced that man to be unworthy the name of a Christian who would enter any place of public worship. This he not only advanced

, a very extraordinary person, was a native of Amsterdam, where he was born in 1.522. It appears that early in life he travelled into Spain and Portugal, but the motives of his journey are not ascertained. He was a man of science; and, according to report, a good poet. The sister arts he at first considered as an amusement only; but at length was obliged to have recourse to engraving for his support, and though the different studies in which he employed his time prevented his application to this art from being so close as it ought to have been, yet marks of genius are discoverable in his works. They are slight, and hastily executed with the graver alone, in an open careless style, so as greatly to resemble drawings made with a pen. He was settled at Haerlem; and there pursuing his favourite studies in literature, he learned Latin, and was made secretary to that town, from whence he was several times employed as ambassador to the prince of Orange, to whom he addressed a famous manifesto, which that prince published in 1566. Had he stopped here, it had been well; but, directing his thoughts to matters which he did not understand, he brought forward an argument as dangerous as it was absurd. He maintained, that all religious communications were corrupted; and that without a supernatural mission, accompanied with miracles, no person hat! any right to administer in any religious office: he therefore pronounced that man to be unworthy the name of a Christian who would enter any place of public worship. This he not only advanced in words, but strove to shew the sincerity of his belief in it by practice; and for that reason would not communicate with either protestant or papist. His works were published in three volumes folio, 1630; and though he was several times imprisoned, and at last sentenced to banishment, yet he does not appear to Lave altered his sentiments. He died at Tergout in 1590, aged 68. It is to his honour as an artist, that he was the instructor of the justly-celebrated Henry Goltzius. Cuerenhert worked conjointly with the Galles and other artists, from the designs of Martin Hemskerk. The subjects are from the Old and New Testament, and consist chiefly of middling-sized plates lengthwise. He also engraved several subjects from Frank Floris.

in his walls, for fear perhaps that it should become contagious. Such is the story, as told by Wood, who says he had it from Dr. Bathurst; but Mr. Warton has proved

, a celebrated wit and scholar, but memorable chiefly for the peculiarity of his fate, was descended from a good family, though some have insinuated the contrary, and born at Hinton St. George in Somerset-' shire about 1560. He gave early marks of genius and application, and in 1576 was admitted of Trinity college in Oxford; where he soon distinguished himself by his knowledge of the Greek tongue, and an admirable faculty in disputing. He was elected scholar in May 1578, and was admitted fellow in May 1583, but had the misfortune to lose his fellowship for a witticism, which, either in jest or malice, he levelled at sir Thomas Pope, the founder of his college. Sir Thomas, we are told, had a singular whim, upon visiting some persons, of seizing whatever he could lay his hands on, and carrying it off under his gown or in his pocket; which, however, was not imputed to dishonesty, but to humour. This induced Cuff in one of his merry moments to say, “A pox! this is a poor beggarly college indeed: the plate that our founder stole, would build such another.” The president, hearing of this, ejected Cuff from his fellowship; not suffering prophane wit to be thus exercised within his walls, for fear perhaps that it should become contagious. Such is the story, as told by Wood, who says he had it from Dr. Bathurst; but Mr. Warton has proved that he has misrepresented it, nor was Cuff removed by the president, but by a mandate from lady Powlett, the foundress, who first placed him there. Cuff’s merit, however, was so great, and his reputation for foaming so extraordinary, that he was, in 1586, elected probationer of Merton college by sir Henry Savile, then warden; and two years after made fellow. He was considered as a man capable of making a shining figure in life; and that he was much esteemed by sir Henry Savile, appears not only from the instance of kindness just mentioned, but also from a letter of his to the learned Camden, in which he gives him the highest character, and styles him his own and Camden’s intimate friend. He wrote a Greek epigram in commendation of Camden’s Britannia, which is prefixed to all the Latin editions, and to some of the English translations of it; and which has been much admired. He was afterwards promoted to the Greek professorship, and chosen proctor of the university in 1594. While Greek professor, he assisted Columbanius in the first edition of Longus’s elegant pastoral romance, printed at Florence in 1598.

ursuits. This disposition recommended him much to the favour of the celebrated Robert earl of Essex, who was himself equally fond of knowledge and business. Cuff became

At what time he left Oxford, or upon what occasion, does not appear; but there is some reason to believe, it was for the sake of travelling in order to improve himself. For he was always inclined rather to a busy, than to a retired life; and held, that learning was of little service to any man, if it did not qualify him for active pursuits. This disposition recommended him much to the favour of the celebrated Robert earl of Essex, who was himself equally fond of knowledge and business. Cuff became his secretary in 1596, when the earl was made lord lieutenant of Ireland; but it had been happier for him, if he could have contented himself with the easy and honourable situation, which his own learning, and the assistance of his friends in the university, had procured him. Even his outset was unfortunate; he accompanied the earl in his expedition against Cadiz, and after its successful conclusion, was dispatched with his lordship’s letters to England, and, when he had landed, endeavoured with the utmost speed, to arrive with them at the court. Beinsr, however, unfortunately taken ill on the road, he was obliged to send up the letters, inclosed in one of his own, to Mr. Reynoldes, another of the earl’s secretaries. Mr. Cuff, agreeably to Jarge instructions which he had received from his lordship, had drawn up a discourse concerning the great action at Cadiz, which the earl purposed to be published as soon as possible, both to stop all vagrant rumours, and to inform those that were well affected, of the truth of the whole. It was at the same time to be so contrived, that neither his lordship’s name, nor Cuff’s, nor any other person’s, connected with the earl, should either be openly mentioned, used, or in such a manner insinuated, as that the most slender guess could be made, who was the penman. The publication was to have the appearance of a letter that came from Cadiz, and the title of it was to be, “A true relation of the action at Cadiz, the 21st of June, under the earl of Essex and the lord admiral, sent to a gentleman in court from one that served there in good place.” Sir Anthony Ashley, who was entrusted with the design, acted a treacherous part on this occasion. He betrayed the secret to the queen, and the lords of her council; the consequence of which was, that Mr. Fulke Grevill was charged by her majesty to command Mr. Cuff, upon pain of death, not to set forth any discourse concerning the expedition without her consent.

rtunes. Thus, when the earl was tried and condemned, February ly, 1601, and solicited by the divines who attended him while under sentence, he not only confessed matters

He was afterwards involved in all the misfortunes of that unhappy earl, and did not escape partaking of his fate. Upon the sudden reverse of the earl’s fortunes, Cuff was not only involved, but looked upon as the chief if not the sole cause and author of his misfortunes. Thus, when the earl was tried and condemned, February ly, 1601, and solicited by the divines who attended him while under sentence, he not only confessed matters prejudicial to Cuff, but likewise charged him to his face with being the author of all his misfortunes, and the person who principally persuaded him to pursue violent measures. Sir Henry Neville, also, being involved in this unhappy business, mentioned Cuff as the person who invited him to the meeting at JDrury-house; where the plot for forcing the earl’s way to the queen by violence was concerted. Cuff was brought to his trial March 5th following, and although he defended himself with great steadiness and spirit, was convicted, and executed at Tyburn, March 30, 1601; dying, it is said, with great constancy and courage. He declared, at the place of execution, that “he was not in the least concerned in that wild commotion which was raised by a particular great but unadvised earl, but shut up that whole day within the house, where he spent his time in very melancholy reflections: that he never persuaded any man to take up arms against the queen, but was most heartily concerned for being -an instrument of bringing that worthy gentleman sir Henry Neville into danger, and did most earnestly intreat his pardon, &c.” His character has been harshly treated by lord* Bacon, sir Henry Wotton, and other writers. Camden also, who knew him intimately, and had lived many years in great friendship with him, says that he was a man of most exquisite learning and penetrating wit, but of a seditious and perverse disposition. Others are milder in their censures 5 and all allow him to have been a very able and learned man. He wrote a book in English, a very little before his death, which was printed about six years after, under this title: “The differences of the ages of man’s life, together with the original causes, progress, and end thereof,1607, 8vo. It has been printed more than once since, and commended as a curious and philosophical piece. Wood says, that he left behind him other things ready for the press, which were never published. Bishop Tanner has given us the title of one; viz. “De rebus gestis in sancto concilio Nicaeno;” or, The transactions in the holy council of Nice, translated out of Greek into Latin, and believed to have been the work of Gelasius Cyricenus, which was transcribed from the original in the Vatican library by Cuff. And in the “Epistolae Francisci et Johannis Hotomanorum, Patris et Filii, et clarorum Virorum ad eos,” are several letters by Cuff, to John Hotman. These are said to exhibit distinguished marks of genius and learning; to be written in elegant Latin; and to contain some curious particulars. Mr. Warton informs us that, notwithstanding the severe check he received at Trinity college, he presented several volumes to the library. The manner of his death deprived him, as may easily be imagined, of a monument an old friend, however, ventured to embalm his memory in the following epitaph:

of his country, for refusing him the professor’s chair when it was vacant, and presenting one to it who was not capable of filling it xvith half the honour. Foreigners,

, a celebrated lawyer, was born at Thoulouse about 1520. His parents were mean; but nature compensated for the favours of fortune, by the great talents she bestowed upon him. In his education he was independent of the assistance of teachers. He taught himself Greek and Latin, and every thing else which related to polite literature: and he arrived to so profound a knowledge of law in general, and of civil law in particular, that he is supposed of all the moderns to hare penetrated the farthest into the origin and mysteries of it. The means by which he succeeded in these refcearches, were the same which the ancient lawyers pursued; the etymology of words, and the lights of history. Indeed he was some little time under Arnoldus: but it was so little, that it can be esteemed of no account to him. With such talents and acquirements he had some reason to complain of his country, for refusing him the professor’s chair when it was vacant, and presenting one to it who was not capable of filling it xvith half the honour. Foreigners, however, did justice to his merit, came from all parts, and studied under his direction, and the ablest magistrates, which France then had, were formed by the instructions of this lawyer. From Thoulouse he was invited to the university of Cohors, and thence to Bourges. The king of France shewed him every honour, and permitted him to sit amongst his counsellors of parliament. Emanuel Philibert, duke of Savoy, invited him to Turin; and pope Gregory XIII. endeavoured to draw him to Bologna, his own native country, a very advantageous offer, which his age and infirmities did not permit him to accept. He continued to teach at Bourges, where he took the greatest pleasure in communicating familiarly to his friends and scholars whatever he had discovered in the law, and shewed them the shortest and easiest way to come to a perfect knowledge of that science. He was remarkable for his friendly manner of treating his scholars. He used to eat and drink with them; and, to encourage them in their studies, lent them money and books, which procured him the name of “Father of his scholars.” He died at Bourges 1590; and his works were first published at Paris, 1584, folio, and afterwards by C. Hannibal Fabrot, at Paris, in 10 vols. 1659, folio, which is reckoned the best edition. With respect to his religious principles, in the critical times in which he lived, we are told that when his opinion was asked about some questions in divinity, then agitated with great warmth, he answered, “Nil hoc ad edictum prsetoris:” which Gallio-like answer subjected him to the suspicion of indifference in religious matters.

n wanted the proper apparatus. The gentleman, recollecting young Cullen, mentioned him as the person who could most probably supply his wants. He was consequently invited

, one of the most eminent physicians of the last century, was born Dec, 11, 1712, of respectable though indigent parents in Lanarkshire. Hav^ ing served a short apprenticeship to a surgeon and apothecary in Glasgow, he obtained the place of a surgeon in one of the merchant’s vessels from London to the West Indies. Not liking his employment, he returned to his own county, where he practised a short time in the parish of Shotts, among the farmers and country people, and then removed to Hamilton, intending to practise there as a physician. While he resided near Shotts, Archibald duke of Argyle made a visit to a gentleman in that neighbourhood. His grace was engaged in some chemical researches which required elucidation by experiments, for which he then wanted the proper apparatus. The gentleman, recollecting young Cullen, mentioned him as the person who could most probably supply his wants. He was consequently invited to dinner, and presented to the duke, with whom he commenced an acquaintance, to which he was probably indebted for all his future fortune. The name of Cullen having thus become known, his reputation as a practitioner was soon established in the neighbourhood. The duke of Hamilton likewise happened then to be for a short time in that part of the country, and having been suddenly taken ill, was induced by the character which he had heard of Cullen to send for his assistance, and was not only benefited by his skill, but amply gratified xvith his conversation. He accordingly obtained for him a place in the university of Glasgow, where his talents soon became more conspicuous. It was not, however, solely to the favour of these two great men that Cullen owed his literary fame. He was recommended to the notice of men of science in a way still more honourable to himself. The disease of the duke of Hamilton having resisted the effect of the first applications, Dr. Clarke was sent for from Edinburgh; and he was so much pleased with every thing that Cullen had done, that he became his eulogist upon every occasion. Cullen never forgot this; and when Clarke died, gave a public oration in his praise in the university of Edinburgh; which, it is believed, was the first of the kind in that kingdom.

was during this time that a connexion in business was formed in a very humble line between two men, who became afterwards eminently conspicuous in much more exalted

During his residence in the country, several important incidents occurred, that ought not to be passed over in silence. It was during this time that a connexion in business was formed in a very humble line between two men, who became afterwards eminently conspicuous in much more exalted stations. William, (afterwards Doctor) Hunter, the famous lecturer on anatomy in London, was a native of the same part of the country; and these two young men, stimulated by the impulse of genius to prosecute their medical studies with ardour, but thwarted by the narrowness of their fortune, entered into a copartnership business as surgeons and apothecaries in the country. The chief end of their contract being to furnish the parties with the means of prosecuting their medical studies, which they could not separately so well enjoy, it was stipulated, that one of them alternately should be allowed to study in what college he inclined, during the winter, while the other should carry on the business in the country for their common advantage. In consequence of this agreement, Culleu was first allowed to study in the university of Edinburgh for one winter; but when it came to Hunter’s turn next winter, he, preferring London to Edinburgh, went thither. There his singular neatness in dissecting, and uncommon dexterity in making anatomical preparations, his assiduity in study, his mildness of manner, and pliability of temper, soon recommended him to the notice of Dr. Douglass, who then read lectures upon anatomy and midwifery there; who engaged Hunter as an assistant, and whose chair he afterwards filled with so much honour to himself and satisfaction to the public. Thus was dissolved,' in a premature manner, a partnership perhaps of as singular a kind as is to be found in the annals of literature; nor was Cuilen a man of that disposition to let any engagement with him prove a bar to his partner’s advancement in lite. The articles were freely given up by him; and Cuilen and Hunter ever after kept up a very cordial and friendly correspondence; though, it is believed, they never from that time had a personal interview.

miable woman, a Miss Johnston, daughter to a clergyman in that neighbourhood, nearly of his own age, who was prevailed on to marry him, at a time when he had nothing

During the time that Cuilen practised as a country surgeon and apothecary, he formed another connexion of a more permanent kind, which, happily for him, was not dissolved till a very late period of his life. Very early in life he took a strong attachment to an amiable woman, a Miss Johnston, daughter to a clergyman in that neighbourhood, nearly of his own age, who was prevailed on to marry him, at a time when he had nothing else to recommend him, except his person and dispositions. She was beautiful, had great good sense, equanimity of temper, an amiable disposition, and elegance of manners, and brought with her a little money, which, however small in modern calculation, was important in those days to one in his situation in life. After giving to him a numerous family, and participating with him the changes of fortune which he experienced, she peacefully departed this life in summer 1786.

In the year 1716, Cuilen, who had now taken the degree of doctor in physic, was appointed

In the year 1716, Cuilen, who had now taken the degree of doctor in physic, was appointed a lecturer in chemistry in the university of Glasgow; and in the month of October began his lectures in that science. His singular talents for arrangement, his distinctness of enunciation, his vivacity of manner, and his knowledge of the science he taught, rendered his lectures interesting to the students to a degree that had been till then unknown at that university. He became, therefore, in some measure, adored by the students. The former professors were eclipsed by the brilliancy of his reputation: and he had to experience all those little rubs that envy and disappointed ambition naturally threw in his way. Regardless, however, of these, he pressed forward with ardour in his literary career; and, supported by the favour of the public, he consoled himself lor the contumely he met with from a few individuals. His practice as a physician increased from day to day; and a vacancy having occurred in the year 1751, he was then appointed by the king professor of medicine in that university. This new appointment served only to call forth his powers, and to bring to light talents that it was not formerly known he possessed; so that his fame continued to increase.

ical men to support the rising fame of the college, their attention was soon directed towards Cullen who, on the de;ith of Dr. Plmnmer, professor of chemistry, was,

As, at that period, the patrons of the university of Edinburgh were desirous of engaging the most eminent medical men to support the rising fame of the college, their attention was soon directed towards Cullen who, on the de;ith of Dr. Plmnmer, professor of chemistry, was, in 1756, unanimously invited to accept the vacant chair. 7 his invitation he accepted: and having resigned all his employments in Glasgow, he began his academical career in Edinburgh in the month of October of that year; and therf he resided till his deatta If the admission of Cullen into the university of Glasgow gave great spirit to the exertions of the students, this was still, if possible, more strongly felt in Edinburgh. Chemistry, which had been till that time of small account in that university, and was attended to by very few of the students, instantly became a favourite study; and the lectures upon that science were more frequented than any others in the university, anijtomy alone excepted. The students, in general, spoke of Cullen with the rapturous ardour that is natural to youth when they are highly pleased. These eulogiums appeared extravagant to moderate men, and could not fail to prove disgusting to his colleagues. A party was formed among the students for opposing this new favourite of the public; and these students, by misrepresenting the doctrines of Cullen to others, who could net have an opportunity of hearing these doctrines themselves, made even some of the most intelligent men in the university think it their duty publicly to oppose these imaginary tenets. The ferment was thus augmented; and it was some time before the professors discovered the arts by which they had been imposed upon, and universal harmony was then restored.

open, so kind, and so little regulated by pecuniary considerations, that it was impossible for those who had occasion to call once for his medical assistance, ever to

During this time of public ferment, Cullen went steadily forward, without taking any part himself in these disputes. He never gave ear to any talcs respecting his colleagues, nor took any notice of the doctrines they taught. That some of their unguarded strictures might at times come to his knowledge, is not impossible; but if they did, they seemed to make no impression on his mind. These attempts of a party of students to lower the character of Cullen on his first outset in the university of Edinburgh having proved fruitless, his fame as a professor, and his reputation as a physician, became more and more respected every day. Nor could it well be otherwise: Culien’s professional knowledge was always great, and his manner of lecturing singularly clear and intelligible, lively and entertaining; and to his patients, his conduct in general as a physician was so pleasing, his address so affable and engaging, and his manner so open, so kind, and so little regulated by pecuniary considerations, that it was impossible for those who had occasion to call once for his medical assistance, ever to be satisfied on any future occasion without it. He became the friend and companion of every family he visited; and his future acquaintance could not be dispensed with.

lars, which was so attentive, and the interest he took in the private concerns of all those students who applied to him for advice, was so cordial and so warm, that

Dr. Cullen also was justly admired in his conduct to his scholars, which was so attentive, and the interest he took in the private concerns of all those students who applied to him for advice, was so cordial and so warm, that it was impossible for any one who had a heart susceptible of generous feelings, not to be enraptured with attentions so uncommon and kind. The general conduct of Cullen to his students was this. With all such as he observed to be attentive and diligent, he formed an early acquaintance, by inviting them by twos, by threes, or by fours at a time, to sup with him, conversing with them on these occasions with the most engaging ease, and freely entering with them on the subject of their studies, their amusements, their difficulties, their hopes, and future prospects. In this way, he usually invited the whole of his numerous class, till he made himself acquainted with their abilities, their private character, and their objects of pursuit. Those among them whom he found most assiduous, best disposed, or the most friendless, he invited the most frequently, till an intimacy was gradually formed, which proved highly beneficial to them. Their doubts, with regard to their objects of study, he listened to with attention, and solved with the most obliging condescension. His library, which consisted of an excellent assortment of the best books, especially on medical subjects, was at all times open for their accommodation; and his advice, in every case of difficulty to them, they always had it in their power most readily to obtain. They seemed to be his family; and few persons of distinguished merit have left the university of Edinburgh in his time, with whom he did not keep up a correspondence till they were fairly established in business. By these means, he came to have a roost accurate knowledge of the state of every country, with respect to practitioners in the medical line: the only use he made of which knowledge, was to direct students in their choice of places, where they might have an opportunity of engaging in business with a reasonable prospect of success. Many, very many able men has he thus placed in situations of business which they never could have thought of themselves; and some of them even now are reaping the fruits of this beneficent foresight on his part.

friendly habits he was in with many of them, he found no difficulty in discovering those among them who were rather in low circumstances, without being obliged to hurt

Nor was it in this way only that he befriended the students at the university of Edinburgh. Possessing a benevolence of mind that made him ever think first of the wants of others, and recollecting the difficulties that he himself struggled with in his younger days, he was at all times singularly attentive to their pecuniary concerns. From his general acquaintance among the students, and the friendly habits he was in with many of them, he found no difficulty in discovering those among them who were rather in low circumstances, without being obliged to hurt their delicacy in any degree. To such persons, when their habits of study admitted of it, he was peculiarly attentive. They were more frequently invited to his house than others; they were treated with more than usual kindness and familiarity; they were conducted to his library, and encouraged by the most delicate address to borrow from it freely whatever books he thought they had occasion for: and as persons in these circumstances were usually more shy in this respect than others, books were sometimes pressed upon them with a sort of constraint, by the doctor insisting to have their opinion of such or such passages they had not read, and desiring them to carry the book home for that purpose. He in short behaved to them rather as if he courted their company, and stood in need of their acquaintance, than they of his. He thus raised them in the opinion of their acquaintance to a much higher degree of estimation than they could otherwise have obtained, which, to people whose minds were depressed by penury, and whose sense of honour was sharpened by the consciousness of an inferiority of a certain kind, was singularly engaging. Thus were they inspired with a secret sense of dignity, which elevated their minds, and excited an uncommon ardour of pursuit, instead of that melancholy inactivity which is so natural in such circumstances, and which too often leads to despair. Nor was he less delicate in the manner of supplying their wants, than attentive to discover them. He often found out some polite excuse for refusing to take payment for a first course of lectures, and never was at a loss for one to an after-course, and by other delicate expedients he befriended those young men whose circumstances were not equal to their merit and industry. It was also a constant rule with him never to take fees as a physician from any student at the university; yet when called in, he attended them with the same assiduity as if they had been persons of the first rank, who paid him most liberally. This gradually induced others to adopt a similar practice; so that it became a general rule for medical professors to decline taking any fees when their assistance was necessary to a student. For this useful reform, with many others, the students of the university of Edinburgh are solely indebted to the liberality of Dr. Cullen.

ely his own. The popularity of Cullen at this time may be guessed at by the increase of new students who came to attend his course in addition to the eight or ten who

The first lectures which Cullen delivered in Edinburgh were on chemistry; and for many years he also gave clinical lectures on the cases which occurred in the Royal Infirmary. In the month of February 1763, Dr. Alston died, after having begun his usual course of lectures on the materia, medica; and the magistrates of Edinburgh, us patrons oi thrit professorship in the university, appointed Dr. Cullen to that chair, requesting that he would finish the course of lectures that had been begun for that season. This he agreed to do; and though he was under a necessity of going on with the course in a few days after he was nominated, he did not once think of reading the lectures of his predecessor, but resolved to deliver a new course, entirely his own. The popularity of Cullen at this time may be guessed at by the increase of new students who came to attend his course in addition to the eight or ten who had entered to Dr. Alston. The new students exceeded one hundred. An imperfect copy of these lectures, thus fabricated in haste, having been published, the doctor thought it necessary to give a more correct edition of them in the latter part of his life; but his faculties being then much impaired, his friends looked in vain for those striking beauties that characterised his literary exertions in the prime of life.

f Dr. Black, his former pupil, whose talents in that department of science were then well known, and who filled the chair till his death with great satisfaction to the

Some years afterwards, on the death of Dr. White, the magistrates once more appointed Dr. Cullen to give lectures on the theory of physic in his stead. And it was on that occasion Dr. Cullen thought it expedient to resign the chemical chair in favour of Dr. Black, his former pupil, whose talents in that department of science were then well known, and who filled the chair till his death with great satisfaction to the public. Soon after, on the death of Dr. Rutherford, who for many years had given lectures with applause on the practice of physic, Dr. John Gregory having become a candidate for this place along with Dr. Cullen, a sort of compromise took place between them, by which they agreed each to give lectures, alternately, on the theory and on the practice of physic during their joint lives, the longest survivor being allowed to hold either of the classes he should incline. In consequence of this agreement, Dr. Cullen delivered the first course of lectures on the practice of physic, in winter 176G; and Dr. Gregorysucceeded him in that branch the following year. Never, perhaps, did a literary arrangement take place, tli*t could have proved more beneficial to the students than this. Both these men possessed great talents, though of a kind extremely dissimilar. Both of them had certain failings or defects, which the other was aware of, and counteracted. Each of them knew and respected the talents of the other. They co-operated, therefore, in the happiest manner, to enlarge the understanding, and to forward the pursuits of their pupils. Unfortunately this arrangement was soon destroyed, by the unexpected death of Dr. Gregory, who was cut off in the flower of life by a sudden and unforeseen event After this time, Culleu continued to give lectures on the practice of physic till a few months before his death, which happened on the 5th of February, 1790, in the seventy-seventh year of his age.

c artless elocution, which rendered his lectures so generally captivating to his hearers. Even those who could not follow him in those extensive views his penetrating

Although much of the character of this learned and amiable man may be collected from the preceding narrative, yet the following circumstances are too remarkable to be omitted. In his lectures Dr. Cullen never attempted to read. They were delivered viva voce, without having been previously put into writing, or thrown into any particular arrangement. The vigour of his mind was such, that nothing more was necessary than a few short notes before him, merely to prevent him from varying from the general order he had been accustomed to observe. This gave to his discourses an ease, a vivacity, a variety, and a force, that are rarely to be met with in academical discourses. His lectures, by consequence, upon the same subject, were never exactly the same. Their general tenor indeed was not much varied; but the particular illustrations were always new, well suited to the circumstances that attracted the general attention of the day, and were delivered in the particular way that accorded with the cast of mind the prelector found himself in at the time. To these circumstances must be ascribed that energetic artless elocution, which rendered his lectures so generally captivating to his hearers. Even those who could not follow him in those extensive views his penetrating mind glanced at, or who were not able to understand those apt allusions to collateral objects, he could only rapidly point at as he went along, could not help being warmed in some measure by the vivacity of his manner. But to those who could follow him in his rapid career, the ideas he suggested were so nurnerous; the views he laid open were so extensive; and the objects to be attained were so important, that every active faculty of the mind was roused; and such an ardour of enthusiasm was excited in the prosecution of study, as appeared to he inexplicable to those who were merely unconcerned spectators. In consequence of this unshackled freedom in the composition and delivery of his lectures, every circumstance was in the nicest unison with the tone of voice, and expression of countenance, which the particular cast of mind he was in at the time inspired. Was he joyous, all the figures introduced for illustration were fitted to excite hilarity and good humour: was he grave, the objects brought under view were of a nature more solemn and grand; and was he peevish, there was a peculiarity of manner, in thought, in word, and in action, which produced a most striking and interesting effect. The languor of a nerveless uniformity was never experienced, nor did an abortive attempt to excite emotions that the speaker himself could not at the time feel, ever produce those discordant ideas which prove disgusting and unpleasing.

allowed for academical prelections would admit. He did not, therefore, so much strive to make those who attended his lectures deeply versed in the particular details

It would seem as if Dr. Cullen had considered the proper business of a preceptor to be that of putting his pupils into a proper train of study, so as to enable them to prosecute those studies at a future period, and to carry them on much farther than the short time allowed for academical prelections would admit. He did not, therefore, so much strive to make those who attended his lectures deeply versed in the particular details of objects, as to give them a general view of the whole subject; to shew what had been already attained respecting it; to point out what remained yet to be discovered; and to put them into a train of study that should enable them at a future period to remove those difficulties that had hitherto obstructed our progress; and thus to advance of themselves to farther and farther degrees of perfection. If these were his views, nothing could be more happily adapted to them than the mode he invariably pursued. He first drew, with the striking touches of a master, a rapid and general outline of the subject, by which the whole figure was seen at once to start boldly from the canvas, distinct in all its parts, and unmixed with any other object. He then began anew to retrace the picture, to touch up the lesser parts, and to finish the whole in as perfect a manner as the state of wur knowledge at the time would permit. Where materials were wanting, the picture there continued to remain imperfect. The wants were thus rendered obvious; and the means of supplying these were pointed out with the most careful discrimination. The student, whenever he looked back to the subject, perceived the defects; and his hopes being awakened, he felt an irresistible impulse to explore that hitherto untrodden path which had been pointed out to him, and fill up the chasm which still remained. Thus were the active faculties of the mind most powerfully excited; and instead of labouring himself to supply deficiencies that far exceeded the power of any one man to accomplish, he set thousands at work to fulfil the task, and put them into a train of going on with it.

dvancement of science than any other man of his time, though many individuals might perhaps be found who were more deeply versed in the particular departments he taught

It was to these talents, and to this mode of applying them, that Dr. Cullen owed his celebrity as a professor; and it was in this manner that he has perhaps done more towards the advancement of science than any other man of his time, though many individuals might perhaps be found who were more deeply versed in the particular departments he taught than he himself was. Chemistry, which was before his time a most disgusting pursuit, was by him rendered a study so pleasing, so easy, and so attractive, that it is now prosecuted by numbers as an Agreeable recreation, who but for the lights that were thrown upon it by Cullen and his pupils, would never have thought of engaging in it at all.

According to a man who knew him well, there were three things which eminently distinguished

According to a man who knew him well, there were three things which eminently distinguished Culien as a professor. “The energy of his mind, by which he viewed every subject with ardour, and combined it immediately with the whole of his knowledge. The scientific arrangement which he gave to his subject, by which there was a hicidus ordo to the dullest scholar. He was the first person in this country who made chemistry cease to be a chaos. A wonderful art ftf interesting the students in every thing which he taught, and of raising an emulative enthusiasm among them.

of that ardour and energy of mind which so strongly characterised him at a former period. Strangers who had never seen him before, could not be sensible of this change;

For some years before Dr. Cullen’s death, his friends perceived a sensible decline of that ardour and energy of mind which so strongly characterised him at a former period. Strangers who had never seen him before, could not be sensible of this change; nor did any marked decline in him strike them; for his natural vivacity still was such as might pass in general as the unabated vigour of one in prime of life. Yet then, though his vigour of body and mind were greater than others of his own age, it should never be forgot that the vigour of old age is but feeble, and the utmost energy of senility bears no resemblance to that gigantic ardour which characterises the man of genius in the prime of life. Cullen to the last was great; but how different from what he had been, those alone could tell who had an opportunity of knowing him in both situations, and who had at the same time not an opportunity of perceiving the change imperceptibly advance upon him, during the lapse of a continued intercourse.

prize in 1758. In April 1762 he was presented to the rectory of Hawsted, in Suffolk, by his father, who died in 1774; as did his mother in 1784. In March 1774, he became

, an accomplished antiquary, descended from a family seated in Suffolk early in the fifteenth century, and at Hawsted in that county in 1656, of which latter place he has himself been the historian, was born in 1733; educated at Catherine-hall, Cambridge, of which society he was afterwards fellow; and obtained the first senior bachelor’s dissertation prize in 1758. In April 1762 he was presented to the rectory of Hawsted, in Suffolk, by his father, who died in 1774; as did his mother in 1784. In March 1774, he became F. S. A.; in December that year he was instituted to the vicarage of Great Thurlow, in the same county, on the presentation of his brother-in-law, the late Henry Vernon, esq.; and in March 1775 was elected F. R. S. His admirable History of the Parish of Hawsted (of which he was lord and patron), and Hardwick House, a perfect model for every work of the same nature, was originally published as the twenty-third number of the “Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica,” and has in the present year (1813) been again offered to the public in a superior style of typography, with the addition of seven new plates.

irements, secured to him universal esteem. He was among the most valued correspondents of Mr. Gough, who sincerely lamented his loss. A specimen of his familiar letters

That sir John Cullum was a profound antiquary, a good natural historian, and an elegant scholar, the “History of Hawsted” sufficiently evinces. That he most punctually and conscientiously discharged the proper duties of his profession as a divine, has been testified by the grateful recollection of his parishioners. His discourses in the pulpit were plain, unaffected, and rarely in any degree controversial; adapted to the village congregation which he gladdened by residing very near them. His attention to their truest interest was unremitted, and his example their best guide. His friendships in private life were amiable; and in his general commerce with the world, the uniform placidity of his manners, and his extensive literary acquirements, secured to him universal esteem. He was among the most valued correspondents of Mr. Gough, who sincerely lamented his loss. A specimen of his familiar letters will be found in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1797, vol. LXVII. p. 995.

. By the whole tenor of his writings we find he joined, or at least favoured the Puritans, and those who were engaged in those unhappy times in overturning the constitution

, student, as he calls himself, in physic and astrology, was born in London, Oct. 18, 1616. He was the son of a clergyman, by whom he was sent, after receiving a preparatory education, to the university of Cambridge, at the age of eighteen. There making but a short stay, he was put apprentice to an apothecary, under whom he appears to have acquired a competent knowledge of the materia medica, and of the method of preparing and compounding medicines. On completing the term of his apprenticeship, he came to London, and settled in Spital-fields about 1642. By the whole tenor of his writings we find he joined, or at least favoured the Puritans, and those who were engaged in those unhappy times in overturning the constitution of the country. But his warfare was with the college of physicians, whom he accused of craft and ignorance. Like the popish clergy, he says they endeavoured to keep the people in ignorance of what might be useful either in preserving or restoring health. To counteract their endeavours, he published, in 1649, a translation of the “Dispensary of the College of Physicians,” in small 4to, adding to the account of each drug and preparation a list of their supposed virtues, and of the complaints in which they were usually given. He also published an “Herbal,” which has passed through several editions, and is still in repute as a sort of family guide. He tells in this book under what planet the plants are to be gathered, which he thinks essential in preserving their virtues; but Dr. Pulteney says his descriptions of common plants are drawn up with a clearness and distinction that would not have disgraced a better pen. He intended to treat of the diseases incident to men at the different periods of their lives, and as a beginning, gave a directory to midwives, on the method of insuring a healthy progeny, and then of the management of new-born children. Though this book is of very small value, it passed through many editions. He died at his house in Spital-fields, Jan. 10, 1653-4.

n 1623,” and reprinted by him in 1668: it was originally written by his father, sir Thomas Culpeper, who died in 1661, and appears to have bequeathed to his son his

, second son of sir Thomas Culpeper of Hollingbourne, in Kent, knight, was born in 1636, and entered a commoner of University college, Oxford, in the beginning of 1640, and was created B. A. in 1643. He afterwards travelled, and on his return was elected probationer fellow of All Souls’ college, but soon retired to his estate in Kent, and after the restoration received the honour of knighthood. When he died is not ascertained, but probably it was about the end of the seventeenth century. He wrote: 1. “Moral Discourses and Essays upon several subjects,” Lond. 1655, 8vo. 2. “Considerations touching Marriage,” 4to. 3. “A Discourse shewing the many advantages, which will accrue to this kingdom by the abatement of usury. Together with the absolute necessity of reducing interest of money to the lowest rate it bears in other countries,” ibid. 1668, 4to. This occasioned a short controversy, in consequence of which sir Thomas wrote, 4. “The necessity of abating Usury, re-asserted,” ibid. 1670, 4to. 5. “Brief Survey of the growth of Usury in England, with the mischiefs attending it,” ibid. 1671, 4to. 6. “Humble proposal for the relief of Debtors, and speedy payment of their Creditors,” ibid. 1671, 4to. 7. “Several Objections against the Reducement of Interest, propounded in a letter, with the answer thereto,” ibid. 1671, 4to. He also wrote a preface to “A Tract against the high rate of Usury, presented to the parliament in 1623,” and reprinted by him in 1668: it was originally written by his father, sir Thomas Culpeper, who died in 1661, and appears to have bequeathed to his son his sentiments on usury, and the necessity of adjusting the interest of money on a new rate.

, a very learned divine, and bishop of Peterborough, the son of an honest citizen of London, who by his industry acquired a competent, though not a great fortune,

, a very learned divine, and bishop of Peterborough, the son of an honest citizen of London, who by his industry acquired a competent, though not a great fortune, was born in the parish of St. Anne, near Aldersgate, July 15th, 1632. He was educated at St. Paul’s school, under the care of Mr. John Langley, and was moved from thence to Magdalen-college, in Cambridge, probably in 1649, where he was contemporary with some very worthy and learned persons; such as Dr. Hezekiah Burton, his intimate friend and acquaintance, a very learned and pious divine; Dr. Hollings, an eminent physician at Shrewsbury; sir Samuel Moreland, admired for his skill in the mathematics; the celebrated Mr. Pepys, secretary to the admiralty; and the lord keeper Bridgeman, to whom himself, and his friend Dr. Burton, were chaplains at the same time. He was very remarkable, while fellow of his college, for his diligent application to his studies, as well as for the unaffected piety and unblemished probity of his life. He took his degree of B. A. in 1653, and in 1656 he became M. A. at which time he had thoughts of applying himself to physic, which he actually studied for some time. He was incorporated M. A. in the university of Oxford, July 14th, 1657, and went out B. D. at a public commencement at his own university, A. D. 1663, with universal applause. His first preferment was the rectory of Brampton, in the deanery of Haddon, in the archdeaconry and county of Northampton, which was given him by sir John Norwich, a gentleman who descended of a most ancient and noble family, and was advanced to the dignity of a baronet by king Charles the First. Mr. Cumberland was admitted December 3d, 1658, upon the demise of the reverend Mr. John Ward; and after the restoration, having never had the least scruple to the authority of the church, he had a legal institution, and read the Thirty-nine Articles, as directed by law, November 24th, 1661, and was the same year appointed one of the twelve preachers in the university of Cambridge. This, however, was a temporary avocation only, owing to the high character he had raised by the masterly manner in which he had performed all academical exercises, and from which he quickly returned to the duties of his parochial charge. In this rural retirement he minded little else than the duties of his function, and his studies. His relaxations from these were very few, besides his journies to Cambridge, which he made frequently, to preserve a correspondence with his learned acquaintance in that place. Here he might probably have remained during the course of his whole life, if his intimate friend and kind benefactor, sir Orlando Bridgeman, upon his receiving the seals in 1667, had not sent for him up to London, made him his chaplain, and soon after bestowed upon him the living of Alhallows, in Stamford. He discharged the functions of his ministry in that great town with indefatigable diligence; for, besides the duties incumbent upon him by his parochial charge, he accepted of the weekly lecture, and then preached three times every week in the same church, and at the same time cultivated his philosophical, mathematical, and philological studies. He gave a noble proof of this, and one which equally demonstrated the soundness of his morals and the solidity of his parts, in publishing his work “De Legibus Naturae Disquisitio philosophica,” Lond. 1672, 4to, written while he was chaplain to sir Orlando Bridgeman, to whom it was dedicated, and there is prefixed to it a short preface to the reader, by the author’s friend and fellow chaplain to the lord-keeper, Dr. Hezekiah Burton. Dr. Cumberland being at a distance from the press when this book was published, it came into the world very incorrectly printed, and in subsequent editions these faults were multiplied in a very surprizing manner. We may hence form an idea of the excellency of a work that could, notwithstanding, support its author’s reputation both at home and abroad, and be constantly esteemed one of the best performances that ever appeared, and that too upon one of the nicest and most important subjects. Mr. Payne says very justly, that it was one of the first pieces written in a demonstrative way on a moral subject, and at the same time the most perfect. It is indeed on all hands admitted, that Hobbes was never so closely handled, or his notions so thoroughly sifted, as by Dr. Cumberland. He has, however, taken a new road, very different from Grotius, Puffendorff, and other writers, more difficult, and less entertaining indeed, but at the same time much more convincing. It was desired that a piece of such general utility should be made better known by being put into an easier method, and translated into the English language. This the author would not oppose, though he did not undertake it; being very sensible that the obscurity complained of by some, was really in the subject itself, and would be found so by those who meddled with it. The project, however, was pursued by James Tyrrel, esq. grandson to the famous archbishop Usher, who published his performance under the following title: “A brief Disquisition of the Law of Nature, according to the principles and method laid down in the reverend Dr. Cumberland’s (now lord bishop of Peterburgh’s) Latin treatise on that subject, &c.” London, 1692, 8vo. Mr. Payne had also an intention to have translated it, but was anticipated by the rev. John Maxwell, in a translation published at London, 1727, 4to; and in 1750 appeared a third translation by the rev. John Towers, D. D. prebendary of St. Patrick’s, Dublin, 4to, Dublin, with large explanatory notes, &c. In 1744, Barbeyrac published a French translation.

ture, but very much wanted, and was therefore received with the highest applause by the best judges, who were equally pleased with the method and matter, as well as

The high fame and repeated praises of this work did not divert the author from his studies or his duties; and in his station of a private clergyman, so great was his reputation, that he was importuned by the university, and by other acquaintance, to take upon him the weighty exercise of responding at the public commencement. Nothing but the earnest solicitation of his friends could have prevailed with a man void not only of ambition, but of even the desire of applause, to appear so publicly. This he did in 1680, in so masterly a manner, as to be remembered for many years after. The next specimen of his abilities was his “Essay on Jewish Measures and Weights,1686, 8vo, a work not only highly useful in its nature, but very much wanted, and was therefore received with the highest applause by the best judges, who were equally pleased with the method and matter, as well as the manner and conciseness, of the performance. It was afterwards reprinted, and will continue to support the reputation of its author, as long as this kind of literature is either en-, couraged or understood. His sincere attachment to the protestant religion made him very apprehensive of its danger; and the melancholy prospect of affairs in the reign of king James made so deep an impression on him as to affect his health. After the revolution he appears to have entertained no thoughts of soliciting for better preferment; and it was, therefore, a greater surprize to himself than to any body else, when walking after his usual manner, on a post-day, to the coffee-house, he read there in a newspaper, that one Dr. Cumberland, of Stamford, was named to the bishopric of Peterborough, This piece of intelligence, however, proved true, and he had the singular satisfaction of finding himself raised to a bishopric, not only without pains or anxiety, but without having so much as sought for it; but at that time it was necessary to the establishment of the new government, that men who were to be raised to these high stations in the church, should be such only as had been most eminent for their learning, most exemplary in their lives, and firmest to the protestant interest; and whilst these qualifications were only considered, the king, who in two years’ time had appointed no less than fifteen bishops of the above character, was told that Dr. Cumberland was the fittest man he could nominate to the bishopric of Peterborough. He was elected in the room of Dr. Thomas White, who refused the new oaths May 15th; was consecrated with other bishops, July 5th, and enthroned September 12th, 1691, in the cathedral of Peterborough. He now applied himself to the work of a bishop, making no omissions to consult his own ease, or to spare his pains; and the desires of his mind, that all under him should do their duty, were earnest and sincere. His composition had no alloy of vain-glory. He never did any thing to court applause, or gain the praise of men. He never acted a part, never put on a mask. His tongue and heart always went together. If he ran into any extreme, it was the excess of humility; he lived with the simplicity and plainness of a primitive bishop, conversed and looked like a private man, hardly maintaining what the world calls the dignity of his character. He used hospitality without grudging; no man’s house was more open to his friends, and the ease and freedom with which they always found themselves entertained, was peculiar to it. The poor had substantial relief at his door, and his neighbours and acquaintance a hearty welcome to his table, after the plentiful and plain manner in which he lived. Every thing in his house served for friendly entertainment, nothing for luxury or pomp. His desire was to make every body easy, and to do them good. He dispensed with a liberal hand, and in the most private and delicate manner, to the necessities of others. His speeches to the clergy at his visitations, and his exhortations to the catechumens before his confirmations, though they had not the embellishments of oratory, yet they were fervent expressions of the inward desires of his soul to do what good he was able, and to excite others to be influenced by it; the pious breathings of a plain and good mind. On all occasions he treated his clergy with singular ta and indulgence. An expression that often came from him, was, “I love always to make my clergy easy.” This was his rule in all applications made to him by them, and if he erred, it was always on this side. When the duties of his office required it, he never spared himself. To the last month of his life it was impossible to dissuade him from undertaking fatigues that every body about him feared were superior to his strength. He was inflexible to their intreaties, and his answer and resolution was, “I will do my duty as long as I can.” He had acted by a maxim like this in his vigour. When his friends represented to him, that by his studies and labours he would injure his health, his usual reply was, “A man had better wear out than rust out.” The last time he visited his diocese, he was in the eightieth year of his age; and at his next triennial, when he was in the eighty-third year of his age, it was with the utmost difficulty that he could be dissuaded from undertaking again the visitation of his diocese. To draw the clergy nearer than the usual decanal meetings, to make his visitations easier to himself, was a thing he would not hear of. Such were the public acts of this great prelate in the discharge of his duty as a father of the church. In respect to his temporal concerns, and his management of the revenue arising from his see, he was not less liberal and munificent. His natural parts were not quick, but strong and retentive. He was a perfect master of every subject he studied. Eyery thing he read staid with him. The impressions on his mind were some time in forming, but they were clear, distinct, and durable. The things he had chiefly studied, were researches into the most ancient times; mathematics in all its parts and the Scripture in its original languages but he was also thoroughly acquainted with all the branches of philosophy, medicine, and anatomy, and was a good classical scholar. He was so thoroughly conversant in Scripture, that no difficult passage ever occurred, either occasionally, or in reading, but he could readily give the meaning of it, and the several interpretations, without needing to consult his books. He sometimes had thoughts of writing an exposition of the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, with a view to set the doctrine of justification in a light very different from that in which it has been hitherto considered by most divines, but what that light was we are not told. One of his chief objects was the examination of Sanchoniatho’s Phoenician History, about which the greatest men had been most mistaken, and in relation to which none had entered into so strict an examination as our learned prelate thought it deserved. He spent many years in these speculations; for he began to write several years before the revolution, and he continued improving his design down to 1702. Jt may be justly wondered, that, after taking so mnch pains, and carrying a work of such difficulty to so high a degree of perfection, he should never judge it expedient to publish it; for though his bookseller refused to print the first part at a critical season, yet afterwards both might have seen the light; and for this the most probable reason that can be assigned is, that thorough dislike he had to controversy. His son-in-law, however, the rev. Mr. Payne, has done justice to his memory, and published it under the title of“Sanchoniatho’s Phoenician History, translated from the first book of Eusebius de Preparatione Evangelica,” &c. Lond. 1720, 8vo. Mr. Payne observes, that our author had a quicker sense than many other men, of the advances popery was making upon us, and was affected with the apprehension of it to the last degree. This made him turn his thoughts to the inquiry, by what steps and methods idolatry got ground in the world. The oldest account of this he believed he found in Sanchoniathe'a fragment. This he saw was a professed apology for idolatry, and owned openly what other heathens would have made a secret of, that the gods of the Gentile world had been all mortal men. He studied this fragment with no other view than as it led to the discovery of the original of idolatry. He spent some time upon it, before ever he had a thought of extracting from it footsteps of the history of the world preceding the flood. While other divines of the church of England were engaged in the controversy with the papists, in which they gained over them so complete a victory, our author was endeavouring to strike at the root of their idolatrous religion. These fragments have exercised the talents of some of the ablest scholars that foreign nations have produced, and several of these, being able to make nothing clear or consistent out of them, incline to think they were forgeries, and consequently not worthy of notice. Our prelate was not only of a different sentiment, but with great knowledge and great labour, has made it very evident that these fragments are genuine, and that he thoroughly understood them. He has proved that they contain the most ancient system of atheism and idolatry; that very system which took place in Egypt, and was set up against the true religion contained in the writings of Moses.

en Dr. Wilkins had published his Coptic Testament, he made a present of one of them to his lordship, who sat down to study this when he was past eighty-three. At this

After bishop Cumberland had once engaged his thoughts upon this subject, fresh matter was continually rising, for the distribution of which into a proper method, so as to render a very perplexed subject intelligible, he found himself under the necessity of undertaking a yet more extensive work than the former, in which he made some progress in the space of above twenty years, during which it employed his thoughts. To this piece, when finished, he proposed to have given the title of “Origines Antiquissimae,” which were transcribed in his life-time, and, by his direction, by Mr. Payne. This treatise, which is properly a supplement to the first, was published in 1724, 8vo, under the title of “Origines Gentium Antiquissimae,” or Attempts for discovering the times of the first planting of nations, in several tracts. — In bishop Cumberland’s old age, he retained the easiness and sweetness of his temper, which continued to the last day of his life. His senses and bodily strength were more perfect than could well be expected, in a man whose course of life had been studious and sedentary. He remained a master of all the parts of learning he had studied when he was young. He ever loved the classics, and to the last week of his life would quote them readily and appositely. When Dr. Wilkins had published his Coptic Testament, he made a present of one of them to his lordship, who sat down to study this when he was past eighty-three. At this age he mastered the language, and went through great part of this version, and would often give excellent hints and remarks as he proceeded in reading it. At length, in the autumn of 1718, he was struck in an afternoon with a dead palsy, and breathed his last in his palace at Peterborough on October 9, in the same year, in the eighty-seventh year of his age. His corpse was interred in his own cathedral, where a plain tomb has been erected, with a modest inscription to his memory. His reputation at the time of his death was very great at home, and much greater abroad. He is mentioned in the highest terms of respect by many foreign writers, particularly Niceron, Morhoff, Thomasius, Stollius, and Fourmont. His fame now rests chiefly on the works he published in his life-time. The Sanchoniatho and the Origines, although they afford ample demonstration of learned research, have not so well preserved their credit.

The earl, as a mark of his consideration, insisted upon bestowing one of the companies upon his son, who being too young to take the command, an officer was named to

, a late dramatic and miscellaneous writer, was the great grandson of the preceding. His father, Denison, so named from his mother, was educated at Westminster school, and from that admitted fellow-commoner of Trinity college, Cambridge. He married, at the age of twenty-two, Joanna, the younger daughter of Dr. Richard Bentley (the Phoebe of Byron’s Pastoral); by whom he had a daughter, Joanna, and Richard, the subject of this article. Though in possession of an independent fortune, he was readily prevailed upon by his father-in-law to take the rectory of Stanwick, in. Northamptonshire, given to him by lord chancellor King, as soon as he was of age to hold it. From this period he fixed his constant residence in that retired spot, and sedulously devoted himself to the duties of his function, never holding any other preferment for thirty years, except a small prebend in the church of Lincoln, given him by his uncle bishop Reynolds, He was in the commission of the peace, and a very active magistrate in the reconcilement of parties rather than in the conviction of persons. When the rebels were on the march, and had advanced to Derby, he raised among the neighbouring parishes two companies of 100 men each for the regiment then enrolling under the command of the earl of Halifax, and marched them in person to Northampton. The earl, as a mark of his consideration, insisted upon bestowing one of the companies upon his son, who being too young to take the command, an officer was named to act in his place. Some time after, on the approach of the general election for the county of Northampton, a contest took place with the rival parties of Knightly and Hanbury, or, in other words, between the tories and the whigs. His politics accorded with the latter, and he gave a very active and effectual support to his party. His exertions, though unsuccessful, were not overlooked by the earl of Halifax, who was then high in office, and lord lieutenant of the county. Offers were pressed upon him; yet, though he was resolute in declining all personal favours, he was persuaded to lend an ear to flattering situations pointed out for his son, who was shortly afterwards employed by lord Halifax as his confidential secretary. In 1757 he exchanged the living of Stanwick for Fulham, in order to be nearer his son, whose attendance on the earl of Halifax required his residence in town. On the earl being appointed lord-lieutenant of Ireland, he was made one of his chaplains; and in 1763, at the close of his lordship’s administration, was promoted to the bishopric of Clonfert. In this situation he much ingratiated himself with all classes of people by his benevolence and generosity. He introduced many improvements and comforts among the Irish peasantry. He encouraged the English mode of agriculture by judicious rewards; and, as one of the members of the linen trade, introduced a number of spinning-wheels, and much good linen was made in consequence. This improving manufacture formed an interesting occupation also to his lady, and flourished under her care. The city of Dublin presented him with his freedom in a gold box, an honour never before (except in the remarkable instance of dean Swift) conferred on any person below the rank of a chief governor; and the deed which accompanied it assigned as the motive, the great respectability of his character, and his disinterested protection of the Irish clergy. In 1772 he was translated to the see of Kilmore. Some alarming symptoms soon after indicated the breaking up of his constitution, which was increased by the anxiety he experienced, through the debility and loss of health of his, amiable lady. When his son took leave of him at the end of his summer visit, the bishop expressed an intention of attempting a journey to England; but died in the winter of the same year; and this sad event was speedily succeeded by the death of his lady, whose weak and exhausted frame sunk under the blow, May 27, 1775.

d as being too frequently betrayed into grammatical errors, which did him no credit with his master, who commented on his blunders in one instance with great severity,

Richard, the subject of this article, was born Feb. 19, 1732, under the roof of his grandfather Bentley, in the master’s lodge in Trinity college. When turned of six years of age, he was sent to the school at Bury St. Edmund’s, then under the mastership of the reverend Arthur Kinsman. For some time he made but little progress in his learning; till Kinsman, having observed his low station in the school, publicly reproved him; and thus roused in him a spirit of emulation. While he continued in this school, his grandfather Bentley died; and the affectionate manner in which Kinsman imparted the melancholy event to him, with the kind regard he evinced for his improvement, wrought so much upon his mind, that his task became his delight. In his exercises, however, he describes himself, in his “Memoirs,” as aiming at something like fancy and invention, and as being too frequently betrayed into grammatical errors, which did him no credit with his master, who commented on his blunders in one instance with great severity, producing so great an effect on his sensibility, that he never perfectly recovered it. It was about this time that he made his first attempt in English verse; the subject of which was an excursion he had made with his family in the summer holidays to visit a relation in Hampshire, which engaged him in a description of the docks at Portsmouth, and of the races at Winchester, where he had been present. This little poem he exhibited to his father, who received it with unreserved commendation, and persisted in reciting it to his intimates, when its author had gained experience enough to wish it had been consigned to oblivion. In the intervals from, school his mother began to form both his taste and his ear for poetry, of which art she was a very able mistress, by employing him every evening to read to her. Their readings were, with few exceptions, confined to Shakspeare, whom she both admired and understood in the true spirit and sense of the author. Under her instruction he became passionately fond of these evening entertainments, and the effect was several attempts on his part towards the drama. He was then head-boy of Bury school, though only in his 12th year. He fitted and compiled a kind of cento, eiititled “Shakspeare in the Shades,” in one act, in which the characters of Hamlet and Ophelia, Romeo and Juliet, Lear and Cordelia, were introduced, and Ariel as an attendant spirit on Shakspeare, who is present through the piece: some extracts from this juvenile production are printed in his “Memoirs.” Mr. Kinsman intimating his purpose of retiring from Bury school, young Cumberland was transplanted to Westminster, and admitted under Dr. Nichols, where he remained about a year and a half; and particularly profited there in point of composition. When only in his fourteenth year, he was admitted of Trinity college, Cambridge, where he had two tutors, who took little care of him; but the inconvenience of this being soon felt, the master of the college, Dr. Smith, in the last year of his being under-graduate, recommended him to lose no time in preparing for his degree, and to apply closely to his academical studies for the remainder of the year. During the year of trial, he determined to use every effort for redeeming lost time; he began a course of study so apportioned as to allow himself but six hours’ sleep, to which he strictly adhered, living almost entirely upon milk, and using the cold bath very frequently. In the several branches of mechanics, hydrostatics, optics, and astronomy, he made himself master of the best treatises; he worked all his propositions, and formed all his minutes, even his thoughts, in Latin, and thereby acquired advantages superior to some of the best of his contemporaries in public disputations; for, so long as his knowledge of a question could supply matter for argument, he never felt any want of terms for explanation. In consequence of this diligence, he was enabled to go through his scholastic exercises four times in the course of the year, keeping two acts and two first opponencies, and acquitted himself with great credit. On being cited to the senate -house for examination for the bachelor’s degree, he was kept perpetually at the table under the process of question and answer. His constitution, considerablv impaired by the intense application he had given, just held him up to the expiration of the scrutiny; and on hastening to his father’s, he soon fell ill of a rheumatic fever, from which, after six months’ care and attention, he was recovered. While in this state of extreme indisposition, a high station was adjudged to him amongst the wranglers of his year.

is studies, and, without neglecting those he had lately been engaged in, again took up those authors who had lain by untouched for a whole twelvemonth. Being in the

Having thus, in 1750, at an age more than commonly early, obtained his bachelor’s degree, with the return of his health he resumed his studies, and, without neglecting those he had lately been engaged in, again took up those authors who had lain by untouched for a whole twelvemonth. Being in the habit of reading upon system, he began to form collectanea of his studies. With this view he got together all the tracts relative to the controversy between Boyle and Bentley, omitting none even of the authorities and passages they referred to; and having done this, compressed the reasonings on both sides into a kind of statement and report upon the question in dispute; and, having accomplished this, he meditated upon a plan little short of what might be projected for an universal history, or at least for that of the great empires in particular. But he was perhaps more agreeably employed in reading the Greek tragedians; and when Mason published his Eu'rida, was warm in his praise of that generally-admired production; and, in imitation, planned and composed an entire drama, of which Caractacus was the hero, with bards and druids attached to it as a chorus, for whom he wrote odes.

nquished them; and on his return to college, he was soon invited to the master’s lodge by Dr. Smith, who honoured him with approbation of his past exertions, and imparted

About this time his father was persuaded to listen to some flattering offers of situations for him; but, as his health was still in an unsettled state, he joined with his family in an excursion to York, where he passed half a year in the society and amusements of that city. The style of living there was a perfect contrast with what he had been accustomed to: he hunted in the mornings, danced in the evenings, and devoted but little time to study. He here got hold of Spenser’s Fairy Queen, in imitation of which he began to write stanzas to the same measure; at other times he also composed short elegies in the manner of Hammond; but for these pursuits he was seasonablyreproved by his mother, and relinquished them; and on his return to college, he was soon invited to the master’s lodge by Dr. Smith, who honoured him with approbation of his past exertions, and imparted to him a new arrangement that had been determined upon, for annulling so much of the existing statutes as restricted all bachelors of arts, except those of the third year’s standing, from offering themselves candidates for fellowships. Dr. Smith also kindly recommended him, as he should be in the second year of his degree at the next election, to present himself for examination.

Dr. Smith, the master; and on the next day Cumberland and Mr. Orde (afterwards master in chancery), who was of the same year, were announced as elected, to the exclusion

Whilst he was preparing to resume his studies with increased attention, he received a summons from lord Halifax to assume the situation of his private confidential secretary. He accordingly came to town; but, among the new connexions in which he was consequently thrown, he met with nothing that in any degree interested him, and at the recess he accompanied lord Halifax to Horton, and from thence went to Cambridge. There were six vacancies, and six candidates of the year above him. They underwent a severe examination from the electing seniors; and Cumberland particularly from Dr. Smith, the master; and on the next day Cumberland and Mr. Orde (afterwards master in chancery), who was of the same year, were announced as elected, to the exclusion of two of the year above them. After his election, he went home to Stanwick, and from thence made a short visit to lord Halifax.

urchyard “Elegy, written on St. Mark’s Eve,” when, according to rural tradition, the ghosts of those who are to die within the year ensuing are seen to walk at midnight

On his return to town he was as much sequestered from the world as if he had been resident in his college. About this time he made his first small offering to the press, following the steps of Gray with another churchyard “Elegy, written on St. Mark’s Eve,” when, according to rural tradition, the ghosts of those who are to die within the year ensuing are seen to walk at midnight across the churchyard. It had been written in one of his college vacations, some time before he belonged to lord Halifax: “The public,” he observes in his Memoirs, “were very little interested with it, and Dodsley as little profited.

. This piece (which appeared in 1771) proved successful beyond the utmost expectation of its author, who was aware that the moral was not quite unexceptionable.

During a visit at his father’s at Clonfert, in a little closet at the back of the palace, with no other prospect than a single turf-stack, he began to plan and compose “The West Indian.” It was his object always in his hours of study, so to place himself, as to have little or nothing to distract his attention. During his stay in Ireland, he received from the university of Dublin the honorary degree of LL.D. On iiis return to London he entered into an engagement with Garrick to bring out the “West Indian” at his theatre; and availed himself of Garrick’s suggestions in adding a new scene and other improvements. This piece (which appeared in 1771) proved successful beyond the utmost expectation of its author, who was aware that the moral was not quite unexceptionable.

. Lowth did not reply to this pamphlet nor did he accept the services of a clergyman of his diocese, who offered to undertake it; acknowledging that Cumberland had just

Mr. Cumberland now for the first time entered the lists of controversy, in a pamphlet entitled “A Letter to the right rev. the lord bishop of O d (Lowth) containing some animadversions upon a character given of the late Dr. Bentley, in a Letter from a late professor in the university of Oxford to the right rev. author of the Divine Legation,” &c. It passed through two editions. Dr. Lowth did not reply to this pamphlet nor did he accept the services of a clergyman of his diocese, who offered to undertake it; acknowledging that Cumberland had just reason for retaliation.

About this time he became a member of a pleasant literary society, who used to dine together upon stated days at the British coffee-house;

About this time he became a member of a pleasant literary society, who used to dine together upon stated days at the British coffee-house; and at one of these meetings it was suggested to him to delineate the character of a North Briton, as he had already those of an Irishman and a West Indian. He adopted the suggestion, and began to frame the character of Colin Macleod, in his comedy of “The Fashionable Lover,” upon the model of a Highland servant who, with scrupulous integrity and a great deal of nationality about him, managed all the domestic affairs of sir Thomas Mills’s household, and being a great favourite of every body who resorted there, became in time, as it were, one of the company. This comedy, in point of composition, he thought superior to the West Indian; but it did not obtain equal success with that drama. When this play came out, he made serious appeals against cavillers and slanderers below his notice, which induced Garrick to call him “the man without a skin,” and this soreness to criticism became afterwards one of the most distinguishing features of his character. His fourth comedy of “The Choleric Man,” was performed with approbation; but its author was charged in the public prints with venting contemptuous and illiberal speeches against his contemporaries. This induced him to prefix to his comedy, when he published it, a “Dedication to Detraction,” the chief object of which was directed to a tract entitled “An Essay on the Theatre,” in which the writer professes to draw a comparison between laughing and sentimental comedy, and under the latter description particularly points his observations to “The Fashionable Lover.

st production of the play; but it has since been neglected. In compliance with the wishes of AJoodv, who had become the established performer of Irish characters, Cumberland

His next dramatic production was “Timon of Athens,” altered from Shakspeare, in which the entire part of Evanthe, and, with very few exceptions, the whole of Alcibiades, were new. The public approbation sanctioned the attempt at the first production of the play; but it has since been neglected. In compliance with the wishes of AJoodv, who had become the established performer of Irish characters, Cumberland sketched another Hibernian, on a smaller scale, in the entertainment of “The Note of Hand, or a Trip to Newmarket,” which was the last of his pieces that Garrick produced before he disposed of his property in Drury-lane. His tragedy of “The Battle of Hastings” was brought out there under the direction of Mr. Sheridan. In his own judgment it was better written than planned. It was published in 1773.

ful, and few would have been more praiseworthy, had he been more sincere in his compliments to those who were present, or less bitter in his sarcasms on them after they

During the alarm of invasion he headed two companies of volunteer infantry, and received the commission of major-commandant. So beloved was he by his corps, that they honoured him with a sword as a mark of their esteem; and at the conclusion of the peace, agreed to serve under him without receiving their customary pay. His last days were spent chiefly in London, where he died May 7, 1811, after a few days illness, at the house of his friend, Mr. Henry Fry, Bedford-place. The last act of his life was the publication of a poem called “Retrospection,” a kind of legacy of opinions concerning the “men and things” more fully handled in his Memoirs. In appreciating the personal character of Mr. Cumberland, the reader may be very safely directed to these “Memoirs,” where the disguise of self-esteem is too thin to hide what is attempted to be hidden. It was Mr. Cumberland’s misfortune to be bred a courtier, and never to have attained his degrees in that school. In a subordinate station, the duties of which were technical and formal, he performed them like others, but was peculiarly unfortunate in venturing to act the minister, Mr. Cumberland having associated with almost all the eminent literary characters of his day, has introduced many striking sketches and anecdotes of them in his “Memoirs.” In company his aim was to please by retailing these, and in the art of pleasing in conversation lew men have In-*, n more successful, and few would have been more praiseworthy, had he been more sincere in his compliments to those who were present, or less bitter in his sarcasms on them after they had taken their leave. By this, however, although it occasionally administered to mirth, he lost more than he gained; and his address, polite, studied, and courtier-like, soon became depreciated beyond all recovery.

erable talents, unhappily, in some respects, misapplied, was the son of Alexander Cuming of Coulter, who was created a baronet in 1695, and was born probably about the

, bart. a man of considerable talents, unhappily, in some respects, misapplied, was the son of Alexander Cuming of Coulter, who was created a baronet in 1695, and was born probably about the beginning of the last century. It appears by his Journal, which was in the possession of the late Isaac Reed, esq. that he was bred to the law of Scotland, but was induced to quit that profession in consequence of a pension of 300l. per annum being assigned him by government, either, as he intimates, for services done by his family, or expected from himself. This pension was withdrawn in 1721, at the instance, according to his account, of sir Robert Walpole, who had conceived a pique against his father, for opposing him in parliament. It is mors probable, however, that he was found too visionary a schemer to fulfil what was expected from him. In 1129 he was induced, by a dream of lady Cunaing’s, to undertake a voyage to America, for the purpose of visiting the Cherokee nations. He left England on Sept. 13, and arrived at Charlestown Dec. 5. On March 11 following, he set out for the Indians country; and on April 3, 1730, he was crowned commander, and chief ruler of the Cherokee nations in a general meeting of chiefs at Nequisee among the mountains; he returned to Charlestown April 13, with six Indian chiefs, and on June 5, arrived at Dover. On the 18th he presented the chiefs to George II. at Windsor, where he laid his crown at his majesty’s feet: the chiefs also did homage, laying four scalps at the king’s feet, to show that they were an overmatch for their enemies, and five eagles’ tails as emblems of victory. These circumstances are confirmed by the newspapers of that time, which are full of the proceedings of the Cherokees whilst, in England, and speak of them as brought over by sir Alexander Cuming. Their portraits were engraved on a single sheet. Sir Alexander says in his Journal, that whilst he was in America in 1729, he found such injudicious notions of liberty prevail, as were inconsistent with any kind of government, particularly with their dependence on the British nation. This suggested to him the idea of establishing banks in each of the provinces dependent on the British exchequer, and accountable to the British parliament, as the only means of securing the dependency of the colonies. But it was not till 1748 (as it appears) that he laid his plans before the minister (the right hon. Henry Pelham) who treated him as a visionary enthusiast, which his journal indeed most clearly indicates him to have been. He connected this scheme with the restoration of the Jews, for which he supposed the time appointed to be arrived, and that he himself was alluded to in various passages of Scripture as their deliverer. He was not, like a late enthusiast, to conduct them to the Holy Land, but proposed to take them to the Cherokee mountains: wild as his projects were, some of the most learned Jews (among whom was Isaac Netto, formerly grand rabbi of the Portuguese synagogue) seem to have given him several patient hearings upon the subject. When the minister refused tollsten to his schemes, he proposed to open a subscription himself for 500,000l. to establish provincial banks in America, and to settle 300,000 Jewish families among the Cherokee mountains. From one wild project he proceeded to another; and being already desperately involved in debt, he turned his thoughts to alchemy, and began to try experiments on the transmutation of metal. He was supported principally by the contributions of his friends: till at length, in 1766, archbishop Seeker appointed him one of the pensioners in the Charter-house, where he died at a very advanced age in August 1775, and was buried at East Bavnet, where lady Cuming had been buried in 1743. He appears to have been a man of learning., and to have possessed talents, which, if they had not been under a wrong bias, might have been beneficial to himself and useful to his country. His son, who succeeded him in his title, became deranged in his intellects, and died some years ago, in a state of indigence, in the neighbourhood of Red-lionstreet, Whitechapel. He had been a captain in the army: the title became extinct at his death.

pectable persons in the county for probity, rank, and fortune. We cannot but regret that the doctor, who lias been the means of so many valuable performances being laid

, born Sept. 30, 1714, was the son of Mr. James Cuming, an eminent merchant in Edinburgh. Alter a suitable education in the high-school of that city, and under the particular tuition of Mr. Alexander Muir, formerly professor of philosophy at Aberdeen, he applied himself to the study of physic four years in the university of Edinburgh, and became connected with some of the most eminent students in that science. In 1735 he spent nine months at Paris, improving himself in anatomy and the French language: and he passed some time at Leyden the following year; but returned immediately before the death of his father. In 1738 he quitted Edinburgh for London: and while his friends were meditating a settlement for him at Lynne in the room of the late sir William Browne, his friend Dr, Fothergill found out a more promising situation at Dorchester; where he remained to the last, notwithstanding the most pressing invitations from Dr. Fothergill to succeed Dr. Russel in London. In the space of a few years after his establishment at Dorchester, he came to be employed in many, and in process of time, with an exception of three or four at most, in all the families of distinction within the county, and frequently in the adjacent ones. At length his chaste manners, his learning, and his probity, as they were more generally known, rendered him not only the physician, but the confidential friend of some of the best families into which he was introduced. His warm and friendly attention to the interests of the late Mr. Hutchins, author of the History of Dorset, in advancing the publication of that well written and well arranged work, cannot better be expressed than in the grateful language of its author: “One of the gentlemen to whom my acknowledgments are eminently due, permitted part of that time which is so beneficially employed to far better purposes, and is so precious to a gentleman of his extensive practice, to be diverted to the work in hand; the publication of which he patronised and promoted with great zeal and assiduity: nor did his success fall short of his zeal. Without his friendly assistance my papers might yet have remained undelivered to the press; or, if they had been committed to the public, would have wanted several advantages and embellishments with which they now appear.” The doctor bequeathed his interleaved copy of this work to Mr.Gough, his friend and coadjutor in its publication. In 1752 he received a diploma from the university of Edinburgh; and was soon after elected a fellow of the royal college of physicians there, of which he died senior fellow. He was elected in 1769 fellow of the society of antiquaries of London; and in 1781 of that of Scotland. The tenderness of his eyes was, through life, the greatest misfortune he had to struggle with; and, considering the many obstacles which the complaints in those organs have occasioned in the pursuit of knowledge, it is wonderful how he attained the degree of erudition which he was well known to possess. In his retreat from the more busy pursuits of this world, the surviving companions of his youth continued the friends and correspondents of his advanced years; and he enjoyed to the last the singular satisfaction of being visited by the most respectable persons in the county for probity, rank, and fortune. We cannot but regret that the doctor, who lias been the means of so many valuable performances being laid before the public, and some of them improved by his pen, had not himself stood forth, to give that information for which he was so well qualified, both in point of classical learning and elegant composition. He died of a dropsy, in the 7 kh year of his age, March 25, 1788.

esbytery of Selkirk. He was educated, according to the custom of the Scotch gentlemen of those times who. were of the presbyterian sect, in Holland, where we may suppose

, an historian, was born in Scotland, in the time of Cromwell’s usurpation, in 1654; his father was minister at Ettrick, in the shire and presbytery of Selkirk. He was educated, according to the custom of the Scotch gentlemen of those times who. were of the presbyterian sect, in Holland, where we may suppose he imbibed his principles of government, and was much with the Scotch and English refugees at the Hague before the revolution, particularly with the earls of Argyle and Sunderland. He came over to England with the prince of Orange; and was honoured with the confidence and intimacy of many leading men among the friends of king William and the revolution. We find him employed, at different times, in the character of a travelling companion or tutor; first to the earl of Hyndford and his brother Mr. William Carmichael, solicitor-general in the reign of queen Anne for Scotland; secondly, with the lord Lome, afterwards so well known under the name of John duke of Argyle; and thirdly, with the lord viscount Lonsdale. In 1703 we find him at Hanover with the celebrated Atldison, and graciously received by the elector and princess Sophia.

ate is preserved, in the paper-office. His dispatches have been collected and arranged by Mr. Astle, who very obligingly communicated this information to the author

Mr. Cunningham’s political friends, Argyle, Sunderland, sir Robert Walpole, &c. on the accession of George I. sent him as British envoy to the republic of Venice, where he resided from 1715 to 1720. His correspondence, or at least part of it (for secretary Craggs carried away his official correspondence from the public officte, and probably, among others, some of Mr. Cunningham’s letters), with the secretaries of state is preserved, in the paper-office. His dispatches have been collected and arranged by Mr. Astle, who very obligingly communicated this information to the author of the critical and biographical memoirs prefixed to the translation of the Latin manuscript.

; for the body of an Alexander Cunningham lies interred in the vicar chancel of St. Martin’s church, who died in the 83d year of his age, on the 15th day of May 1737;

He lived many years after his return from Venice, which he seems chiefly to have passed in a studious retirement. In 1735 he was visited in London by lord Hyndford, at the instance of his lordship’s father, to whom he had been tutor; when he appeared to be very old. It is probable that he lived about two years after; for the body of an Alexander Cunningham lies interred in the vicar chancel of St. Martin’s church, who died in the 83d year of his age, on the 15th day of May 1737; and who was probably the same person.

ell deserving of publication. It contains the history of a very interesting period, written by a man who had a considerable degree of authentic information, and his

His History of Great Britain, from the revolution in 1688 to the accession of George I. was published in two vols. 4to, in 1787. It was written by Mr. Cunningham in Latin, but was translated into English by the rev. Dr. William Thomson. The original manuscript came into the possession of the rev, Dr. Hollingberry, archdeacon of Chichester, some of whose relations had been connected with the author. He communicated it to the late earl of Hardwicke, and to Dr. Douglas, the late bishop of Salisbury, both of whom recommended the publication. In a short preface to the work, the archdeacon says: “My first design was to have produced it in the original; but, knowing how few are sufficiently learned to understand, and how many are indisposed to read two quarto volumes in Latin, however interesting and entertaining the subject may be, I altered my purpose, and intended to have sent it into the world in a translation. A nervous fever depriving me of the power, defeated the scheme.” Accordingly, he afterwards transferred the undertaking to Dr. Thomson; and, we are told by Dr. Hollingberry that this gentleman “has expressed the sense of the author with fidelity.” The work was undoubtedly well deserving of publication. It contains the history of a very interesting period, written by a man who had a considerable degree of authentic information, and his book contains many curious particulars not to be found in other histories. His characters are often drawn with judgment and impartiality: at other times they are somewhat tinctured with prejudice. This is particularly the case with respect to general Stanhope and bishop Burnet, against whom he appears to have conceived a strong personal dislike. He sometimes also indulges himself in severe sarcasms on the clergy, and on the female sex. But he was manifestly a very attentive observer of the transactions of his own time; his works abound in just political remarks; and the facts which he relates are exhibited with great perspicuity, and often with much animation. Throughout his book he frequently intersperses some account of the literature and of the most eminent persons of the age concerning which he writes; and he has also adorned his work with many allusions to the classics and to ancient history.

r of the History of Great Britain, has been supposed to be the same person with Alexander Cunningham who published an edition of Horace at the Hague, in 2 vols. 8vo.

The compilers of the Encyclopaedia Britanriica thus conclude their article on this subject: “Alexander Cunningham, the author of the History of Great Britain, has been supposed to be the same person with Alexander Cunningham who published an edition of Horace at the Hague, in 2 vols. 8vo. 1721, which is highly esteemed. But, from the best information we have been able to collect, they were certainly different persons; though they were both of the same name, lived at the same time, had both been travelling tutors, were both said to have been eminent for their skill at the game of chess, and both lived to a very advanced age. The editor of Horace is generally said to have died in Holland, where he taught both the civil and canon laws, and where he had collected a very large library, which was sold in that country.” That these remarks are just has been since placed beyond a doubt by a writer, under the signature of Crito, in the Scots Magazine for October 1804, who proves that the editor of Horace died at the Hague in 1730, and the historian at London in 1737.

commenced wine-merchant, and failed. The little education our author received was from a Mr. Clark, who was master of the grammar-school of the city of Drogheda; and

, a poet of considerable reputation, was born in 1729 in Dublin, where his father and mother, both descendants of Scotch parents, then resided. His father was a wine cooper, and becoming enriched by a prize in the lottery, commenced wine-merchant, and failed. The little education our author received was from a Mr. Clark, who was master of the grammar-school of the city of Drogheda; and when his father’s affairs became embarrassed, he was recalled to Dublin, where he produced many of his lesser poems at a very early age. At seventeen he wrote a farce, entitled “Love in a Mist,” which was acted for several nights at Dublin in 1747. Garrick is said to have been indebted to this farce for the fable or plot of his “Lying Valet.” The success of his little drama procured him the freedom of the theatre, to which he became immoderately attached, and mistaking inclination for ability, commenced actor without one essential qualification either natural or acquired, if we except a knack at personating the mock French character, in which he is said to have been tolerable. His passion for the stage, however, predominated so strongly, that without any intimation of his intentions, he left his family and embarked for England, where he obtained a precarious and unprofitable employment in various companies of strolling comedians. Frequent want made him at length sensible of his imprudence, but pride prevented his return to his friends; and the death of his father in circumstances of distress, probably reconciled him to a way of life which he could not now exchange for a better. About the year 1761 we find him a performer at Edinburgh, where he published his “Elegy on a Pile of Ruins,” which, although obviously an imitation of Gray’s Elegy, contains many passages conceived in the true spirit of poetry, and obtained considerable reputation. During his theatrical engagement at Edinburgh, although insignificant as an actor, he was of some value to the manager, by furnishing prologues and other occasional addresses, which were much applauded.

About this time he received an invitation from certain booksellers in London, who proposed to engage him in such works of literature as might

About this time he received an invitation from certain booksellers in London, who proposed to engage him in such works of literature as might procure him a more easy and honourable employment than he had hitherto followed. He repaired accordingly to the metropolis, but was disappointed in the promised undertaking by the bankruptcy of the principal person concerned in it, and after a short stay, was glad to return to his friends in the nprth. This was the only effort he ever made to emerge from the abject situation in which youthful imprudence had originally placed him, and contented indolence possessed him so entirely, that he never made a second attempt. In a letter to a friend he describes himself in these terms: “You may remember my last expedition to London. I think I may be convinced by it, that I am not calculated for the business you mention. Though I scribble (but a little neither) to amuse myself, the moment I considered it as my duty, it would cease to be an amusement, and I should of consequence be weary on't. I am not enterprizing; and toleably happy in my present situation.

pable of any theatrical exertion, he was removed to the house of his friend, Mr. Slack of Newcastle, who with great kindness received him under his roof, and paid every

For some time, he was a performer in Mr. Digges’s company at Edinburgh, and on that gentleman’s quitting Scotland, returned to Newcastle-upon-Tyne, a spot which had been his residence for many years, and which he considered as his home. Here and in the neighbouring towns he earned a scanty subsistence. Although his mode of life was not of the reputable kind, his blameless and obliging conduct procured him many friends, and in their society he passed his days without any effort to improve his situation. Yet in the verses he wrote about three weeks before he died, it appears that he was not quite so contented as his biographer has represented. A few months before that event, being incapable of any theatrical exertion, he was removed to the house of his friend, Mr. Slack of Newcastle, who with great kindness received him under his roof, and paid every attention to him which his state required. After lingering some time under a nervous disorder, during which he burnt all his papers, he died on the 18th of September, 1773, and was buried in St. John’s church-yard, Newcastle.

, was a physician in London, who resided in Coleman-street some years of his life. About 1556

, was a physician in London, who resided in Coleman-street some years of his life. About 1556 1559 he lived at Norwich, and in 1563 he was a public lecturer in surgeons’-hall, London. Bishop Bull applauded him much for his knowledge in astronomy and physic. He was certainly a man of considerable learning, and much admired for his ingenuity in the art of engraving on copper. In 1559 he published his “Cosmographical Glass, conteyning the pleasant principles of Cosmographie, Geographic, Hydrographie, or Navigation,” fol. He executed several of the cuts in this book himself. The map of Norwich, Mr. Granger thinks, is curious and fine. He wrote also a Commentary on Hippocrates, “De Acre, Aquis et Regionibus,” and a “Treatise on the French Disease.

mation. In the mean time, he was far from being neglectful of the duties of his profession. To those who employed him he was abundantly known as a skilful and sedulous

His first appearance from the press was on occasion of the lamented death of his intimate friend Dr. Bell, a young physician of great hopes, settled at Manchester. His elegant and interesting tribute to the memory of this person was published in 1785, in the first volume of the Transactions of the Manchester Philosophical and Literary Society, of which they were both members. He was elected a member of the London Medical Society in 1790, and communicated to it a paper “On Tetanus and Convulsive Disorders,” published in the third volume of its memoirs. In 1792 he became a fellow of the Royal Society. A very curious and instructive “Account of the remarkable effects of a shipwreck,” communicated by him to that body, was published in the Philosophical Transactions of that year. Soon after this, having with many other men of political study, viewed the war with France consequent to its great revolutionary struggle with disapprobation, with respect as well to its principles, as to its probable effect on the happiness of both countries, he wrote a pamphlet. This appeared in 1793, under the title of “A Letter Commercial and Political, addressed to the right hon. William Pitt; by Jasper Wilson, esq.;” it soon attained a second edition, and various answers attested the degree of importance attached to it in the public estimation. In the mean time, he was far from being neglectful of the duties of his profession. To those who employed him he was abundantly known as a skilful and sedulous practitioner; and the medical papers he had already published gave him reputation among his brethren. This reputation was widely extended and raised to an eminent degree by a publication which first appeared in October 1797, entitled “Medical Reports on the Effects of Water Cold and Warm, as a Remedy in Febrile Diseases; with observations on the nature of Fever, and on the effects of opium, alcohol, and inanition.” The practice of affusion of cold water in fevers, which is the leading topic in this work, was suggested to the author by Dr. Wright’s narrative, in the London Medical Journal, of his successful treatment of a fever in a homeward-bound ship from Jamaica. Dr. Carrie copied and greatly extended it, and investigated the principles by which its use should be directed and regulated. He discovered that the safety and advantage of the application of cold was proportionate to the existing augmentation of the animal heat; and he found the thermometer a very valuable instrument to direct the practitioner’s judgment in febrile cases. He may therefore be considered as the principal author of a practice which has already been attended with extraordinary success in numerous instances, and bids fair to prove one of the greatest medical improvements in modern times. The work, which contained many ingenious speculations and valuable observations, was generally read and admired. A new volume was added to it in 1804, consisting of much interesting matter on different topics, especially in confirmation of the doctrine and practice of the former volume respecting cold arYusion. The free and successful employment of this remedy in the scarlatina, was one of its most important articles. The author had the satisfaction of receiving numerous acknowledgments of the benefit derived from his instructions, both in private and in naval and military practice. He himself was so much convinced of the utility of the methods he recommended, lhat a revision of the whole work for a new edition, was one of the latest labours of his life.

he materials, the kind purpose for which the publication was undertaken, pleaded his excuse with all who were capable of feeling its force. Its success fully equalled

Dr. Currie might now, without danger to his professional character, indulge his inclination for the ornamental parts of literature; and an occasion offered in which he had the happiness of rendering his taste and his benevolence equally conspicuous. On a visit to his native county, in 1792, he had become personally acquainted with that rustic son of genius, Robert Burns. This extraordinary, but unfortunate man, having at his death left his family in great indigence, a subscription was made in Scotland for their immediate relief, and at the same time a design was formed, of publishing an edition of his printed works and remains for their emolument. Mr. Syme, of Ryetlale, an old and intimate friend of Dr. Currie, strongly urged him to undertake the office of editor; and to this request, in which other friends of the poet’s memory concurred, he could not withhold his acquiescence, notwithstanding his multiplied engagements. In 1800 he published in 4 vols. 8vo, “The Works of Robert Burns, with an account of his Life, and a criticism on his Writings: to which are prefixed, some Observations on the Character and Condition of the Scottish Peasantry.” These volumes were a rich treat to the lovers of poetry and elegant literature; and Dr. Currie’s part in them, as a biographer and critic, was greatly admired, as well for beauty of style, as for liberality of sentiment and sagacity of remark. If any objection was made to him as an editor, on account of unnecessary extension of the materials, the kind purpose for which the publication was undertaken, pleaded his excuse with all who were capable of feeling its force. Its success fully equalled the most sanguine expectations.

dogmatism. His behaviour was singularly calculated to convert rivals into friends; and some of those who regarded him with the greatest esteem and affection, have been

Few men have left the world with a more amiable and estimable character, proved in every relation of life, public and domestic. In his professional conduct he was upright, liberal, and honourable; with much sensibility for his patients, without the affectation of it; fair and candid towards his brethren of the faculty; and though usually decided in his opinion, yet entirely free from arrogance or dogmatism. His behaviour was singularly calculated to convert rivals into friends; and some of those who regarded him with the greatest esteem and affection, have been the persons who divided practice with him. His powers of mind were of the highest rank, equally fitted for action and speculation; his morals were pure, his principles exalted. His life, though much too short to satisfy the wishes of his friends and family, was long enough for signal usefulness and for lasting fame.

a particular taste for botany, from an acquaintance in humble life, the ostler of an adjoining inn, who had studied some of the popular Herbals. Some more systematic

, an eminent botanist, was born at Alton, in Hampshire, in 1746. At the age of fourteen he was bound apprentice to his grandfather, an apothecary at Alton, and appears to have first acquired a particular taste for botany, from an acquaintance in humble life, the ostler of an adjoining inn, who had studied some of the popular Herbals. Some more systematic works falling in his way soon after, instilled into his apt and ardent mind, principles of method, and of Linnaean philosophy, which neither his original preceptor, nor the books he studied, could ever have taught. At the age of twenty, Mr. Curtis came to London, in order to finish his medical education, and to seek an establishment in the profession to which he was destined. He was associated with a Mr. Talwin of Gracechurch-street, to whose business he at length succeeded; but not without having from time to time received many reproofs and warnings, respecting the interference of his botanical pursuits with the more obviously advantageous ones of his profession. Nor were these warnings without cause. The street-walking duties of a city practitioner but ill accorded with the wild excursions of a naturalist; the apothecary was soon swallowed up in the botanist, and the shop exchanged for a garden. Mr. Curtis, therefore, became a lecturer on the principles of natural science, and a Demonstrator of practical botany. His pupils frequented his garden, studied in his library, and followed him into the fields in his herborizing excursions. His first garden was situated at Bermondsey; afterwards he occupied a more extensive one at Lambeth Marsh, which he finally exchanged for a more salubrious and commodious spot at Brompton. This last garden he continued to cultivate till his death.

ate illiberal stock of mere collectors, a race of enlightened and communicative observers of nature; who no longer hoard up unique specimens, and selfish acquisitions,

Mr. Curtis was very early led to combine the study of insects and thtir metamorphoses with that of plants, and his various gardens were furnished with accommodations for this pursuit. Hence he became an author; his first publication being a pamphlet, entitled “Instructions for collecting and preserving Insects; particularly Moths and Butterflies, illustrated with a copper plate,” printed in 1771. In the following year he published a translation of the “Fundamenta Entomologist” of Linnæus, entitled “An Introduction to the Knowledge of Insects,” many valuable additions being subjoined to the original treatise. These two pamphlets have contributed more than any similar works, to diffuse a knowledge of scientific entomology in England, and to engraft on the illiterate illiberal stock of mere collectors, a race of enlightened and communicative observers of nature; who no longer hoard up unique specimens, and selfish acquisitions, but contribute their discoveries and their experience for the benefit of the agriculturist, the manufacturer, or the physician.

ings and six-pence. The first artist employed in making the drawings for this work, was Mr. Kilburn, who used a camera obscura for the purpose; his sketches were shaded

The celebrity which these publications procured for their author, was soon altogether eclipsed by what arose from his botanical labours, which have placed him in the very first rank of English writers in that department of science. In 1777 appeared the first number of his “Flora Londinensis,” containing six folio plates, with a page or more of letter-press, consisting of a description in Latin and English, with synonyms of each plant, and copious remarks on its history, uses, qualities, and the insects it nourishes. Each number was sold at half a crown plain, five shillings coloured; and some copie?, finished with extraordinary care, were sold at seven shillings and six-pence. The first artist employed in making the drawings for this work, was Mr. Kilburn, who used a camera obscura for the purpose; his sketches were shaded with Indian ink, before the colours were laid on. The performances of this artist have not been excelled in any similar work. When from other engagements, Mr. Kilburn was obliged to relinquish his task, Mr. Sowerby was employed, and maintained uridiminished the perfection of the figures. After him, Mr. Sydenham Edwards was engaged by Mr. Curtis, with no less credit, both in this publication and the “Botanical Magazine” hereafter mentioned. Of the plates of the “Flora Londineosis” too much cannot be said; their beauty and botanical accuracy are alike eminent, and it is only to be regretted that the manufactory of paper, as well as the typographical art, were in so degraded a state when this book first appeared. For this its author cannot be responsible, nor are these defects of any moment in the eyes of learned or scientific readers, to whom the work in question, independent of its excellent figures, ranks next to Ray’s Synopsis, in original merit and authority upon English plants. It may be added, that the works of Curtis have tended, more than any other publications of their day, to give that tone of urbanity and liberality to the science, which every subsequent writer of good character has observed. Wherever their author swerved in any degree from this candour, which was very seldom, and not perhaps without provocation, it was always to his own loss; and he was thus led into some of the very few mistakes that he has committed.

ender that science as attractive as possible. It must not be forgotten that he was one of the first, who, in spite of authority, contributed to remove some reproaches

Besides the above works, Mr. Curtis published “Practical Observations on the British Grasses,” in 8vo; his truly praise-worthy aim being to direct the farmer to a knowledge and discrimination of the species and their qualities. He also from time to time printed catalogues of his garden. He was induced, by the unfortunate alarm which he conceived at the publication of“English Botany,” an apparently rival work, to put forth diminished figures in 8vo, of his great Flora; but these met with no approbation nor success, and were soon discontinued. His “Lectures on Botany,”' rendered needlessly expensive by superfluous coloured plates, have appeared since his death; but for this publication he is not responsible. Two admirable entomological papers of Mr. Curtis are found in the “Transactions of the Linnean Society” of which society he was one of the original fellows. The first of these is an account of the Silpha Grisea, and Curculio Lapathi, two coleopterous insects very destructive to willows. The other paper is intended to shew that the Aphides, or lice of plants, are “the sole cause of the honey-dew,” a new theory on the subject, and perfectly just, as far as concerns the most common kind of honey-dew. This paper was digested by the president from the unfinished materials of its author, and communicated to the society after his death, which happened on the 7th of July, 1799, after he had for near a twelvemonth laboured under a disease in the chest, supposed to be of a dropsical nature; but which was rather, perhaps, an organic affection of the heart, or of the great vessels immediately connected with it. His remains were interred at Battersea church. He left behind him the character of an honest friendly man, a lively and entertaining companion, and a good master. He was ever ready to encourage and assist beginners in his favourite science, and always endeavoured to render that science as attractive as possible. It must not be forgotten that he was one of the first, who, in spite of authority, contributed to remove some reproaches to which it was justly liable, on the score of indelicacy. This last praise is justly paid to Mr. Curtis by an excellent and very eminent friend, who has given the world a history of his life and merits in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1799, whence we have derived many of the ubove particulars.

helmed with business, he once charged Curtius with an important commission to the duke of Brunswick, who then commanded the allied army. He likewise gained the entire

, professor of history and rhetoric at Marpurg, was born Aug. 18, 1724, at Techentin, in the duchy of Mecklenburg, of which place his father was minister. Alter his decease, his mother married his successor, John Frederic Aepin; and it was from him that her son’s mind received its first cultivation. He was then placed in the schools at Parchim anil Schwerin, and in 1742 repaired to the university of Rostock. Having completed his academical studies, he accepted the situation of private tutor in the family of the superintendant Paul Rehfeld, of Stralsund. Here he remained till the minister of state, baron von Schwicheidt, of Hanover, became acquainted with him, and entrusted him with the education of his children. That gentleman gave Curtius many proofs of the regard he entertained for him. Among other things, during the seven years’ war, at a time when he himself was overwhelmed with business, he once charged Curtius with an important commission to the duke of Brunswick, who then commanded the allied army. He likewise gained the entire confidence of that excellent minister, the baron von Miinchhausen, who had become acquainted with him by means of Schwicheidt. He held his situation in the house of the latter till 1759, when he was appointed regular professor at the academy of Lilneburg, where he taught logic, metaphysics, history, &c. In 1767 he was appointed professor of history, rhetoric, and poetry, at Marburg, and about this time published his “Commentarii de Senatu Romano, sub iniperatoribus, &c.” In 1769, he also published a translation of Columella on agriculture, with notes.

, is the name, or assumed name, of a Latin historian, who has written the actions of Alexander the Great, in ten books;

, is the name, or assumed name, of a Latin historian, who has written the actions of Alexander the Great, in ten books; the two first of which are indeed not extant, but yet are so well supplied by Freinshemius, as to be thought equal to the others. Where this author was born, and when he lived, are disputed points among the learned, and never likely to be settled. Some have fancied, from the elegant style of his history, that he must have lived in or near the Augustan age; but there are no explicit testimonies to confirm this opinion; 'and a judgment formed upon the single circumstance of style will always be found precarious. Others place him in the reign of Vespasian, and others have brought him down so low as to Trajan’s: Gibbon is inclined to place him in the time of Gordian, in the middle of the third century; and some have imagined that the name of Quintus Curtius was forged by an Italian, who composed that history, or romance as it has been called, about three hundred years ago; yet why so good a Latin writer, who might have gained the reputation of the first Latin scholar of his time, should have been willing to sacrifice his glory to that of an imaginary Quintus Curtius, is a question yet to be resolved. On the other hand it is certain that Quintus Curtius was an admired historian of the romantic ages. He is quoted in the “Policraticon” of John of Salisbury, who died in the year 1181; and Peter Blesensis, archdeacon of London, a student at Paris, about 1150, mentioning the books most common in the schools, declares that “he profited much by frequently looking into this author.” All this is decidedly against the opinion that Quintus Curtiuis a forgery of only three hundred years old.

nother proof of what we have advanced above, respecting the forgery of Quintus Curtius. This prince, who lived in the thirteenth century, labouring under an indisposition

There is a singular anecdote, relating to this historian, preserved of Alphonso king of Naples, which may be mentioned as another proof of what we have advanced above, respecting the forgery of Quintus Curtius. This prince, who lived in the thirteenth century, labouring under an indisposition at Capua, from which none of his physicians could relieve him, every one strove to bring him such things as they thought would divert him best. Antonius Panormita made choice of books, and among the rest, the history of Alexander, by Quintus Curtius. To this the prince listened very attentively, and was so extremely pleased with it, that he almost entirely recovered the very first day it was read to him. Upon which occasion he could not help rallying his physicians, and telling them, that whatever they might think of their Hippocrates and their Avicenna, Quintus Curtius was worth a thousand of them.

the dedication, that it was not written till after the loss of that city being inscribed to Pius II. who did not enter on the papacy till the Turks had been about three

, a cardinal, so called from Cusa, the place of his birth, was born in 1401. His parents were mean and poor; and it was his own personal merit which raised him to the height of dignity he afterwards attained. He was a man of extraordinary parts and learning, particularly famous for his vast knowledge in law and divinity, and a great natural philosopher and geometrician. Nicholas V. made him a cardinal by the title of St. Peter ad viucula, in 1448; and two years after, bishop of Brixia. In 1451 he was sent legate into Germany, to preach the crusade, but not succeeding in this attempt, he performed the more meritorious service of reforming some monasteries which he visited, and of establishing some new rules relating to ecclesiastical discipline. He returned to Rome under Calixtus III. and afterwards was made governor of it by Pius II. during his absence at Mantua, where he was chief concerter and manager of the war against the Turks. He died at Todi, a city of Umbria, in 1464, aged sixtythree years. His body was interred at Rome; but his heart, it is said, was carried to a church belonging to the hospital of St. Nicholas, which he had founded near Cusa, and where he collected a most noble and ample library of Greek and Latin authors. He left many excellent works behind him, which were printed in three volumes at Basil, in 1565. The first volume contains all his metaphysical tracts, in which he is very abstruse and profound; the second, his controversial pieces, and others which relate to the discipline of the church; the third, his mathematical, geographical, and astronomical works. It is said of Cusa, that before he was made a cardinal, he had taken the freedom to reprehend some errors and misdemeanours in the pope; and there are some instances in his works, where he has made no scruple to detect and expose the lying sophistries and false traditions of his church. In his piece entitled “Catholic Concord,” he has acknowledged the vanity and groundlessness of that famous donation of Constantine the Great to Sylvester, bishop of Rome. He gained considerable reputation by his “Cribratio Alcorani.” The Turks had taken Constantinople in 14-53, which seems to have given occasion to his writing this book, by way of antidote, as he proposed it, to the doctrines of the Koran, which were now in so fair a way of being spread through the western parts of the world. It appears by the dedication, that it was not written till after the loss of that city being inscribed to Pius II. who did not enter on the papacy till the Turks had been about three years in. possession of it. It is a very learned and judicious performance.

were confined to medicine and poetry, and soon became in high favour with the emperor Maximilian I. who made him his librarian, and afterwards employed him in various

, whose German name was Speishammer, an eminent historian, was born in 1473, at Sweinfurt, in Franconia, and became distinguished as a philosopher, historian, orator, poet, and physician, although his historical works only have survived. He was educated at Vienna, where his studies were confined to medicine and poetry, and soon became in high favour with the emperor Maximilian I. who made him his librarian, and afterwards employed him in various important negociations in Hungary, Bohemia, and Poland, and for many years admitted him to his presence as a confidential adviser, and placed him at the head of the senate of Vienna. When Cuspinian meditated his historical writings, the emperor ordered the libraries and archives to be thrown open to him. He died in 1529. His biographer, Gerbelius, describes him as a man of elegant person, address, and manners; and his works attest his learning and diligence in historical research. In this branch he wrote: 1. “De Cicsaribus et Imperatoribus Romanorum,1519, fol.; reprinted at Strasburgh, 1540; Basil, by Oporinus, 1561, and Francfort, 1601. 2. “Austria, sive Commentarius de rebus Austrice Marchionum, Ducum, &c.” Basil, 1553, fol. Franc fort, 1601. 3. “Commonefactio ad Leonem X. papam, ad Carolum V. imperatorem, &c. de Constantinopoli capta a Turcis, &c.” Leipsic, 1596, 4to. 4. “Commentarius in Sexti Rufi libellum de regia, consulari, imperialique dignitate, &c.” Basil, 1553, fol. with his life by Gerbelius, reprinted at Francfort, 1601, fol. 5. “De origine Turcorum,” Antwerp, 1541, 8vo. 6. “Panegyric! variorum Auctorum,” Vienna, 1513.

leaving behind him a great number of disciples. Whatever may be said of those zealous monkish saints who lived from the fifth to the eighth century, it is certain they

was born in the north of England, in the beginning of the sixth century, and educated under the Scottish monks in the famous abbey of rcolmhill, celebrated for having been the seat of learning for British and Irish monks in that age. The Scottish and Irish monks were then stimulated by the fervency of pious zeal to convert the pagan Saxons to the Christian religion, and for that purpose Cuthbert with some others settled in the island of Liridisferne, about four miles from Berwick. Egfred, king of Northumberland, invited Cuthbert to his court, where he converted and baptized many of his nobles, and acquired such reputation, that he received episcopal ordination at York, as bishop of the Northumbrian Saxons. But his love of solitude induced him to return to Lindisferne, since called Holy-island, where he founded a monastery, the remains of which are yet to be seen. There he lived to a great age, and died in the year 686, leaving behind him a great number of disciples. Whatever may be said of those zealous monkish saints who lived from the fifth to the eighth century, it is certain they were better men than their successors have represented them. They never pretended to work miracles, but the latter monks have made them perform many, even after their deaths. There can remain little doubt but Cuthbert was interred in Holy-island, where he resigned his breath; but the monks, ever fertile at invention, have told us many ridiculous stories concerning him. They say that he was first buried at Norham, in Northumberland; but, not relishing the damp situation, he appeared in person to his monks, and desired them to carry his bones to Melrose, about twenty miles farther up the Tweed. His request was complied with; but Melrose not being agreeable to him, he again appeared to his monks, and desired them to put him into a stone boat, and sail with him down the Tweed to Tilmonth, where he rested some years. The stone boat was left with a farmer, who made it a tub for pickling beef in, which enraged St. Cuthbert so much, that he came in the night-time and broke it in pieces. The monks, although almost tired with carrying the saint so often, were obliged to travel with him once more, and rested at Chester; but that place not being agreeable, they carried him to Durham, where his bones rested in peace till the time of the reformation, when the wife of Dr. Whittingham, then dean of that church, and one of the translators of the psalms ascribed to Sternhold and Hopkins, ordered them to be taken up and thrown upon a dunghill.

Childerley in Cambridgeshire, to take possession of a good estate given him by sir John Cutts, bart. who died without issue. This, estate, after the decease of an elder

, a brave officer in king William’s wars, was a younger son of Richard Cutts, esq. of an ancient and distinguished family, settled about the time of Henry VI. at Matching in Essex, where they had considerable property. His father removed to Childerley in Cambridgeshire, to take possession of a good estate given him by sir John Cutts, bart. who died without issue. This, estate, after the decease of an elder brother, devolved on John; who sold it, to pay incumbrances, to equip himself as a soldier, and to enable himself to travel. After an academical education at Cambridge, he entered early into the service of the duke of Monmouth, and afterwards was aid-de-camp to the duke of Lorrain in Hungary, and signalized himself in a very extraordinary manner at the taking of Buda by the imperialists in 1686; which important place had been for nearly a century and a half in the hands of the Turks. Mr. Addison, in a Latin poem, not unworthy of the Augustan age, plainly hints at Mr. Cutts’ s distinguished bravery at that siege. He was afterwards colonel of a regiment in Holland under the States, and accompanied king William to England, whobeing graciously pleased to confer a mark of his royal favour upon colonel John Cutts, for his faithful services, and zealous affection to his royal person and government, thought fit to create him a baron of the kingdom of Ireland, by the style and title of Baron Cutts of Gowran in the said kingdom, December 6, 1690.” He was appointed governor of the Isle of Wight, April 14, 1693 made a major-general and, when the assassination-project was discovered, 1695-6, was captain of the king’s guard. He was twice married first to Elizabeth, daughter of George Clark of London, merchant (relict of John Morley, of Glynd, in Sussex, and after, of John Trevor, esq. eldest brother to the first lord Trevor). This lady died in Feb. 1692. His second wife, an amiable young woman, was educated under the care of her grandmother, the lady Pickering, of Cambridgeshire. She was brought to bed of a son, September 1, 1697, and died in a few days after, aged only 18 years and as many days. Her character has been admirably delineated by bishop Atterbury, in the dedication to a sermon he preached on occasion of her death.

He was colonel of the Coldstream, or second regiment of guards, in 1701; when Steele, who was indebted to his interest for a captain’s commission in the

He was colonel of the Coldstream, or second regiment of guards, in 1701; when Steele, who was indebted to his interest for a captain’s commission in the lord Lucas’s regiment of fusileers, inscribed to him his first work, “The Christian Hero.” On the accession of queen Anne, he was made a lieutenant-general of the forces in Holland. February 13, 1702-3, he was appointed commander in chief of the English forces on the continent, during the absence of the duke of Marlborough; commander in chief of the forces in Ireland, under the duke of Ormond, March 23, 1704-5; and afterwards one of the lords justices of that kingdom, to keep him out of the way of action, a circumstance which broke his heart. He died at Dublin, Jan. 26, 1706-7, and was buried there on the 29th, in the cathedral of Christ-church. He was a person of eminent natural parts, well cultivated by study and conversation; of a free, unreserved temper; and of undaunted bravery and resolution. As he was a servant to queen Mary when princess of Orange, and learned the trade of war under her consort, he was early devoted to them both, and a warm supporter of the revolution. He was an absolute stranger to fear; and on all occasions gave distinguishing proofs of his intrepidity, particularly at the siege of Limerick in 1691, at the memorable attack of the castle of Namur in 1695, and at the siege of Venlo in 1702. Macky says of him, in 1703: “He hath abundance of wit, but too much seized with vanity and self-conceit; he is affable, familiar, and very brave. Few considerable actions happened in this as well as the last war, in which he was not, and hath been wounded in all the actions where he served; is esteemed to be a mighty vigilant officer, and for putting the military orders in execution; he is pretty tall, lusty, wellshaped, and an agreeable companion; hath great revenues, yet so very expensive, as always to be in debt; towards fifty years old.” Swift, in a ms note on the above passage, with his usual laconic cruelty, calls lord Cutts, “The vainest old fool alive.” He wrote a poem on the death of queen Mary; and published in 1687, “Poetical Exercises, written upon several occasions, and dedicated to her Royal Highness Mary Princess of Orange; licensed March 23, 1686-7, Roger L'Estrange.” It contains, besides the dedication signed “J. Cutts,” verses to that princess; a poem on Wisdom; another to Mr. Waller on his commending it; seven more copies of verses (one of them called “La Muse Cavalier,” which had been ascribed to lord Peterborough, and as such mentioned by Mr. Walpole in the list of that nobleman’s writings), and eleven songs; the whole composing a very thin volume, which is by no means so scarce as Mr. Walpole supposes it to be. The author speaks of having more pieces by him.

nt him to Rome to solicit a peace, which was nearly granted him, when Appius Claudius and Fabricius, who were not to moved by the flowers of rhetoric, influenced the

, originally of Thessaly, the disciple of Demosthenes and minister of Pyrrhus, equally celebrated as a philosopher and as an orator, flourished in the 125th olympiad, about 280 B. C. Pyrrhus said of him, “that he had taken more towns by his eloquence, than he had by his arms.” This prince sent him to Rome to solicit a peace, which was nearly granted him, when Appius Claudius and Fabricius, who were not to moved by the flowers of rhetoric, influenced the senate to adopt other measures. Cyneas, being returned to the camp of Pyrrhus, described Rome to him as a temple, the senate as an assembly of kings, and the Roman people as a hydra, which recruited its vigour as often as it was defeated. Pliny cites the memory of Cyneas as a prodigy, at least in remembering persons; for the day after his arrival at Rome, he saluted all the senators and knights by their several names. He abridged the book of Ericas the tactician, on the defence of places, which Casaubon published with a Latin version, in the Paris edition of Polybius, 1609, folio, and M. de Beausobre translated it into French, with comments, 1757, 4to.

ught a high degree of piety, as being yet not become general. This we learn from his deacon Pontius, who has left us memoirs of his life, which are prefixed to his works,

In the year 246 Cyprian was prevailed on to embrace Christianity, at Carthage, by Cæcilius, a priest of that church, whose name Cyprian afterwards took; and between whom there ever after subsisted so close a friendship, that Csecilius at his death committed to Cyprian the care of his family. Cyprian was also a married man himself; but as soon as he became a Christian, he resolved upon a state of continence, which was thought a high degree of piety, as being yet not become general. This we learn from his deacon Pontius, who has left us memoirs of his life, which are prefixed to his works, but are not so ample in information as might have been expected from one who knew him so well. It was now incumbent upon him to give the usual proof of the sincerity of his conversion, by writing against paganism, and in defence of Christianity. With this view he composed his piece “De gratia Dei, or, concerning the grace of God,” which he addressed to Donatus. It is a work of the same nature with the Apologetic of Tertullian, and the Octavius of Minutius Felix; and it is remarkable, that Cyprian has not only insisted upon the same arguments with those writers, but frequently transcribed their words, those of Minutius Felix especially. In the year 247, the year after his conversion, he composed another piece upon the subject, entitled “De idolorum vanitate, or, upon the vanity of idols” in which he has taken the same liberties with Tertulliau and Minutius Felix. His Oxford editor, bishop Fell, endeavours to excuse him from the charge of plagiarism upon this occasion; because, says he, having the same points to treat as all the apologists had before, namely, the truth and excellency of Christianity, and the falsehood and vanity of heathenism, he could not well avoid making use of the. same topics.

e eucharist, in order to render it effectual.” In another to the clergy, concerning certain priests, who had restored some lapsed Christians too hastily to the communion

In the year 249, the emperor Decius began to issue out very severe edicts against the Christians, which particularly affected those living upon the coasts of Africa; and in the beginning of the year 250, the heathens, in the circus and amphitheatre at Carthage, loudly insisted upon Cyprian’s being thrown to the lions: a common method, as is well known, of destroying the primitive Christians. Cyprian upon this withdrew from his church at Carthage, and fled into retirement, to avoid the fury of the persecution; which step, how justifiable soever in itself, gave great scandal, and seems to have been considered by the clergy of Rome, in a public letter written upon the subject of it to the clergy of Carthage, as a desertion of his post and pastoral duty. It is no wonder, therefore, to find Cyprian himself, as well as his apologist, Pontius, the writer of his life, so solicitous to excuse it; which they both endeavour to do by affirming, in the true spirit of the times, “that he was commanded to retire by a special revelation from heaven; and that his flight was not the effect of any other fear but that of offending God.” It is remarkable, that this father was a great pretender to visions. For instance, in a letter to Caecilius, he declares, “that he had received a divine admonition, to mix water with wine in the sacrament of the eucharist, in order to render it effectual.” In another to the clergy, concerning certain priests, who had restored some lapsed Christians too hastily to the communion of the church, he threatens them to execute “what he was ordered to do against them, in a vision, if they did not desist.” He makes the same threat to one Pupianus, who had spoken ill of him, and withdrawn himself from his communion. In a letter likewise to the clergy and the people, he tells them, “how he had been admonished and directed by God to ordain one Numidicus a priest.” Dodwell, in his “Dissertationes Cyprianicae,” has made a large collection of these visions of Cyprian, which he treats with more reverence than they seem to deserve.

horted the clergy to take care of the discipline of the church, of the poor, and especially of those who suffered for the gospel; and he gave them particular directions

As soon as Cyprian had withdrawn himself, he was proscribed by name, and his goods confiscated. He lay concealed, but not inactive; for he continued to write from time to time to the clergy and to the laity such letters as their unhappy situation and occasions required. He exhorted the clergy to take care of the discipline of the church, of the poor, and especially of those who suffered for the gospel; and he gave them particular directions upon each of these heads. He exhorted the people to be of good courage, to stand fast in the faith, and to persevere against all the terrors of persecution even unto death; assuring them, in the words of the apostle, that the present “afflictions, which were but for a moment, would work for them a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory.” When the persecution ceased, either in 251 or 252, Cyprian returned to Carthage, and appeared again at the head of his clergy. He had now much business upon his hands, which was occasioned in his absence, partly by the persecution, and the disorders attending it, and partly by divisions which had arisen among the Christians. The first thing that presented itself was the case of the lapsed, or those unhappy members of the church who had not been able to stand the fiery trial of persecution, but had been drawn by the terrors of it to renounce Christ, and sacrifice to idols; and for the settling of this, he immediately called a council at Carthage. The year after, he called another council, to sit upon the baptism of infants; and, in 255, a third, to debate concerning baptism received from heretics, which was there determined to be void and of no effect. All these points had produced great disputes and disturbances; and as to the last, namely, heretical baptism, it was so far from being fixed at Carthage to the satisfaction of the church, that Stephen, the bishop of Rome, and a great part of the Christian world, afterwards opposed it with the utmost violence.

ves, and frequently visited by the Christians, for eleven months, Galerius Maximus, a new proconsul, who had succeeded Aspasius, recalled him. from his exile, and ordered

These divisions and tumults among the Christians raised a second persecution against them, in 257, under the emperor Valerian. Cyprian was summoned to appear before Paternus, the proconsul of Carthage, by whom, after he had confessed himself a Christian, and refused to sacrifice to idols, he was condemned to be banished. He was sent to Curebis, a little town fifty miles from Carthage, situated by the sea, over against Sicily: and here Pontius says he had another vision, admonishing him of his death, which was to happen the year after, When he had continued in tins place, where he was treated with kindness by the natives, and frequently visited by the Christians, for eleven months, Galerius Maximus, a new proconsul, who had succeeded Aspasius, recalled him. from his exile, and ordered him publicly to appear at Carthage. Galerius, however, being retired to Utica, and Cyprian having intimation that he was to be carried 1 thither, the latter absconded, and, when soldiers were sent to apprehend him, was not to be found. Cyprian excuses this conduct in a letter, by saying, that “it was not the fear of death which made him conceal himself, but that he thought it became a bishop to die upon the spot, and in sight of that flock over which he presided.” Accordingly, when the proconsul returned to Carthage, Cyprian came forth, and presented himself to the guards, who were commissioned and ready to seize him. He was carried to the proconsul, who ordered him to be brought again on the morrow. Cyprian being introduced, the proconsul put several questions to him, which he replying to with unchangeable fortitude, the former pronounced upon him the sentence of death; to which the martyr answered, “God be praised 1” He was then led away to the place of execution, where he suffered with great firmness and constancy; after he had been bishop of Carthage ten years, and a Christian not more than twelve. He died Sept. 14, 258.

ch of Cassarea, which was metropolitan to that of Jerusalem. This made Maximus, and after him Cyril, who were bishops of Jerusalem, to insist upon certain rights about

, of Jerusalem, was ordained a priest of that church by Maximus bishop of Jerusalem; and after Maximus’s death, which happened about the year 350, became his successor in that see, through the interest of Acacius bishop of Caesarea, and the bishops of his party. This made the orthodoxy of Cyril highly suspected, because Acacius was an Arian; aiul St. Jerome accuses Cyril, as if he was one too: but Theodoret assures us, that he was not. His connexions, however, with Acacius, were presently broken by a violent contest which arose between them about the prerogatives of their respective sees. The council of Nice had decreed to the bishop of Jerusalem the honour of precedency amongst the bishops of his province, without concerning himself at all with the right of the church of Cassarea, which was metropolitan to that of Jerusalem. This made Maximus, and after him Cyril, who were bishops of Jerusalem, to insist upon certain rights about consecrating bishops, and assembling councils, which Acacius considered as an encroachment upon the jurisdictions of his province. Hence a dispute ensued, and Acacius calling a synod, contrived to have Cyril deposed, under the pretence of a very great sin he had committed in the time of a late famine, by exposing to sale the treasures of the church, and applying the money to the support of the poor. This, however, might possibly have been passed over, as an offence at least of a pardonable nature, but for one circumstance that unluckily attended it; which was., that amongst these treasures that were sold there was a rich embroidered robe, which had been presented to the church by Constantine the Great; and this same robe was afterwards seen to have been worn by a common actress upon the stage: which, as soon as it was known, was considered as a horrible profanation of that sacred vestment.

stians to pillage their effects. This, however, highly displeased Orestes, the governor of the town; who began to be sensible that the bishop’s authority, if not timely

, of Alexandria, another celebrated father of the church, succeeded his uncle Theophilus in the bishopric of that place in the year 412; and as the bishops of Alexandria had long acquired great authority and power in that city, Cyril took every opportunity to confirm and increase it. He was no sooner advanced to this see, than he drove the Novatians out of the city; and, as Dupin says, stripped Theopemptus their bishop of every thing he had. In the year 415 the Jews committed some insult upon the Christians of Alexandria, which so inflamed the zeal of Cyril that he put himself at the head of his people, demolished the synagogues of the Jews, drove them all out of the city, and suffered the Christians to pillage their effects. This, however, highly displeased Orestes, the governor of the town; who began to be sensible that the bishop’s authority, if not timely suppressed, might possibly be found too strong for that of the magistrate. Upon which a kind of war broke but between Orestes and the bishop, and each had his party the inhabitants were inclined to be seditious; many tumults were raised, and some battles fought in the very streets of Alexandria. One day, when Orestes was abroad in an open chariot, he found himself instantly surrounded with about 500 monks, who had left their monasteries to revenge the quarrel of their bishop. They pursued him fiercely, wounded him with stones, and had certainly killed him, if the people had not restrained their fury till his guards came up to his relief. Ammonius, one of these monks, was afterwards seized by the order of Orestes, and, being put upon the rack, died under the operation. Cyril, however, had him immediately canonized, and took every public opportunity of commending his zeal and constancy. About the same time there was at Alexandria a heathen philosophess, named Hypatia, whose fame and character were every where so celebrated, that people came from all parts to see and to consult her. Orestes saw her often, which made the Christians imagine that it was she who inspired the governor with such an aversion to their bishop. This suspicion wrought so strongly upon some of their zealots, that on a certain day they seized upon Hypatia as she was returning home, dragged her violently through the streets, and caused the mob to tear her limb from limb. Damascius, who wrote the life of Isidore the philosopher, charges Cyril himself with being the contriver of this horrid murder.

convene a general council at Ephesus, in order to put an end to it: where some bishops of the East, who were assembled on the part of Nestorius, gave Cyril so warm

But what affords the most memorable instance of Cyril’s fiery zeal, is his quarrel with Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople. Nestorius had urged in some of his homilies, that the virgin Mary ought not to be called the mother of God; and these homilies coming to Egypt, raised no small disturbances among the monks there. Cyril wrote a pastoral letter to the monks, in which he maintained, that she was indeed the mother of God, and therefore ought to be called so. As soon as Nestorius heard of this letter, he openly declared Cyril his enemy, and refused to have any iurther commerce with him. Cyril upon this, wrote Nestorius a very civil letter, without approving his doctrine; which Nestorius answered as civilly, without retracting it. The affair was laid at length before pope Celestine; after which Cyril, supported by the pontiff’s authority, began, to issue forth anathemas against Nestorius and his doctrine, and the quarrel rose to such a pitch, that it was necessary to convene a general council at Ephesus, in order to put an end to it: where some bishops of the East, who were assembled on the part of Nestorius, gave Cyril so warm an opposition, that they got him deprived of his bishopric, and thrown into prison. But he was soon set at liberty and restored, and gained a complete victory over Nestorius, who was deposed from his see of Constantinople in the year 431 Cyril returned to Alexandria, where he died in the year 444. His works are voluminous, and have been often printed. They consist of the commentaries upon the Pentateuch, called “Glaphyra, &c.” Isaiah, the 12 lesser prophets, and St. John’s gospel; 17 books on the adoration and worship of God in spirit and truth, composed in form of a dialogue; dialogues on the holy and consubstantial trinity, and on the incarnation; a discourse of the orthodox faith; homilies, letters, and apologies. John Aubert, canon of Laon, published the best edition in Greek and Latin, 1638, 6 vols. fol. which are bound in seven, because vol. 5th consists of two parts. St. Cyril’s style is diffuse and singular; his writings contain much subtilty, metaphysical reasoning, and all the niceties of logic. St. Isidore, of Pelusium, accuses him of acting with too much zeal and heat during the disputes in which he was engaged; but the catholic writers think that he atoned for that fault by his piety and innocent life.

cond visit to Paris, he procured an introduction to the duke of Montausier, governor to the dauphin, who put him on the list of the commentators for the use of the dauphin,

, a French critic and philologer, was born of protestant parents at Castres in Upper Languedoc April 6, 1651, and began to be educated in the college there; but, when by a decree of the council the direction of it was given, in 1664, to the Jesuits alone, his father sent him to the university of Puylaurens, and afterwards to that of Saumur, that he might finish his classical studies under Tannegui le Fevre, or Tanaquil Faber. This eminent scholar was so pleased with Dacier’s inclination for learning, that he kept him alone in his house, after he had dismissed the rest of the pupils; and here he conceived that affection for le Fevre’s celebrated daughter, which ended at length in marriage. On le Fevre’s death in 1672, Dacier returned to his father; and after some time went to Paris, in order to gain a settlement, and cultivate the acquaintance and friendship of the learned: in the former of these objects he did not at first succeed; but on a second visit to Paris, he procured an introduction to the duke of Montausier, governor to the dauphin, who put him on the list of the commentators for the use of the dauphin, and engaged him in the edition of Pompeius Festus, and Marcus Verrius Flaccus. This he published at Paris, 1681, in 4to; and it was again published at Amsterdam, 1699, in 4to, which edition is preferable to that of Paris, because there are added to it the entire notes of Joseph Scaliger, Fulvius Ursinus, and Anthony Augustinus, and the new fragments of Festus. His Horace, with a French translation, and notes critical and historical, came out at Paris, 1681, in 10 vols. 12mo, and has often been printed since. The best edition of this work is that of Amsterdam, 1726, consisting of the same number of volumes in the same size. Another edition was printed at Amsterdam in 8 vols. 12mo, to which were added the translation and notes of father Sanadon, published at Paris, 1728, in 2 vols. 4to, Mr. John Masson, a refugee minister in England, made several animadversions upon Dacier’s notes on Horace, in his life of that poet, printed at Leyden in 1708; which occasioned Dacier to publish new explications upon the works of Horace, with an answer to the criticisms of Mr. Masson, in which he treats Masson’s book with great contempt; and, speaking of verbal criticism, styles it “the last effort of reflection and judgment.” These were afterwards added to Sanadon’s edition of Dacier’s Horace.

medallic history of Lewis XIV.; and, when it was finished, was chosen to present it to his majesty; who, being informed of the pains which Dacier had taken in it, settled

He had a share too in the medallic history of Lewis XIV.; and, when it was finished, was chosen to present it to his majesty; who, being informed of the pains which Dacier had taken in it, settled upon him a pension of 2000 livres; and about the same time appointed him keeper of the books of the king’s closet in the Louvre. In 1713 he was made perpetual secretary of the French academy. In 1717 he obtained a grant in reversion of 10,000 crowns upon his place of keeper of the books of the king’s closet; and when this post was united to that of library-keeper to the king, in 1720, he was not only continued in the privileges of his place during life, but the reversion of it was granted to his wife; a favour, of which there had never been an instance before. But her death happening first, rendered this grant, so honourable to her, ineffectual. Great as Dacier’s grief was for the loss of an helpmate so like himself, it did not prevent him from seeking out another; and he had actually been married at a very advanced period of life, had he not died almost suddenly on Sept. 18, 1722, of an ulcer in the throat, which he did not think at all dangerous, since that very evening he was present at the academy. He was 7 1 years of age; short of stature, and of a long and meagre visage. He was a great promoter of virtue and learning; and if he was somewhat partial to the ancients, in the famous controversy on the comparative merits of the ancients and moderns, yet this may be pardoned in one who had so assiduously studied their works. It would be less easy to excuse his occasional boldness as a critic, and his intemperance as a disputant. In his own time, however, he enjoyed deserved reputation. He chose none but useful subjects; devoted his labours to works only of importance; and enriched the French language with those remains of wise antiquity, which are most advantageous to the morals of mankind. He could not make his countrymen classical, but he did what he could to give them a relish for the ancients. This, however, although an useful attempt in his day, has narrowed the bounds of his fame, and except in his Aristotle’s Poetics, and some parts of his Horace, modern critics seem disinclined to acknowledge his taste and critical acumen.

this difficulty; vyho observes, upon this occasion, that “nothing is more common than for a person, who abandons any party, to be exposed to the calumies of those whom

In the midst of all these various publications, so close to eacli other, she married Dacier, with whom she had been brought up in her father’s house from her earliest years. This happened, as we have already observed in our account of that gentleman, in 1683; though some have controverted not only the date, but even the marriage itself; and have surmised that she was previously married to one John Lesnier, a bookseller of her father’s, and that she ran away from him for the sake of Dacier, with whom she was never married in any regular way. But it is hardly possible to conceive, that so extraordinary a circumstance in the history of this celebrated lady must not, if it were true, have been notorious and incontested. We are therefore apt to admit father Niceron’s solution of this difficulty; vyho observes, upon this occasion, that “nothing is more common than for a person, who abandons any party, to be exposed to the calumies of those whom they have quitted,” and to suffer by them. Madame Dacier, soon after her marriage, declared to the duke of Montausier and the bishop of Meaux, who had been her friends, a design of reconciling herself to the church of Rome; but as M. Dacier was not yet convinced of the reasonableness of such a change, they thought proper to retire to Castres in 1684, in order to examine the controversy between the protestants and papists. They at last determined in favour of the latter; and, as already noticed, made their public abjuration in Sept. 1685. This, in the opinion of her catholic admirers, might probably occasion the above-mentioned rumour, so much to the disadvantage of madame Dacier, and for which there was probably very little foundation. After they had become catholics, however, the duke of Montausier and the bishop of Meaux recommended them at court; and the king settled a pension of 1500 livres upon M. Dacier, and another of 500 upon his lady. The patent was expedited in November; and, upon the advice which they received of it, they returned to Paris, where they resumed their studies; but before proceeding in our account of madame Dacier' s publications, it is necessary to do justice to the liberality of her patron the duke de Montausier. We are informed, that in 1682 this lady having dedicated a book to the king of France, she could not find any person at court, who would venture to introduce her to his majesty, in order to present it, because she was at that time a protestant. The duke of Montausier, being informed of this, offered his service to introduce her to the king, and taking her in his coach, presented her and her book to his majesty; who told him with an air of resentment, that he acted wrong in supporting persons of that lady’s religion; and that for his part he would forbid his name to be prefixed to any book written by Huguenots; for which purpose he would give orders to seize all the copies of mademoiselle le Fevre’s book. The duke answered with that freedom with which he always spoke to the king, and in which no person else would presume to follow him: “Is it thus, sir, that you favour polite literature? I declare to you frankly, a king ought not to be a bigot.” He added then, that he would thank the lady in his majesty’s name, and make her a present of an hundred pistoles; and that he would leave it to the king to pay him, or not pay him; and he did as he had said. In 1688 she published a French translation of Terence’s comedies, with notes, in 8 vols. 12mo. She is said to have risen at five o'clock in the morning, during a very sharp winter, and to have dispatched four of the comedies; but, upon looking them over some months after, to have flung them into the fire, being much dissatisfied with them, and to have begun the translation again. She brought the work then to the highest perfection; and, in the opinion of the French critics, even reached the graces and noble simplicity of the original. It was a circumstance greatly to her honour, that, having taken the liberty to change the scenes and acts, her disposition of them was afterwards confirmed by an excellent ms. in the king of France’s library. The best and most finished edition of this universally-admired performance, is that of 1717; which, however, was greatly improved afterwards, by adopting the emendations in Bentley’s edition. She had a hand in the translation of Marcus Antoninus, which her husband published in 1691, and likewise in the specimen of a translation of Plutarch’s Lives, which he published three years after; but being now intent on her translation of Homer, she left her husband to finish that of Plutarch. In 1711 appeared her Homer, translated into French, with notes, in 3 vols. 12mo and the translation is reckoned elegant and faithful. In 1714 she published the Causes of the Corruption of Taste. This treatise was written against M. de la Motte, who, in the preface to his Iliad, had declared very little esteem for that poem. Madame Dacier, shocked with the liberty he had taken with her favourite author, immediately began this defence of him, in which she did not treat La Motte with the greatest civility. In 1716 she published a defence of Homer, against the apology of father Hardouin, or, a sequel of the causes of the corruption of Taste: in which she attempts to shew, that father Hardouin, in endeavouring to apologize for Homer, has done him a greater injury than ever he received from his most declared enemies. Besides these two pieces, she had prepared a third against La Motte; but suppressed it, after M. de Valiincourt had procured a reconciliation between them. The same year also she published the Odyssey of Homer, translated from the Greek, with notes, in 3 vols. 12mo, and this, as far as we can find, was her last appearance as an author. She was in a very infirm state of health the last two years of her life; and died, after a very painful sickness, Aug. 17, 1720, being 69 years of age. She bad two daughters and a son, of whose education she took the strictest care; but the son died young: one of her daughters became a nun; and the other, who is said to have had united in her all the virtues and accomplishments of her sex, died at 18 years of age. Her mother has said high things of her, in the preface to her translation of the Iliad.

s may think the pi oof equivocal. It is customary with the scholars in the northern parts of Europe, who visit, when they travel, the learned in other countries, to

Madame Dacier was a lady of great virtue as well as learning. She was remarkable for firmness, generosity, good nature, and piety. The causes of her change of religion are not well explained, but she appears to have been at least sincere. Her modesty was so great, that she never spoke of subjects of literature; and it was with some difficulty that she could at any time be led to do it. There is an anecdote related of her, which her countrymen say sets this modesty in a very strong light, although others may think the pi oof equivocal. It is customary with the scholars in the northern parts of Europe, who visit, when they travel, the learned in other countries, to carry with them a book, in which they desire such persons to write their names, with some sentence or other. A learned German paid a visit to madame Dacier, and requested her to write her name and sentence in his book. She seeing in it the names of the greatest scholars in Europe, told him, that she should he ashamed to put her name among those of so many illustrious persons; and that such presumption would by no means become her. The gentleman insisting upon it, she was at last prevailed upon and taking her pen, wrote her name with this verse of Sophocles, Γυναιξὶν ὴ πιγὴ φέρει χόσμον, that is, “Silence is the ornament of the female sex.” When likewise she was solicited to publish a translation of some books of scripture, with remarks upon them, she always answered, that “a woman ought to read, and meditate upon the scriptures, and regulate her conduct by them, and to keep silence, agreeably to the command of St. Haul.” Among her other literary honours, the academy of Iticovrati at Padua chose her one of their body in 1684.

fe, as in October of it, he was admitted into the family of the illustrious mons. du Plessis Mornay, who did him the honour to appoint him tutor to two of his grandsons.

, a minister of the church of Paris, and one of the ablest advocates the protestants ever had, was born at Chatelleraut, Jan 6, 1594; but carried soon after to Poitiers, where his father usually lived, on account of the office which he bore of receiver of the deposits there. His father designed him for business, and proposed to leave him his office; but his strong attachment to books made him prefer a literary education, and when his son had attained his eleventh year, he sent him to S. Maixent in Poitou, to learn the first rudiments of learning. He continued his studies at Poitiers, Chatelleraut, and Saumur; and, having finished his classical course in the last of those towns, he entered on logic at Poitiers, at the age of sixteen, and finished his course of philosophy at Saumur under the celebrated Mark Duncan. He began his theological studies at Saumur in 1612; which, says his son, was indisputably one of the most fortunate years in his whole life, as in October of it, he was admitted into the family of the illustrious mons. du Plessis Mornay, who did him the honour to appoint him tutor to two of his grandsons. Here, though he discharged the trust he had undertaken very well, yet it is said that he received more instruction from the grandfather than he communicated to the grandsons. Mornay was extremely pleased with him, frequently read with him, and concealed from him nothing of whatever he knew; so that some have been ready to impute the great figure Mr. Daillc afterwards made, to the assistance he received here; and it is but reasonable to suppose, that Mornay’s advice and instructions contributed not a little to it.

e personages of this and other nations: among others by sir Lucius Gary late lord viscount Falkland, who, with his dear friend Mr. Chillingworth, made very much use

Daille was received minister in 1623, and first exercised his office in the family of du Plessis Mornay: but this did not last long; for that lord fell sick a little after, and died the same year, in the arms of the new pastor. Daille spent the following year in digesting some papers of his, which were afterwards published in two volumes, under the title of “Memoirs.” In 1625 he was appointed minister of the church of Sauinur; and the year after removed to that of Paris. Here he spent the rest of his life, and diffused great light over the whole hody, as well by his sermons, as by his books of controversy. In 1628 he wrote his celebrated book, “De l'usage des Peres,” or, “Of the Use of the Fathers;” but, on account of some troubles which seemed to be coming upon the protestants in France, it was not published till 1631. Bayle has pronounced this work a master-piece; but it has been attacked with great seventy by some, as tending to lessen the just respect due to the fathers, and to the views of religious opinions which they exhibit, and which are at least important in point of historical evidence. On the other hand, some eminent scholars, and orthodox churchmen in England have acknowledged its high worth and merit; and so early as 1651 an English translation of it was published by the learned Thomas Smith, B. D. fellow of Christ’s college in Cambridge. An advertisement is prefixed to it, from which we transcribe a passage or two, as illustrating the translator’s opinion and views of the work: “The translation of this tract,” says Mr. Smith, “hath been often attempted, and oftener desired by many noble personages of this and other nations: among others by sir Lucius Gary late lord viscount Falkland, who, with his dear friend Mr. Chillingworth, made very much use of it in all their writings against the Romanists. But the papers of that learned nobleman, wherein this translation was half finished, were long since involved in the common loss. Those few, which have escaped it, and the press, make a very honourable mentipn of this monsieur, whose acquaintance the said lord was wont to say, was worth a voyage to Paris. In page 202 of his Reply, he hath these words: ‘This observation of mine hath been confirmed by consideration of what hath been so temperately, learnedly, and judiciously written by M. Daille, our protestant Perron.’ I shall add but one lord’s testimony more, namely, the lord George Digby*S in his late Letters concerning Religion, in these words, p. 27, 28: 'The reasons prevalent with me, whereon and enquiring and judicious person should be obliged to rely and acquiesce, are so amply and so learnedly set down by M. Daille in his `Emploi des Peres,‘ that I think little, which is material and weighty, can he said on this subject, that his rare and piercing observation hath not anticipated.’ And for myself, I must ingenuously profess, that it was the reading of this rational book, which first convinced me that my study in the French language was not ill employed; which hath also enabled me to commend this to the world, as faithfully translated by a judicious hand.” Mr. Mettayer, who was minister of St. Quintin, published a Latin translation of this work; which translation was revised and augmented with new observations, by Daille himself, and was printed at Geneva in 1656.

which, independent of much other intrinsic worth, will long continue the use of the book with those who wish to pursue the history of any article through all the former

, M. D. an antiquary and botanist, was originally an apothecary at Braintree in Essex, until about 1730, when he became a licentiate of the college of physicians, and a fellow of the royal society, according to Pulteney, but his name does not appear in Dr. Thomson’s list. About the time above-mentioned, Dr. Dale is supposed to have settled at Bocking, where he practised as a physician until his decease June 6, 1739, in the eightieth year of his age. He was buried in the dissenters’ burying ground at Bocking. His separate publications are, 1. “Pharmacologia, seu Manuductio ad Materiam Medicam,1693, 8vo, republished in 1705, 1710, 8vo, and 1737,4to,a much improved edition. It was also four times printed abroad. The first edition was one of the earliest rational books on the subject, and the author attended so much to subsequent publications and improvements, as to give his last edition the importance of a new work. Scarcely in any author, says Dr. Pulteney, is there a more copious collection of synonyms, a circumstance which, independent of much other intrinsic worth, will long continue the use of the book with those who wish to pursue the history of any article through all the former writers on the subject. 2. “The Antiquities of Harwich and Dover Court,1730, 4to, originally written by Silas Taylor, gent, about the year 1676. That part of this work which regards natural history is so copious and accurate as to render the book a real acquisition to science. Dale was also the author of various communications to the royal society, which were published in the Philosophical Transactions.

, an eminent engraver, who flourished about the year 1640, was a native of Holland; but

, an eminent engraver, who flourished about the year 1640, was a native of Holland; but under what master he learnt the art of engraving, is uncertain. It is difficult to form a proper judgment of his merit; for sometimes his prints resemble those of Cornelius Vischer; of Lucas Vosterman; of P. Pontius; of Bolswert; and other masters. A set of antique statues engraved by him, are in a bold, freestyle, as if founded upon that of Goltzius; others again seem imitations of that of Francis Poilly. In all these different manners he has succeeded; and they plainly manifest the great command he had with his graver, for he worked with that instrument only. He engraved a great variety of portraits, some of which are very valuable, and form the best as well as the largest part of his works.

, a learned Swede, who was born at Winberga, in Holland, in 1708, deservedly obtained

, a learned Swede, who was born at Winberga, in Holland, in 1708, deservedly obtained the appellation of the father of Swedish poetry by two poems written in that language; the one entitled “The Liberty of Sweden,” published in 1743; the other the tragedy of “Brunhilda.” He successively raised himself to be preceptor to prince Gustavus, counsellor in ordinary of the chancery, knight of the northern star, and at last to the dignity of chancellor of the court. By command of the king he engaged to compile a history of his own country from the earliest period to the present time, which he accomplished in three volumes quarto; and which was afterwards translated into the German language. Sweden is indebted to him also lor a great number of epistles, satires, fables, thoughts, and some panegyrics on the members otthe royal academy of sciences, of which he was a principal ornament: all these have been collected and printed in 6 vols. There is likewise by him a translation of the president Montesquieu, on the Causes of the grandeur and declension of the Romans. Von Dalin died in August 1763, leaving a reputation for literature, which his works are thought to confirm.

rnors resolved at the same time that no future master should be elected under forty years of age; or who was not in holy orders of priesthood two years before his election;

According to the records of the Charter-house, he was appointed master July 9, 1624, when he was only in deacon’s orders, which was through the recommendation “of the most excellent prince of Wales.” He is described as a man “of good merit and deserte.” The governors resolved at the same time that no future master should be elected under forty years of age; or who was not in holy orders of priesthood two years before his election; and having not more than one living, and that within thirty miles of London. Sir Robert had grown so very infirm in 1636, that the governors ordered three persons as his assistants.

this Bible should be printed for their use. They first employed John Manlius, a printer of Laybach, who was the first that printed the Sclavonic in Roman letters: but

, a very learned Lutheran divine of the sixteenth century, of whose personal history little is known, deserves notice as thetranslator of Luther’s German Bible into the Sclavonian, which language being . spoken in Styria, Carinthia, and Carniola, the states of those countries came to a determination that this Bible should be printed for their use. They first employed John Manlius, a printer of Laybach, who was the first that printed the Sclavonic in Roman letters: but while Manlius was making his calculations of expence, &c. the archduke Charles of Austria forbad him to print it. This appears to have happened in 1580. The states, however, only changed their determination so far as to have it printed elsewhere, and sent Dalmatin for that purpose to Gratz, where he was to correct the press, after the copy had been carefully revised at Laybach by him, in conjunction with other eminent divines and Oriental scholars. But, finding that no impression of this Bible would be permitted in the Austrian dominions, the states sent, in April 1583, Dalmatin, and another divine, Adam Bohoritsch, to Wittemberg, with a recommendation to the elector of Saxony, and the work being begun in May 1583, was finished Jan. 1, 1584. They had agreed with Samuel Seelfisch, bookseller at Wittemberg, that he should print fifteen hundred copies, each to contain two hundred and eighty sheets of the largest paper, on a fine character, with wooden cuts; for which the states of Carniola were to pay after the rate of twenty florins for every bale of five hundred sheets. The expences of the impression of this Bible amounted to about eight thousand florins: towards which the states of Styria gave a thousand florins, those of Carirrthia nine hundred, and the evangelic states of Carniola six thousand one hundred. These particulars may not be unacceptable to typographical students, as it is but seldom we have access to the history of early printing. Of Dalmatin we are only told that he afterwards was put in possession of the cure of St. Khazaim, or St. Catiani, near Aurspergh, by Christopher, baron of Aurspergh, in 1585, who, when the popish party banished Dalmatin in 1598, kept him concealed in his house; and a vault under the stable before the castle used long to be shewn as the hole of the preacher."

of Haddington, a very amiable and accomplished woman, bore sixteen children, all of whom Alexander, who was the seventh son, survived. He was educated at the school

, an eminent hydrographer, F. R. S. and F. S. A. was born July 24, 1737, at New Hailes, near Edinburgh, the seat of his fattier sir James Dalrymple, bait, of Hailes. His mother, lady Christian, daughter of the earl of Haddington, a very amiable and accomplished woman, bore sixteen children, all of whom Alexander, who was the seventh son, survived. He was educated at the school of Haddington, under Mr. David Young; but as he left school before he was fourteen years of age, and never was at the university, his scholastic endowments were very limited. At school he had the credit of being a good scholar; and, after he left school, his eldest hrother was wont to make him translate, off hand, some of the odes of Horace; so that he was, for his years, a tolerable proficient in Latin: but going abroad, entirely his own master, before he was sixteen years of age, he neglected his Latin; and, as he says, never found so much use for it as to induce him to take any pains to recover it.

called Joe Thomson. He accordingly left Scotland in the spring of 1752, with his brother sir David, who affectionately accompanied him to London. He was put to Mr.

Sir James Dalrymple died in 1750; and the hon. general St. Clair having married sir James’s sister, a very sensible and accomplished woman (the relict of sir John Baird, bart.), in 1752, from his intimacy with alderman Baker, then chairman of the East India company, general St. Clair got Mr. Baker’s promise to appoint his nephew, Mr. Dalrymple, a writer in the company’s service; the young man having conceived a strong desire of going to the East Indies, by reading Nieuhoff’s Voyages, and a novel of that time, called Joe Thomson. He accordingly left Scotland in the spring of 1752, with his brother sir David, who affectionately accompanied him to London. He was put to Mr. Kinross’s academy, at Forty-hill, near Enfield, for some months antecedent to his appointment in the company’s service. He tells us he was obliged to Mr. Kinross for his great kindness and attention to him, and received much good instruction for his conduct through life; by which he greatly profited: but was too short a time at that academy to learn much of what was the object of sending him there, viz. writing and merchants’ accounts; which are, at least were at that time, the only qualifications the East India company thought requisite in their servants: and the absurdity of supposing a boy of sixteen from an academy competent to keep a set of merchants’ books not being considered, some demur was made to Mr. Kinross’s certificate of this part of Mr. Dalrymple’s education not being expressed in terms sufficiently direct; however, this was not insisted on.

with great kindness, as well as by Mr. Orme, the historian, then a member of council and accountant, who continued his friendship to him during the remainder of his

About the middle of December, he embarked at Gravesend on board the Suffolk Indiaman, commanded by captain William Wilson, and the vessel sailed from the Downs Dec. 25, 1752, and arrived at Madras on May 11. At first Mr. Dalrymple was put under the store-keeper, but was soon after removed to the secretary’s office, and on lord Pigot’s being appointed governor, was noticed by his lordship with great kindness, as well as by Mr. Orme, the historian, then a member of council and accountant, who continued his friendship to him during the remainder of his life. While in the secretary’s office, examining the old records, to qualify himself, by the knowledge of them, to fill the office of secretary, which he was in succession to expect, he found the commerce of the eastern islands was an object of great consideration with the company, and he was inspired with an earnest desire to recover that important object for this country.

A favourable opportunity offered for putting this into train: his old friend captain Wilson, who was appointed by the East India company commodore of all their

A favourable opportunity offered for putting this into train: his old friend captain Wilson, who was appointed by the East India company commodore of all their ships and vessels, and commander of the Pitt, of 50 guns, for his good and gallant conduct, arrived in September 1758, having on board sir William (then colonel) Draper, and part of his regiment. The Pitt was destined for China. Commodore Wilson, whose sagacity and maritime knowledge was equal to his courage, had reflected during the course of his voyage from England, in what manner his passage to China could be attained at that season; and it occurred to him, that the same principle by which ships went to the Malabar coast and Persia from Madras in the south west monsoon, was applicable in a passage to China, viz. by crossing the line, and taking advantage of the contrary monsoons that prevail at the same time in north and south latitudes. Thus, as the ships from Madras stand to the south east with the south west winds, till they get into the south east trade in south latitude, and then stand westward, till they are to windward of their intended port, when they cross the line again into north latitude; so commodore Wilson reasoned, that the north-west winds would, in south latitude, carry him far enough eastward to make the north-east wind a fair wind to China. Sir William Draper countenancing his opinion, commodore Wilson, on his arrival at Madras, mentioned the subject to Mr. Dalrymple, and asked his sentiments; which entirely concurring with his own, and being confirmed by reference to Saris, &c. who had performed the most essential part of the voyage, though with a different object; commodore Wilson was thereby induced to propose it to governor Pigot, who consulted Mr. Dalrymple, and being convinced that it was practicable, commodore Wilson performed the voyage highly to the credit of our maritime reputation, and much to the advantage of the company.

robably, only be purchased by barter; a small cargo was put on board at the expence of the governor, who permitted captain Baker, the captain, to have a fourth concern.

As the Cuddalore went under the secret orders of the governor, it was not thought proper to apply to the council for the provision of such a cargo as was necessary in countries where there was no regular communication or commerce; and where even provisions could, probably, only be purchased by barter; a small cargo was put on board at the expence of the governor, who permitted captain Baker, the captain, to have a fourth concern. The evening before Mr. Dalrymple embarked, governor Pigot presented him with an instrument, making him a present of whatever profits might accrue from the three-fourths concern. Having never insinuated such an intention, he left no ground for mercenary imputation against Mr. Dalrymple, in undertaking the voyage, or against the governor himself for ordering it. In consequence of an offer made by the hon. Thomas Howe, commander of that ship, he first embarked in the Winchelsea, April 22, 1759, and having joined the Cuddalore, captain George Baker, in the strait of Malacca, whither that vessel had been dispatched a few days before the Winchelsea, Mr. Dalrymple quitted the Winchelsea, and embarked on the Cuddalore June 3, in the Strait of Sincapore.

and orauky’s meet in the national council to deliberate, the authority is vested in a few officers, who are hereditary, the Sultan, Dato Bandahara, who represents the

It cannot be pretended to give a recital, however brief, of the course of this voyage, of which Mr. Dalrymple did not publish any connected journal, but it was in this voyage the English visited Sooloo. Mr. Dalrymple concluded a treaty with the sultan, and made a contract with the principal persons, for a cargo to be brought on the East India company’s account, which the natives engaged to receive at 100 per cent, profit, and to provide a cargo for China, which they engaged should yield an equivalent profit there. The principal person with whom this contract was negociated, was Dato Bandahara, the head and representative of the nobility; for the Sooloo government is a mixed monarchy, in which, though the principal nobility and orauky’s meet in the national council to deliberate, the authority is vested in a few officers, who are hereditary, the Sultan, Dato Bandahara, who represents the nobility, and Oranky Mallick, who represents the people; matters of government depending on the concurrence of two of the states, of which the people must be one.

em the sultan had an interest; the other belonged entirely to Chinese merchants of Amoy. The sultan, who was very avaricious, in hopes of getting money from the Chinese,

The person then filling the hereditary office of Bandahara, was as conspicuous for the probity and exalted justice ok his character, as by his distinguished rank, of which, whilst Mr. Dalrymple was at Sooloo, in 1761, an occasion occurred for Bandahara to exert. There were at this time two Chinese junks in Sooloo road; in the cargo of one of them the sultan had an interest; the other belonged entirely to Chinese merchants of Amoy. The sultan, who was very avaricious, in hopes of getting money from the Chinese, or thinking, perhaps, that it would be more advantageous for the sale of the cargo in which he was concerned, laid an embargo on the other junk: Bandahara and Oranky Mailick remonstrated with the sultan on the impropriety of this behaviour to merchants, but without effect; upon which Bandahara, and Oranky Mailick, with Pangleema Milabain, a person of a military order, consonant to ancient knighthood, went on board the China junk, in which the sultan had an interest, and brought her rudder on shore, informing the sultan that they would detain the one if he obstructed the departure of the other: this well-timed interference had its due effect, and both junks proceeded without further molestation on their voyage home.

ays before the death of this good man, he sent for the linguist whom Mr. Dalrymple had employed, and who had remained behind at Sooloo, asking if he thought the English

He returned to Madras from this eastern voyage, Jan. 23, 1762. The company’s administration approved of his proceedings, and in March 1762, having resolved to send on the company’s account the cargo stipulated, employed him in expediting the provision of that cargo. His expences in the voyage of almost three years, amounted to 612l. which was repaid by the governor and council of Madras, but he neither asked or received any pecuniary advantage to himself. On the 10th of May, the London packet was destined for the Sooloo voyage, and Mr. Dalrymple was appointed captain. In the passage from Madras to Sooloo, he first visited Balambangan; and on his arrival at Sooloo, found the small-pox had swept off many of the principal inhabitants, and dispersed the rest; so that very ineffectual measures had been taken towards providing the intended cargo. But although this unexpected calamity, which in the Eastern Islands is similar in its effects to the plague, was a sufficient reason for the disappointment of the cargo, yet a still more efficient cause, was the death of Bandahara, soon after Mr. Dalrymple’s departure from Sooloo, the preceding year. A few days before the death of this good man, he sent for the linguist whom Mr. Dalrymple had employed, and who had remained behind at Sooloo, asking if he thought the English would certainly come again. The linguist declaring that it was not to be doubted; Bandahara thereupon expressed his concern, saying that it would have made him very happy to have lived to have seen this contract faithfully performed on their part, and the friendship with the English established on a firm footing. The linguist observed, that they were all equally bound. Banclahara replied, that although this was true, all had not the same disposition; and perhaps none else the power of enforcing the due execution of their engagements; but that he was resigned to the divine will.

ated his col -m that subject to the secretary of state, lord Shelburne, late marquis of Lans^ downe, who expressed a strong desire to employ him on these discoveries.

Soon after his arrival home in 1765, discoveries in the South Sea being a favourite object of Mr. Dalrymple’s researches, he communicated his col -m that subject to the secretary of state, lord Shelburne, late marquis of Lans^ downe, who expressed a strong desire to employ him on these discoveries. Afterwards, when the royal society proposed to send persons to observe the transit of Venus, in 1769, Mr. Dalrymple was approved of by the admiralty, as a proper person to be employed in this service, as well as to prosecute discoveries in that quarter; but from some differences of opinion, partly owing to official etiquette, respecting the employment of any person as commander of a vessel who was not a naval officer, and partly owing to Mr. Dalrymple’s objections to a divided command, this design did not take place. In that year, however, the court of directors of the East India company gave Mr. Dalrymple 5000l. for his past services, and as an equivalent to the emoluments of secretary at Madras, which he had relinquished in 1759, to proceed on the eastern voyage. As the various proceedings concerning Balambangan were published in 1769, it may be sufficient to notice in this place that the court of directors appointed Mr. Dalrymple chief of Balambangan, and commander of the Britannia; but some unhappy differences arising with the directors, he was removed from the charge of that intended settlement, and another person appointed in his stead. In 1774, however, the court of directors being dissatisfied with this person’s conduct, had it in contemplation to send a supervisor thither. On this occasion Mr. Dalrymple made an offer of his services to redeem the expedition from destruction, without any emolument except defraying his expences, on condition that a small portion of the clear profits of the establishment should be granted to him and his heirs, &c. But this offer was not accepted, and soon after the settlement of Balambangan was lost to the company.

ought into parliament, there was a clause precluding the company from sending persons back to India, who had been a certain time in England; Mr. Dalrymple represented

In 1784, when the India bill was brought into parliament, there was a clause precluding the company from sending persons back to India, who had been a certain time in England; Mr. Dalrymple represented the injustice this was to him, who had accepted his employment, on condition that it should not injure his pretensions at Madras; a clause was thereupon inserted, precluding that measure, unless with the concurrence of three-fourths of the directors, and three-fourths of the proprietors; he was still not satisfied, and carried on a sort of controversial correspondence with the directors, the merits of which would now be but imperfectly. understood. It having been long in contemplation to have an hydrographical office at the Admiralty, this was at length established during the administration of earl Spencer. In 1795 Mr. Dalrymple was appointed to the office of hydrographer, and received the assent of the court of directors, xinder whom he held a similar office, and who had lately given him a pension for life.

pleadings, which were never addressed to the passions, did not rival those of some of his opponents, who, possessed of great rhetorical powers, did not, like him, employ

, an eminent Scotch lawyer and antiquary, and brother to the preceding, was born in Edinburgh on the 28th of October 1726, and was educated at Eton school, where he was distinguished no less for his acquisitions in literature-than for the regularity of his manners. From Eton he was removed, to complete his studies at Utrecht, where he remained till 1746. In 1748 he was called to the Scotch bar, where, notwithstanding the elegant propriety of the cases which he drew, his success did not answer the expectations which had been formed of him. This was not owing either to wajjt of science or to want of industry, but to certain peculiarities, which, if not inherent in his nature, were the result of early and deep-rooted habits. He possessed on all occasions a sovereign contempt, not only for verbal antithesis, but for well-rounded periods, and every thing which had the semblance of declamation; and indeed he was wholly unfitted, by an ill-toned voice, and ungraceful elocution, for shining as an orator. It is not surprizing, therefore, that his pleadings, which were never addressed to the passions, did not rival those of some of his opponents, who, possessed of great rhetorical powers, did not, like him, employ strokes of irony too fine to be perceived by the bulk of any audience, but expressed themselves in full, clear, and harmonious periods. Even his memorials, though classically written, and often replete with valuable matter, did not on every occasion please the court; for they were always brief, and sometimes, it was said, indicated more attention to the minutiye of forms than to the merits of the cause. Yet on points which touched his own feelings, or the interests of truth and virtue, his language was animated, his arguments forcible, and his scrupulous regard to form thrown aside. He was on all occasions incapable of misleading the judge by a false statement of facts, or his clients, by holding out to them fallacious grounds of hope. The character indeed which he had obtained for knowledge and integrity in the Scotch law, soon raised him to an eminence in his profession. Accordingly, in March 1766, he was appointed one of the judges of the court of session with the wannest approbation of his countrymen; and in May 1776 he succeeded to the place of a lord commissioner of the justiciary on the resignation of lord Coalston, his wife’s father. Upon taking his seat on the bench he assumed the title of lord Hailes, in compliance with the usage established in the court of session: this is the name by which he is generally known among the learned of Europe.

David II. Aiul happy it was that the affairs of Scotland attracted the talents of so able a writer, who to the learning and skill of a lawyer, joined the industry and

In 1771 he composed a very learned and ingenious paper, or law-case, on the disputed peerage of Sutherland. He was one of the trustees of the lady Elizabeth, the daughter of the last earl, and being then a judge, the names of two eminent lawyers were annexed to it. In that case, he displayed the greatest accuracy of research, and the most profound knowledge of the antiquities and rules of descent, in that country; which he managed with such dexterity of argument, as clearly established the right of his pupil, and formed a precedent, at the same time, for the decision of all such questions in future. In 1773 he published a small volume, entitled “Remarks on the History of Scotland.” Tnese appeared to be the gleanings of the historical research which he was making at that time, and discovered his lordship’s turn for minute and accurate inquiry into doubtful points of history, and at the same time displayed the candour and liberality of his judgment. This publication prepared the public for the favourable reception of the Annals of Scotland, in 2 vols. 4to, the first of which appeared in 1776, and the second in 1779, and fully answered the expectations which he had raised. The difficulties attending the subject, the want of candour, and the spirit of party, had hitherto prevented the Scotch from having a genuine history of their country, in times previous to those of queen Mary. Lord Hailes carried his attention to this history, as far back as to the accession of Malcolm Canmore, in 1057, and his work contains the annals of 14 princes, from Malcolm III. to the death of David II. Aiul happy it was that the affairs of Scotland attracted the talents of so able a writer, who to the learning and skill of a lawyer, joined the industry and curiosity of an antiquary; to whom no object appears frivolous or unimportant that serves to elucidate his subject.

moirs, the history of his country for 736 years, and may revere the memory of the respectable judge, who with indefatigable industry, and painful labour, has removed

Lord Hailes has so well authenticated his work by references to historians of good credit, or deeds and writings of undoubted authority, and has so happily cleared it from fable, uncertainty, and conjecture, that every Scotchman, since its appearance, has been able to trace back with confidence, in genuine memoirs, the history of his country for 736 years, and may revere the memory of the respectable judge, who with indefatigable industry, and painful labour, has removed the rubbish under which the precious remains were concealed. Lord Hailes at first intended, as appears by an advertisement prefixed to his work, to carry down his annals to the accession of James I. but, to the great disappointment of the public, he stopped short at the death of David II. and a very important period of the history still remains to be filled up by an able writer. Lord Hailes’s Annals of Scotland, it is believed, stand unrivalled in the English language, for a p irity and simplicity of style, an elegance, perspicuity, and conciseness of narration, that peculiarly suited the form of his work; and is entirely void of that false ornament, and stately gait, which makes the works of some other writers appear in gigantic but fictitious majesty.

married; by his first wife, Anne Brown, only daughter of lord Coalston, he left issue one daughter, who inherits the family estate. His second marriage (of which also

Although his lordship’s constitution had been long in an. enfeebled state, he attended his duty on the bench till within three days of his death, which happened on the 29th of November 1792, in the 66th year of his age. His lordship was twice married; by his first wife, Anne Brown, only daughter of lord Coalston, he left issue one daughter, who inherits the family estate. His second marriage (of which also there is issue one daughter) was to Helen Fergusson, youngest daughter of lord Kilkerran, who survived him. Leaving no male issue, the title of baronet descends to his nephew, son of the late lord provost Darrymple.

of the life of John Barclay,“1786, 4to. 35.” Sketch of the life of John Hamilton, a secular priest, who lived about 1600,“4to. 36.” Sketch of the life of sir James

The works of lord Hailes, arranged in the order of their publication, are as follow: 1. “Sacred poems, by various authors,” Edinb. 1751, 12mo. 2. “The wisdom of Solomon, wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus.” Edinb. 1755, 12mo. 3. “Select discourses, nine in number, by John Smith, late fellow of Queen’s college, Cambridge,” Ediub. 17 06, 12mo. 4. “World,” No. 140, Sept. 4, 1755; a meditation among books. 5. World, No. 147, Thursday, Oct. 23, 1755. 6. World, No. 204, Thursday, Nov. 25, 1756. 7. “A discourse of the unnatural and vile Conspiracy attempted by John earl of Go wry, and his brother, against his majesty’s person, at St. Johnstoun, upon the 5th of Aug. 1600,1757, 12mo. 8. “A sermon which might have been preached in East Lothian, upon the 25th day of Oct. 1761, from Acts xxvii. 1, 2.” The barbarous people sbewed us no little kindness,“Edinb. 1761, 12mo; occasioned by the country people pillaging the wreck of two vessels, viz. the Betsy, Cunningham, and the Leith packet, Pitcairn, from London to Leith, cast away on the shore between D unbar and North Berwick. All the passengers on board the former, in number seventeen, perished; five on-board the latter, Oct. 16, 1761. An affecting discourse, which is said to have produced the restitution of some part of the pillage. 9.” Memorials and Letters relating to the history of Britain in the reign of James I. published from the originals,“Glasgow, 1762. 10.” The works of the ever-memorable Mr. John Hailes of Eton, now first collected together,“Glasgow, 1765, 3 vols. The fine-paper copies of this work are truly elegant. 11. A specimen of a book entitled: Ane compendious booke of godlie and spiritual sangs, collectit out of sundrie parts of the Scripture, with sundrie other ballates, changed out of prophaine sangs, for avoyding of sin and harlotrie, with augmentation of sundrie gucle and godlie ballates, not contained in the first edition. Printed by Andro Hart,” Edinb. 1765, 12mo. 12. “Memorials and Letters relating to the history of Britain in the reign of Charles’ I. published from the originals,” Glasgow, 1766. 13. “An Account of the Preservation of Charles II. after the battle of Worcester, drawn up by himself; to which are added, his letters to several persons,” Glasgow, 1766. 14. “The secret correspondence between sir Robert Cecil and James VI.” 1766, 12mo. 15. “A catalogue of the lords of session, from the institution of the college of justice, in 1532, with historical notes,” Edinb. 1767, 4to. 16. “The private correspondence of doctor Francis Atterbury, bishop of Rochester, and his friends, in 1725, never before published,1768, 4to. 17. “An examination of some of the arguments for the high antiquity of regiam majestatem; and an inquiry into the authenticity of the leges Malcolrni,” Edinb. 1769, 4to. 18. “Historical Memoirs concerning the Provincial Councils of the Scottish Clergy, from the earliest accounts of the,; aera of the reformation,” Edinb. 1769, 4to. 19. “Canons of the church of Scotland, drawn up in the provincial councils held at Perth, anno 1242 and 1269,” Edinb. 1769, 4to. 20. “Ancient Scottish poems, published from the manuscript of George Bannatyne, 1568,” Edinb. 1770, 12mo. 21 .“The additional case of Elizabeth, claiming the title and dignity of countess of Sutherland,” 4to. 22. “Remarks on the History of Scotland,” Edinb. 1773, 12mo. 23. “Hubert! Langueti Epistolae ad Philippum Syclm-ium eqtritem Anglum, ace ura rite D. Dalrymple de Hailes eq.” Edinb. 1776, 8vo. 24. “Annals of Scotland, from the accession of Malcolm III. suriiamed Canmore, to the accession of Robert!.” Edinb. 1776. 25. “Tables of the succession of the kings of Scotland, from Malcolm 111. to Robert 1.” 26. Chronological abridgment of the volume.“The appendix contains eight dissertations. 27.” Annah of Scotland, from the accession of Robert I. surnamed Bruce, to the accession of the house of Stewart,“177:, 4to, with an appendix containing nine dissertations. 28.” Account of the Martyrs of Smyrna and Lyons, in the 2d century, with explanatory notes,“Edinb. 1776. 29,” Remains of Christian Antiquity,“Edinb. 1778, 3 vols. 30.” Octavius, a dialogue by Marcus Minucius Felix,“Edinb. 1781. 31.” Of the manner in which the persecutors died, by Lactantius,“Edinb. 17S2. 32.” Luciani Coelii Firmiani Lactantii divinarum institutionum liber quintus, sen de justitia,“1777. 33.” Disquisitions concerning the Antiquities of the Christian Church,“Glasgow, 1783. 34.” Sketch of the life of John Barclay,“1786, 4to. 35.” Sketch of the life of John Hamilton, a secular priest, who lived about 1600,“4to. 36.” Sketch of the life of sir James Ramsay, a general officer in the armies of Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden.“37.” Life of George Leslie,“4 to. 38.” Sketch of the life of Mark Alex. Boyd,“4to. 39.” The opinions of Sarah duchess dowager of Marlborough, published from her originalMSS.“1788, 12mo. 40.” The address of Q. Septini. Tertullian to Scapula Tertullus, proconsul of Africa," Edinb. 1790, 12mo. This address contains many particulars relating to the church after the 3d century. The translator has rejected all words and phrases of French origin, and writes entirely in the Anglo-Saxon dialect. In the course of the notes, many obscurities of the original, not adverted to by other commentators, are explained. Some strange inaccuracies of Mr. Gibbon are also detected, not included in the misrepresentations of his two famous chapters. He was long engaged in pursuits to examine the authenticity of the books of the New Testament. The result is said to have been, that he discovered every verse contained in it, with the exception of two or three, in the writings of the three first centuries. Indeed this seems to have been an object in all his works; for, at the end of each of his translations and editions of the primitive Christian writers, a table is given of passages quoted or mentioned by them.

noble patron lord Charlemont, introduced to the notice of his present majesty, then prince of Wales, who, after his accession to the throne, appointed him his librarian,

, brother to the preceding, keeper of the pictures, medals, &c. and antiquary to his majesty, was originally apprenticed to a coach-painter in Clerkenwell, and after quitting his master, went to Rome to pursue the study of painting, where, about the year 1749, an invitation was given him by Roger Kynaston, esq. of Shrewsbury, in company with Mr. (afterwards sir John) Frederick, to accompany them to Naples. From that city they proceeded in a felucca, along the coast of Calabria, crossed over to Messina, and thence to Catania, where they met with lord Charlemont, Mr. Burton, afterwards lord Cunningham, Mr. Scott, and Mr. Murphy. They then sailed together in a ship, hired by lord Charlemont and his party, from Leghorn, with the intention of making that voyage; the felucca followed first to Syracuse, then to the isle of Malta, and afterwards separated; but Mr. Dalton, accompanying the party in the ship, made the voyage to Constantinople, several parts of Greece, and Egypt. This voyage led to his publication, which appeared in 1781, called, “Explanation of the set of prints relative to the manners, customs, &c. of the present inhabitants of Egypt, from discoveries made on the spot, 1749, etched and engraved by Richard Daiton, esq.” On his return to England, he was, by the interest of his noble patron lord Charlemont, introduced to the notice of his present majesty, then prince of Wales, who, after his accession to the throne, appointed him his librarian, an office for which it would appear he was but indifferently qualified, if Dr. Morell’s report be true. Soon after, it being determined to form a noble collection of drawings, medals, &c. Mr. Daltou was sent to Italy in 1763, to collect the various articles suited to the intention. The accomplishment of that object, however, was unfortunately attended with circumstances which gave rise to sir Robert Strange’s memorable letter of complaint to the earl of Bute, in which he says, indignantly, although not altogether unjustly, that “persecution haunted him, even beyond the Alps, in the form of Mr. Dalton.” On this subject it may here be necessary only to refer to sir Robert’s letter, and to the authorities in the note.

good esteem. In Neal’s “History of the Puritans,” mention is made of Mr. Dalton the queen’s counsel, who, in 1590, pleaded against Mr. Udal, who was condemned for writing

, an English lawyer, was born somewhere in the county of Cambridge, in 1554, and bred to his profession in Lincoln’s-inn, or Gray’s-inn, and was formerly as well known for his book on the office of justice of the peace, as Burn is at present: his “Duty of Sheriffs” was also a book in good esteem. In Neal’s “History of the Puritans,” mention is made of Mr. Dalton the queen’s counsel, who, in 1590, pleaded against Mr. Udal, who was condemned for writing a libel called “A demonstration of Discipline:” this was probably our Dalton, who also in 1592 supported the episcopal power in parliament, of which he was a member, when attacked by the puritan party. There is a ms. of his in the British Museum, entitled “A Breviary or Chronology of the state of the lioinan or Western church or Empire; the decay of true religion, and the rising of papacy, from the time of our Saviour till Martin Luther.” In this he is styled Michael Dalton of Gray’s-inn, esq. It is supposed that he died before the commencement of the civil war.

intment of principal clerk to the general assembly of the church of Scotland, being the first layman who had ever been elected to that office. Besides an intimacy with

On the death of the learned professor of Oriental languages, Dr. James Robertson, he was chosen to succeed him as keeper of the university library; and likewise succeeded Dr. John Drysdale in the honourable appointment of principal clerk to the general assembly of the church of Scotland, being the first layman who had ever been elected to that office. Besides an intimacy with his learned contemporaries at home, he corresponded with Heyne and other eminent scholars abroad, and enriched the Edinburgh Royal Society Transactions with a variety of interesting communications in biography, or on subjects of erudition. He also translated and illustrated Chevalier’s description of the plain of Troy; and was editor of the sermons of Dr. Drysdale, whose daughter he married. This learned professor, whose private character was in, every respect amiable, and threw a lustre on his public services, died at Edinburgh, Dec. 3, 1806.

priest and monk of the 'eighth century, surnamed Mansur, was born at Damascus about G76. His father, who was rich, and held several considerable offices, had him instructed

, or John of Damascus, a learned priest and monk of the 'eighth century, surnamed Mansur, was born at Damascus about G76. His father, who was rich, and held several considerable offices, had him instructed in the sciences by an Italian monk, named Cosmo, and he was afterwards raised to the highest posts, and became chief counsellor to the prince of the Saracens All these dignities, however, St. John Damascenus resigned, and entered himself a monk in the monastery of St. Sabas near Jerusalem, where he led a pious and exemplary life, and became famous in the church by his piety and writings. It is said, that the caliph Hiocham, having ordered his right hand to be cut off on account of a forged letter by the emperor Leo, the hand was restored to him the night following by a miracle, as he slept; which miracle was universally known, or as much so as many other miracles propagated in the credulous ages. He died about the year 760, aged eighty-four. He left an excellent treatise on the orthodox faith, and several other works published in Greek and Latin, by le Quien, 1712, 2 vols. fol. A book entitled “Liber Barlaam et Josaphat Indite regis,” is ascribed to St. John Damascenus, but without any foundation; it has no date of time or place, but was printed about 1470, and is scarce. There are several French translations of it, old, and little valued. Damascenus may be reckoned the most learned man of the eighth century, if we except our countryman Bede; and, what is less to his credit, ono of the first who mingled the Aristotelian philosophy with the Christian religion. He became among the Greeks what Thomas Aquinas was afterwards among the Latins. Except with regard to the doctrine of the Trinity, most of his notions were erroneous, and his learning and fame gave considerable support to the worshipping of images, and other superstitions of that time.

the life of his master Isidorus, and dedicated it to Theodora, a very learned and philosophic lady, who had been a pupil of Isidorus. In this Life, which was copiously

, a celebrated heathen philosopher and writer, of the stoic school as some say, of the peripatetic according to others, was born at Damascus, and flourished about 540, when the Goths reigned in Italy. If great masters can make a great scholar or philosopher, Damascius had every advantage of this kind. Theon, we are told, was his preceptor in rhetoric; Isidorus in logic; Mavinus, the successor of Proclus in the school of Athens, in geometry and arithmetic; Zenodotus, the successor of Marinus, in philosophy ', and Ammonias in astronomy, and the doctrines of Plato. He wrote the life of his master Isidorus, and dedicated it to Theodora, a very learned and philosophic lady, who had been a pupil of Isidorus. In this Life, which was copiously written, Damascius frequently attacked the Christian religion; yet obliquely, it is said, and with some reserve and timidity: for Christianity was then too firmly established, and protected by its numbers, to endure any open attacks with impunity, especially in a work so remarkable for obscurity, fanaticism, and imposture. Of this Life, however, we have nothing remaining, but some extracts which Photius has preserved; who also acquaints us with another work of Damascius, of the philosophic or the theologic kind. This was divided into four books; 1. De admirandis operibus; 2. Admirandae narrationes de daemonibus; 3. De animarum apparitionibus post obitum admirandae narrationes. The title of the fourth has not been preserved. Damascius succeeded Theon in the rhetorical school, over which he presided nine years: and afterwards Isidorus in that of philosophy at Athens, in which situation it is supposed that he spent the latter part of his life.

he taught us rather to bear the fury of the world with constancy, than to take up arms against those who offend us; especially since between the royalty and the priesthood

, an eminent cardinal, was born at Ravenna in the beginning of the eleventh century, became a Benedictine, and, it is thought, would always have preferred solitude to the dignities of the church, if he had not been in some measure forced to accept them. In 1057 he was created cardinal by pope Stephen IX. and under pope Nicolas II. was sent as papal legate to Milan, to reform certain clerical abuses, which he successfully accomplished, and even turned his arguments against his superiors, whom he found licentious, without any respect for their rank or power. Among other proofs of his zeal, he publicly condemned the liberty which the popes took of opposing the emperors in cases of war; affirming, that the offices of emperor and pope are distinct, and that the emperors ought not to meddle with what belongs to the popes, nor the popes with what belongs to the emperors. “As the son of God,” says he, “surmounted all the obstacles of worldly power, not by the severity of vengeance, but by the lively majesty of an invincible patience, so has he taught us rather to bear the fury of the world with constancy, than to take up arms against those who offend us; especially since between the royalty and the priesthood there is such a distinction of offices, that it belongs to the king to use secular arms, and to the priest to gird on the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God,” &c. Damian described also in a very lively manner the enormous vices of his age, in several of his works;, in his Gomorrhaetis particularly, which, though pope Alexander II. thought fit to suppress it, has nevertheless been preserved. Disappointed, however, in his hopes of producing any favourable change, he resigned all his preferments in the church in 1061, although he appears afterwards to have been employed on missions as legate. He died in 1073, and his writings, while in ms. must have been frequently read and admired, as we find that between five and six centuries after his deaih they were ordered to be printed by Clement VIII. who employed Constantino Cajetan as editor. This first edition was published at Home in 3 vols. fol. 160b, 1608, 1615, and reprinted at Leyden, 1623, fol. In 1640 Cajeta 1 added a fourth volume. The whole were afterwards reprinted at Paris in 1642 and 1663, in a thick folio. These works consist of

Streights of Magellan; and, arriving at the isle of Juan Fernandez, took on board a Moskito Indian, who had been left in that uninhabited place above three years before.

, a celebrated English navigator, descended from a good family in Somersetshire, was bora in 1652; but losing his father when very young, he was sent to sea, where he soon distinguished himself particularly in the South Sea. He associated himself with capt. Cook, in order to cruize on the Spaniards; and, Aug. 23, 1683, sailed from Achamac in Virginia for the Cape de Verde islands. After touching at several of them, he steered for the Streights of Magellan; but, the wind being against them, they stood over for the Guinea coast, and in u few days anchored at the mouth of Sherborough river, where the ship’s crew were hospitably received by the inhabitants. He then proceeded to the South Seas through the Streights of Magellan; and, arriving at the isle of Juan Fernandez, took on board a Moskito Indian, who had been left in that uninhabited place above three years before. After staying fourteen days at this island, they set sail April 8, 1684, steering towards the line, off the islands of Peru and Chili; took several prizes, and proceeded to the Gallipago islands, and from thence to cape bianco, where captain Cook was interred. July 19, Mr. Edward Davis was appointed captain in the room of Cook, sailed the next day towards Rio Leja, and from thence to the gulph of Amapalla; and Sept. 20th came to an anchor in the island of Plata. Here they made a descent upon Plata, attacked the fort, and took it with little opposition. But finding that the governor and inhabitants had quitted the town, and carried off their money, goods, and provisions, they set fire to it, and afterwards sailed for Guaiquil, and attacked it, but without success.

ft them, and arrived at the English factory at Achen, where he became acquainted with captain Bowry, who would have persuaded him to sail with him to Persia in quality

Their success in this part of the world having been very indifferent, and there appearing no probability of its mending, Swan and Dampier agreed to steer their course for the East Indies. They sailed to St. John’s island, and to the Piscadores, to Bouton island, to New Holland, to Triest; and arriving at Nicobar, Dampier with others was left on shore, and treated with great civility by the inhabitants. He, however, left them, and arrived at the English factory at Achen, where he became acquainted with captain Bowry, who would have persuaded him to sail with him to Persia in quality of boatswain but he declined accepting of this proposal, on account of the ill state of his health. He afterwards engaged with captain Weldon, under whom he made several trading voyages, for upwards of fifteen months, and afterwards entered as a gunner to an English factory at Bencoolen. Upon this coast he staid till 1691, and then embarked for England, when he was obliged to make his escape by creeping through one of the port-holes, for the governor had revoked his promise of allowing him to depart; but he brought off his journal and most valuable papers. He arrived in the Downs Sept. 16; and being in want of money, sold his property in a painted Indian prince, who was carried about for a sight, and shewn for money. He appears afterwards to have been concerned in an expedition concerted by the merchants of Bristol to Uie South Sea, commanded by caplain Woodes “Rogers, which sailed in Aug. 1708, and returned Sept. 1711; a voyage attended with many singular circumstances, and a great number of curious and entertaining events. We have no further particulars of Dampier’s life or death. His” Voyage round the World" has gone through many editions, and the substance of it has been transferred to many collections of voyages. It was first published in 3 vols. 8vo, Lond. 1697.

ts, is the name of a family of engravers of considerable reputation in Holland. Cornelius Danckkkts, who was born at Amsterdam in 1561, established himself at Antwerp

, or Danckerts, is the name of a family of engravers of considerable reputation in Holland. Cornelius Danckkkts, who was born at Amsterdam in 1561, established himself at Antwerp as a print-seller; but he did not suffer this employment to engross his whole time, as he engraved many portraits, landscapes, and historical pieces, as well from his own compositions as from the designs of Berghem, Rembrandt, and others. His son, Danckert Danckerts, who was born at Antwerp about 1600, also engraved different subjects, as well from his own designs as from those of other artists; and though his pieces are not so numerous as his father’s, they surpass them in merit. Danckert combined the point and the graver with very great success, and the pieces from Berghem and Wouvermanns, which he has wrought in this manner, are much esteemed.

age travelled into Italy, from whence he came to England. Here he enjoyed the favour of Charles II. who employed him to draw views of the British sea-ports, and royal

John Danckilkts, of the same family, a designer and engraver, about 1654 settled at Amsterdam; but being invited into England, he went to London, where he designed for the English Juvenal, the plates engraved by Hollar. This artist also engraved some plates. Hesiiy Danckerts, his brother, was also bred an engraver, but afterwards became a landscape-painter. He was born at the Hague, but at an early age travelled into Italy, from whence he came to England. Here he enjoyed the favour of Charles II. who employed him to draw views of the British sea-ports, and royal palaces. During the disturbances which preceded the abdication of James II. he quitted England for Amsterdam, where he died soon after. The landscapes painted by this artist were numerous, anil are chiefly to be found in England. Amongst them are Views of Windsor, Plymouth, Penzance, &c. He also engraved from Vandyk, Titian, Jacopo Palma, &c. Justus Danckerts, of the same family, was a designer, engraver, and print-seller, and resided in Amsterdam. The following plates bear his name: the Portrait of Casimir, king of Poland; a ditto of William III. prince of Orange; the Harbours of Amsterdam, a set of seven pieces. One other of the name remains to be noticed, Cornelius Danckerts. The circumstance of both Milizia and Heinecken dating the birth of this architect in 1.561, and saying that he was born in Amsterdam (the very time and place of the birth of Cornelius Danckerts mentioned above), leads us to suspect some chronological error, if not, indeed, that these two artists were one and the same person. Cornelius was originally a stonemason, but afterwards applied himself to architecture. He constructed in the city of Amsterdam many public and private buildings, highlycreditable to his talents on account of their beauty and convenience, and, amongst others, three of the principal churches, the exchange, and the gate which leads to Haarlem, the most beautiful of the city. He had a son named Peter, who was born at Amsterdam in 1605, and afterwards became painter to Uladislaus, king of Poland.

alian Jesuit, was born at Cesena in the ecclesiastical state in 1554, and was the first of his order who taught philosophy at Paris. He bore several honourable offices

, an Italian Jesuit, was born at Cesena in the ecclesiastical state in 1554, and was the first of his order who taught philosophy at Paris. He bore several honourable offices in the society; for, besides teaching divinity at Padua, he was rector of the several colleges at Ferrara, Forli, Bologna, Parma, and Milan; visitor in the provinces of Venice, Toulouse, and Guienne; provincial in Poland, and in the Milanese. He taught philosophy in Perugia, 1596, when he was appointed by Clement VIII. to be his nuncio to the Maronites of mount Libanus. He embarked at Venice in July the same year, and returned to Rome in August the year following. The French translation which was made of his journey to Mount Libanus by father Simon, was printed at Paris in 1675, and reprinted at the Hague in 1685. Dandini’s book was printed at Cesena in 1656, under the title of “Missione apostolica al patriarcha e Maroniti del Monte Libano.” It contains the relation of his journey to the Maronites and to Jerusalem; but father Simon has left out the journey to Jerusalem in his translation, because, he says, there is nothing in it but what has been observed by travellers already. Dandini died at Forli, 1634, aged eighty. His commentary on the three books of Aristotle “de Anima” was printed at Paris, 1611, in folio; and after his death his “Ethica sacra, de virtutibus et vitiis,” was printed at Cesena, 1651, fol.

n at Florence in 1646, and received his first instruction in the art of painting from Valerio Spada, who excelled in small drawings with a pen. Whilst he was under the

, an eminent painter, nephew to the preceding, was born at Florence in 1646, and received his first instruction in the art of painting from Valerio Spada, who excelled in small drawings with a pen. Whilst he was under the tuition of thrt artist he gave such evident proofs of genius, that he was then placed as a disciple with his uncle Vincent. He afterwards travelled through most of the cities of Italy, studying the works of those who were most distinguished; and resided for a long time at Venice, where he copied the paintings of Titian, Tintoretto, and Paolo Veronese. He next visited Parma and Modena, to study the works of Correggio; omitting no opportunity that might contribute to improve his hand or his judgment. When he returned to Florence, the grand duke Cosmo III. the grand duchess Victoria, and the prince Ferdinand, kept him perpetually employed, in fresco painting as well as in oil; his subjects being taken not only from sacred or fabulous history, but from his own invention and fancy, which frequently furnished him with such as were odd and singular, and especially with whimsical caricatures. He died in 1712. — This master had an extraordinary talent for imitating the style of even the most celebrated ancient painters of every school, particularly Titian, Veronese, and Tintoretto; and with a force and elegance, equal to his subjects of history, he painted portraits, landscapes, architecture, flowers, fruit, battles, animals of all kinds, and likewise sea-pieces; proving himself an universal artist, and excellent in even thing he undertook. Mr. Fuseli, however, says that the avidity of gain led him to dispatch and a general mediocrity, compensated by little more than the admirable freedom of his pencil. He exerted his powers according to the price he received for his work: they are seen to advantage in the cupolas of S. Maria Maddalena, in various frescos of the ducal palace and villas, and in the public hall of Pisa, where he represented the taking of Jerusalem. There are likewise altar-pieces which shew his merit: that of St. Francis in S. Maria Maggiore, and another of S. Piccolomini saying mass in the church a'Servi, a pleasing animated performance. He had a son, Octavio, who proved not inferior to him in any branch of his profession, and was an honour to his family and his country.

cience in his native city for four years under Aune du Bourg, then a teacher of high reputation, and who, after holding the office of clerk of the parliament of Paris

, an eminent French protestant divine, was born at Orleans about the year 1530. Having at first an inclination for the law, he studied that science in his native city for four years under Aune du Bourg, then a teacher of high reputation, and who, after holding the office of clerk of the parliament of Paris for two years, was strangled and burnt, Dec. 20, 1559, for his adherence to the protestant faith. Affected by the constancy with which his master suffered, and of which he appears to have been an eye-witness, and referring such constancy to its proper source, Daneau embraced the principles of the deceased martyr, and the following year retired to Geneva, where he could enjoy his religion unmolested. From this time he gave over all thoughts of the law, and began the study of divinity, in which he made such progress as to be acknowledged one of the ablest divines of the protestant persuasion. At Geneva he became one of their preachers, and professor of divinity. In 15S1 he was invited to Leyden in the same character, and taught there about a year. He at length returned to France, and after residing some time atOrthcs, finally took up his abode at Castres, where he exercised the functions of the ministry until the year 1596, vvheu he died. His works are very numerous. A considerable collection of them was published by himself at Geneva in 1583, in a large folio volume, divided into three classes, didactic, exegetic, and polemic. But, besides these, Niceron and other authors give a very large catalogue of separate publications, commentaries on the Holy Scriptures; and moral, historical, and geographical treatises. One of these, “Primi mundi antiquitatum sectiones quatuor,” was published in English by Thomas Twine, under the title of “The wonderful workmanship of the World,1578, 4to. His “Les Sorciers” was also published here in 1564-, under the title, “A Dialogue of Witches.

itics that the tenth book of the history of France, by Paulus Æmilius, is his. At least it was Danes who sent it from Venice to the printer Vascosan. His “Opuscula”

, born in 1497, at Paris, of a noble family, studied at the college of Navarre, and was the pupil of Budeus and of John Lascaris. Being appointed by Francis I. to open the Greek school at the college-royal, he was professor there for five years, and had scholars that afterwards signalized themselves. He next became preceptor and confessor to the dauphin, afterwards Francis If. He was sent to the council of Trent, where he delivered a very celebrated speech in 1546, which was afterwards published; and during the session of this council he was made bishop of Lavaur. Sponde and de Thou have handed down to us an ingenious answer of this prelate. Nicholas Pseaume, bishop of Verdun, speaking very freely one day in the council, the bishop of Orvietta looking at the French, said to them with a sarcastic smile, “Gallus cantat,” (the cock crows), “Utinam,” replied Danes, “ad istud Gallicinium Petrus resipisceret!” (I wish that Peter would repent at this cock’s crowing.) This prelate died at Paris the 23d of April, 1577, at the age of 80. He had been married. When news was brought him of the death of his only son, he retired for a moment into his closet; and, on rejoining the company, “Let us be comforted,” said he, “the poor have gained their cause,” alluding to his being wont to distribute a part of his revenues among the poor, which he now thought he might increase. With the erudition of a true scholar he had the talent of speaking well, integrity of character, and a great simplicity of manners. His custom was to write much, and almost always to conceal his name. It has been suspected by some critics that the tenth book of the history of France, by Paulus Æmilius, is his. At least it was Danes who sent it from Venice to the printer Vascosan. His “Opuscula” were collected and printed in 1731, 4to, by the care of Peter Hilary Danes, of the same family with the bishop of Lavaur, who added the life of the author. The abbe Lenglet du Fresnoi attributes to P. Danes, two Apologies for king Henry II. printed in Latin in 1542, 4to. One publication of Danes’s merits particular notice, viz. an edition of Pliny the elder, very beautiful and correct, Paris, 1532, folio. This, for whatever reason, he thought proper to publish under the name of Bellocirius, i. e. Belletiere, the name of one of his servants. The short and elegant preface, so highly praised by Rezzonicus in his “Disquisitiones Pliniani,” is to be found amongour author’s “Opuscula.” This edition is so rare on the continent that Rezzonicus was able to find only two copies of it in Spain, and not a single one in Italy; and Ernesti pronounces it as valuable as it is rare.

ee, might have been passed over, on account of the worthiness of his character. Madame de Montespun, who thought him not qualified exactly for that, said rather tartly,

, brother of the preceding, was born in 1638. The endowments of his mind and person advanced him at the court of Louis XIV. and his decided taste for literature obtained him a place in the French academy, and in that of sciences. He died at Paris in 1720, at the age of eighty-two, privy ­councillor, knight of several orders, grand-master of the royal and military order of Notre Dame dn Mont Carmel, and of St. Lazare de Jerusalem. On being invested with this last dignity, he paid greater attention than had been before shewn to the choice of the chevaliers, iincl revived the ancient pomp at their reception, which the wits endeavoured to turn into ridicule. But what was superior to all ridicule was, that by his care he procured the foundation of upwards of twenty-five commanderies, and employed the revenues of the office of grand-master, to the education of twelve young gentlemen of the best nobility of the kingdom, as has been mentioned in onr account of his brother. At the court (says Fontenelle), where there is but little faith in probity and virtue, he always preserved his reputation clear and entire. His conversation, his manners, all savoured of a politeness which was far less that of a man of fashion, than of a friendly and obliging person. His wish at all times to play the part of a grandee, might have been passed over, on account of the worthiness of his character. Madame de Montespun, who thought him not qualified exactly for that, said rather tartly, that it was impossible not to love him, and not to laugh at hi ID. His first wife was Frances Morin, sister to the marechal dEstrées, and his second the countess de Louvestein, of the palatine house. There are extant by the marquis de Dangeau, memoirs in manuscript, from whence Voltaire, Renault, and la Beaumelle, have taken many curious anecdotes; but it was not always Dangeau, says Voltaire, who made these memoirs: “It was (according to this satirist) an old stupid valet-de-chambre, who thought proper to make manuscript gazettes of all the nonsense, right or wrong, that he could pick up in the anti-chambers,” by which Voltaire would insinuate that the memoirs which bear the name of the marquis de Dangeau are to be read with caution. There is Another little work of his, also in manuscript, in which he gives the picture of Louis XIV. in a very interesting manner, such as he was among his courtiers.

the Provencal language, and seems equally partial to the prose part of his romances; Petrarch also, who places him at the head of the Provencal poets, calls him the

, so in Moreri, but in other French biographical works placed under Arnaud, one of the troubadours of the twelfth century, was born of noble parents, in the castle of Ribeyrac, in Perigord. If we may judge of his merit by his works which have descended to us, it would be difficult to give him the preference to his brethren in that century, yet the old Italian critics assign him the first place. Dante in particular speaks of him as the best writer of tender verses in the Provencal language, and seems equally partial to the prose part of his romances; Petrarch also, who places him at the head of the Provencal poets, calls him the great master of love, and has honoured him so far as to conclude one of his own stanzas with a verse from Arnaud. It has, however, been doubted whether this verse be the production of Arnaud, and Crescinjbeni has employed a long digression in discussing the question. The best, however, of Arnaud’s productions must have been lost, for what remain by no means support the character which Dante and Petrarch have given of him. He has the credit of inventing that species of composition called the sestine, and attached great importance to rhyme. Besides his poetical talents, he had musical skill, and composed some of his own songs. Milloi speaks of having seen seventeen pieces by Arnaud, and there are eight in the imperial library at Paris, with a life of him. One of his works is entitled “Fantaumasias del Paganisme.” He is supposed to have died about 1180.

same family he was probably indebted for an university education, as no notice occurs of his father, who, if a music-master, could not well have escaped the researches

, an English poet and historian, the son of a music-master, was born near Taunton, in Somersetshire, in 1562. In 1579 he was admitted a commoner of Magdalen-hall, Oxford, where he continued about three years, and by the help of an excellent tutor, made considerable improvement in academical studies. He left the university, however, without taking a degree, and pursued the study of history and poetry under the patronage of the earl of Pembroke’s family. This he thankfully acknowledges in his “Defence of Rhime,” which is printed in the late edition of his works, as a necessary document to illustrate the ideas of poetry entertained in his time. To the same family he was probably indebted for an university education, as no notice occurs of his father, who, if a music-master, could not well have escaped the researches of Dr. Burney. The first of his product ions, at the age of twenty-three, was a translation of Paulns Jovius’s ' Discourse of Rare Inventions, both military and amorous, called Imprese,“London, 1585, 8vo, to which he prefixed an ingenious preface. He afterwards became tutor to the lady Anne Clifford, sole daughter and heiress to George, earl of Cumberland, a lady of very high accomplishments, spirit, and intrepidity. To her, when at the age of thirteen, he addressed a delicate admonitory epistle. She was married, first to Richard, earl of Dorset, and afterwards to the earl of Pembroke,” that memorable simpleton,“says lord Orford,” with whom Butler has so much diverted himself." The pillar which she erected in the county of Westmoreland, on the road-side between Penrith and Appleby, the spot where she took her last leave of her mother,

o more decisive accuracy, considers him only as a volunteer laureat, like Jonson, Dekker, and others who furnished the court with masks and pageants. In king James’s

At the death of Spenser, Daniel, according to Anthony Wood, was appointed poet-lanreat to tiuceu Elizabeth; but Mr. Malone, whose researches lead to more decisive accuracy, considers him only as a volunteer laureat, like Jonson, Dekker, and others who furnished the court with masks and pageants. In king James’s reign he was made gentleman extraordinary, and afterwards one of the grooms of the privy-chamber to the queen consort, who took great delight in his conversation and writings. Some of la’s biographers attribute this promotion to the interest of his brother-in-law, Florio, the Italian lexicographer, but it is perhaps more probable that he owed it to the Pembroke family. Mrs. Cooper, in her Muses’ Library, observes, that in the introduction to his poem on the civil wars, he acknowledges the friendship of one of the noble family of Mountjoy; and this, adds our female critic, is the more grateful and sincere, as it was published after the death of his benefactor. He now rented a small house and garden in Old-street, in the parish of St. Luke’s, London, where he composed most of his dramatic pieces, and enjoyed the friendship of Shakspeare, Marlowe, and Chapman, as well as of many persons of rank; but he appears to have been dissatisfied with the opinions entertained of his poetical talents; and towards the end of his life retired to a farm, which he had at Beckington, near Philips-Norton, in Somersetshire, and where, after some time devoted to study and contemplation, he died, and was buried Oct. 14, 1619. He had been married to his wife Justina, several years, but left no issue.

Fuller’s account, who lived near enough to the time of his death to have known something

Fuller’s account, who lived near enough to the time of his death to have known something of his character, is worth transcribing:

whose father was a master of musick and his harmonious mind made an impression on his son’s genius, who proved an exquisite poet. He carried in his Christian and surname,

He was born not far from Taunton, in this county (Somersetshire), whose father was a master of musick and his harmonious mind made an impression on his son’s genius, who proved an exquisite poet. He carried in his Christian and surname, two holy prophets, his monitors so to qualify his raptures, that he abhorred all prophaneness. He was also a judicious historian, witness his Lives of our English kings since the conquest, until king Edward III. wherein he hath the happiness to reconcile brevity with clearness, qualities of great distance in other authors. He was a servant in ordinary to queen Anne, who allowed him, a fair salary. As the tortoise burieth himself all the winter under the ground, so Mr. Daniel would lye hid at his garden-house in Old -street, nigh London, for some months together (the more retiredly to enjoy the company of the muses) and then would appear in publick, to converse with his friends, whereof Dr. Cowel and Mr. Camden were principal. Some tax him to smack of the old cask, as resenting of the Romish religion, but they have a quicker palate than I, who can make any such discovery. In his old age he turned husbandman, and rented a farm in Wiltshire, nigh the Devizes. I can give no account how he thrived thereupon. For though he was well versed in Virgil, his fellow-husbandman-poet, yet there is more required to make a rich farmer, than only to say his Georgics by heart; and I question whether his Italian will fit our English husbandry. Besides, I suspect that Mr. Daniel his fancy was too fine and sublimated to be wrought down to his private profit.

Mr. Headly, who appears to have studied his works with much attention, thus

Mr. Headly, who appears to have studied his works with much attention, thus appreciates his merit: “Though very rarely sublime, he has skill in the pathetic; and his pages are disgraced with neither pedantry nor conceit. We find, both in his poetry and prose, such a legitimate and rational flow of language as approaches nearer the style of the 18th than the 16th century, and of which we may safely assert, that it never will become obsolete. He certainly was the Atticus of his day. It seems to have been his error to have entertained too great a diffidence of his own abilities. Constantly contented with the sedate propriety of good sense, which he no sooner attains than he seems to rest satisfied, though his resources, had he but made the effort, would have carried him much farther. In thus escaping censure, he is not always entitled to praise. From not endeavouring to be great, he sometimes misses of being respectable. The constitution of his mind seems often to have failed him in the sultry and exhausting regions of the muses; for though generally neat, easy, and perspicuous, he too frequently grows slack, languid, and enervated. In perusing his long historical poem, we grow sleepy at the dead ebb of his narrative, notwithstanding being occasionally relieved with some touches of the pathetic. Unfortunate in the choice of his subject, he seems fearful of supplying its defects by digressional embellishment; instead of fixing upon one of a more fanciful cast, which the natural coolness of his judgment would necessarily have corrected, he has cooped himself up within the limited and narrow pale of dry events; instead of casting his eye on the general history of human nature, and giving his genius a range over her immeasurable fields, he has confined himself to an abstract diary of fortune; instead of presenting us with pictures of truth from the effects of the passions, he has versified the truth of action only; he has sufficiently, therefore, shown the historian, but by no means the poet. For, to use a sentiment of sir William Davenant’s, ‘ Truth narrative and past is the idol of historians, (who worship a dead thing); and truth operative, and by its effects continually alive, is the mistress of poets, who hath not her existence in mutter, but in reason.’ Daniel Las often the softness of Rowe without his effeminacy. In his Complaint of Cleopatra, he has caught Ovid’s manner very happily, as he has no obscurities either of style or language, neither pedantry nor affectation, all of which have concurred in banishing from use the works of his contemporaries. The oblivion he has met with is peculiarly undeserved; he has shared their fate, though innocent of their faults.

n that of his contemporaries, that he deserves a place in every collection of English poetry, as one who had the taste or genius to anticipate the improvements of a

The justice of these remarks cannot be disproved, although some of them are rather too figurative for sober criticism. Daniel’s fatal error was in causing history instead of fiction; yet in his lesser pieces, and particularly in his sonnets, are many striking poetical beauties; and his language is every where so much more harmonious than that of his contemporaries, that he deserves a place in every collection of English poetry, as one who had the taste or genius to anticipate the improvements of a more refined age. As a dramatic writer, he has been praised for his adherence to the models of antiquity, but whoever attempts this, attempts what has ever been found repugnant to the constitution of the English Theatre.

bore on their arms. He was born in 1265, a little after the return of the Guelfs or pope’s faction, who had been exiled from their native country in consequence of

, an illustrious Italian poet, descended from one of the first families of Florence, of the name of Caccia Guida. Alighieri was the surname of the maternal line, natives of Ferrara, so called from a golden wing which the family bore on their arms. He was born in 1265, a little after the return of the Guelfs or pope’s faction, who had been exiled from their native country in consequence of the defeat at Monte Aperte. The superiority of his genius appeared early, and if we may credit his biographer Boccaccio, his amorous disposition appeared almost as soon. His passion for the lady whom he has celebrated in his poem by the name of Beatrice, is said to have commenced at nine years of age. She was the daughter of Eoleo Portinari, a noble citizen of Florence. His passion seems to have been of the platonic kind, according to the account he gives of it in his “Vita Nuova,” one of his earliest productions. The lady died at the age of twenty-six and Dante, affected by the afflicting event, fell into a profound melancholy, to cure which his friends recommended matrimony. Dante took their advice, but was unfortunate in choosing a lady of a termagant temper, from whom he found it necessary to separate, but not until they had lived miserably for a considerable time, during which she bore him several children. Either at this period, or after the death of his first mistress, he seems by his own account to have fallen into a profligate course of life, from which he was rescued by the prayers of his mistress, now a saint, who prevailed on the spirit of Virgil to attend him through the infernal regions. It is not easy to reduce this account to matter of fact, nor is it very clear indeed whether his reigning vice was profligacy, or ambition of worldly honours. It is certain, however, that he possessed this ambition, and had reason to repent of it.

e, was distracted between the factions of the Guelfs, or partizans of the pope, and the Ghibellines, who adhered to the emperor. After many revolutions, the Gnelfs had

He had already conceived notions of military glory, and had distinguished himself by his bravery in an action where the Florentines obtained a signal victory at Arezzo. This, joined with his acknowledged learning, prepared the way for his advancement to the first honours of the state. Italy, at that time, was distracted between the factions of the Guelfs, or partizans of the pope, and the Ghibellines, who adhered to the emperor. After many revolutions, the Gnelfs had got the superiority in Florence; and in 130O Dante, with several colleagues, was elected prior, the first executive office in the republic of Florence, and from this he is said to have dated all his misfortunes. Although the faction of the Ghibellines seemed totally extinct, an uninterrupted flow of ten years prosperity was attended with consequences more fatal to the Guelfs than all their past misfortunes. The two noble families of the Cherchi and Donati had been engaged in a quarrel of old standing, and now had recourse to arms, in consequence of a dispute between two branches of the family of Cancelieri, of Pistoia. The rival factions had distinguished themselves by the names of the blacks and the whites, i. e. the Neri and the Bianchi. Donati, from an old attachment to the part of the Cancelieri, called the blacks, joined their faction, which immediately determined the Cherchi to join the whites; and in order to put an end to the quarrel, Dante and his colleagues, ordered the heads of the opposite factions t remove from Pistoia to Florence, the consequence of which was, that all the noble families of Florence ranged themselves with the one or the other, and even the lower order of the citizens became partizans. At last, at a secret meeting of the blacks, Carso Donati proposed to apply to pope Boniface VIII. to terminate these intestine broils, by sending Charles of Valois of the blood royal of France. The whites, having learned this, assembled in arms, and clamoured loudly against the project, and Dante was so dissatisfied with it, that from that moment it is probable he took a decided part against the black faction.

earance of partiality gave the wished for pretext to Boniface to send Charles of Valois to Florence, who, after producing a letter pretended to be written by some of

To preserve, however, the appearance of impartiality, he and his colleagues, gaining the multitude on their side, ordered the leaders of both parties, Donati and Cherchi, into confinement; but Dante’s real sentiments soon appeared: the whites were set at liberty, and the blacks remained in bonds or in exile, and although Dante’s priorate had expired before the whites were released, the measure was attributed to his influence. This appearance of partiality gave the wished for pretext to Boniface to send Charles of Valois to Florence, who, after producing a letter pretended to be written by some of the leaders of the whites, offering to corrupt his integrity in their favour, recalled the exiles of the black faction, and banished their opponents. Dante was at this time at Rome soliciting the pope to conciliate the two parties, and finding his solicitations in vain, returned, and found the sentence of exile passed upon him, his possessions confiscated, and his house razed to the foundation. This news met him at Siena, where he was soon joined by a numerous body of exiles, who formed themselves into an army, and after makingsome unsuccessful efforts to enter their native city byforce, which they repeated for four years, were obliged tu disperse.

of Paris with great reputation, which Boccaccio had a much better opportunity of knowing than Bavle, who takes upon him to question the fact.

Dante first found a patron in the great Cane de la Scala, prince of Verona, whom he has celebrated in the first canto of the Inferno; but his high spirit was ill-suited to courtly dependance; and it is very probable he lost the favour of the prince by the frankness of his behaviour. Of this an instance is given in several authors. The disposition of the poet, in the latter part of his life, had acquired a strong tincture of melancholy, which made him less acceptable in the gay court of Verona, where probably a poet was only thought a character fit to find frivolous amusements for his patron. A common jester, or buffoon (a noted personage in those days), eclipsed the character of the hard, and neither the variety of his learning, nor the sublimity of his genius, stood him in any stead. Cane, the prince, perceived that he was hurt by it; and, instead of altering his mode of treatment, very ungenerously exasperated his resentment, by observing one day in public company, that it was very extraordinary, that the jester, whom every one knew to be a worthless fellow, should be so much admired by him, and all his court; while Dante, a man unparalleled in learning, genius, and integrity, was universally neglected. “You will cease to wonder (says Dante), when you consider that similarity of manners is the strongest bond of attachment.” It does not appear whether the prince resented this answer, which he surely must have felt; but it is certain that the prince endeavoured to make the poet an occasional object of merriment in some very low instances, and Dante condescended to meet him even in that humble species of wit. Dante, however, soon found it necessary to seek his fortune elsewhere, and from Verona he retired to France, according to Manetti; and Boccaccio affirms that he disputed in the theological schools of Paris with great reputation, which Boccaccio had a much better opportunity of knowing than Bavle, who takes upon him to question the fact.

ourable establishment at Ravenna, by the friendship of Guido NoVelio de Polenta, lord of that place, who received tbl? illustrious exile with the most endearing liberality,

Dante’s first prospect of better fortune opened in 1308, when Henry, count of Luxemburgh was raised to the empire. In hopes of being restored to his native country, he attached himself to the interests of the new emperor, in whose service he is supposed to have written his Latin work “De Monarchia,” in which he asserts the rights of the empire against the encroachments of the papacy. In 131 J, he instigated the emperor to lay siege to Florence, in which enterprize, says one of his biographers, he did not chuse to appear in person, from motives of respect to his native country. But the emperor was repulsed by the Florentines; and his death, which happened next year, deprived Dante of all hopes of re-establishment in his native country. After this disappointment he is supposed to have spent several years in roving about Italy, in a state of poverty and dependance; till he found an honourable establishment at Ravenna, by the friendship of Guido NoVelio de Polenta, lord of that place, who received tbl? illustrious exile with the most endearing liberality, continued to protect him during the few remaining years of his life, and extended his munificence even to the ashes of the poet.

rvice of this nature, and dispatched him as his ambassador, to negociate a peace with the Venetians, who were preparing for hostilities against Ravenna. Manetti asserts

Eloquence was one of the many talents which Dante possessed in an eminent degree; on this account he is said to have been employed in fourteen different embassies during the course of his life, and to have succeeded in most of them. His patron Guido had occasion to try his abilities in a service of this nature, and dispatched him as his ambassador, to negociate a peace with the Venetians, who were preparing for hostilities against Ravenna. Manetti asserts that he was unable to procure a public audience at Venice, and returned to Ravenna by land, from his apprehension of the Venetian fleet. But the fatigue of his journey, and the mortification of having failed in his attempt to preserve his generous patron from the impending danger, threw him into a fever, which terminated in death. He died Sept. 14, 1321, in the palace of Guido, who paid the most tender regard to his memory. This magnificent patron, says Boccaccio, commanded the body to be adorned with poetical ornaments; and alter being carried on a bier through the principal streets of Ravenna, by the most illustrious citizens, to be deposited in a marble coffin. He pronounced himself the funeral oration, and expressed his design of erecting a most splendid monument, in honour of the deceased; a design, which his subsequent misfortunes rendered him unable to accomplish. At his request, however, many epitaphs were written on the poet. The best of them, says Boccaccio, was by Giovanni di Virgilio, of Bologna, a famous author of the time, and the intimate friend of Dante. Bernardo Bembc, the father of the celebrated cardinal, raised a handsome monument over the neglected ashes of the poet, with a Latin inscription; but before this, the Florentines had vainly endeavoured to gain the bones of their great poet from the city of Ravenna. In the age of Leo X. they made a second attempt, by a solemn application to the pope for that purpose; and Michael AngeJo, an enthusiastic admirer of Dante, very liberally offered to execute a magnificent monument to the poet, but the hopes of the Florentines were again unsuccessful.

d. This gave him that singularity of aspect, which made his enemies observe, that he looked like one who had visited the infernal regions. His deportment, both in public

Dante is described by Boccaccio, as a man of middle stature; his demeanour was solemn, and his walk slow; his dress suitable to his age and rank; his visage long, his nose aquiline, his eyes full, his cheek bones large, and upper lip a little projecting over the under one; his complexion was olive, his hair and beard thick and curled. This gave him that singularity of aspect, which made his enemies observe, that he looked like one who had visited the infernal regions. His deportment, both in public and private life, was regular and exemplary, and his moderation in eating and drinking remarkable.

Cassini completed. The reputation of his learning caused him to be invited to Rome by Gregory XIII. who employed him in making geographical maps and plans. He acquitted

, according to some, a descendant of the famous poet, was born at Perugia in 1537, and took the habit of a Dominican. He became skilful in philosophy and divinity, but more so in the mathematics. He was invited to Florence by the great duke Cosmo I. and explained to him the sphere and the books of Ptolemy, and left here a marble quadrant, and an equinoctial and meridian line on the front of the church of St. Maria Novella. He read public lectures on the same subject, and had many auditors in the university of Bologna, where he was appointed mathematical professor. Before he returned to Perugia, he made a fine map of that city, and of its whole territory, and in 1576 traced the grand meridian in the church of St. Petrona, which Cassini completed. The reputation of his learning caused him to be invited to Rome by Gregory XIII. who employed him in making geographical maps and plans. He acquitted himself so well in this, that the pope thought himself obliged to prefer him; and accordingly gave him the bishopric of Alatri, near Rome. He went and resided in his diocese; but Sixtus V. who succeeded Gregory XIII. would have him near his person, and ordered him to return to Rome. Dante was preparing for the journey, but was prevented by death, in 1586. His principal works are, “A Treatise of the Construction and Use of the Astrolabe,” “Mathematical Tables,” and a “Commentary on the Laws of Perspective.

ir. He died at Perugia in 1576, at the age of forty-six. There is extant by him, “The lives of those who have excelled in drawings for statues.”

, a native of Perugia, of the family of Rainaldi, imitated so well the verses of the poet Dante, that he was generally called by his name. He was not less distinguished by the delicacy of his poetry, than by his skill in the mathematics and in architecture. He died in 1512, in an advanced age, after having invented several machines, and composed a commentary on the sphere of Sacrobosco. His grandson Vincent Dante, an able mathematician, like him, was at the same time painter and sculptor. His statue of Julius III. has been generally looked upon as a master-piece of the art. Philip II. king of Spain, offered him a large salary to induce him to come and finish the paintings of the Escurial; but the delicacy of Dante’s constitution would not permit him to quit his natal air. He died at Perugia in 1576, at the age of forty-six. There is extant by him, “The lives of those who have excelled in drawings for statues.

at Sandhusen, a village near Gotha. He appears to have obtained the patronage of the duke Frederick, who defrayed the expence of his education, both at school, and at

, a learned German divine of the Lutheran church, and whose talents contributed greatly to raise the reputation of the university of Jena, was born Feb. 1, 1654, at Sandhusen, a village near Gotha. He appears to have obtained the patronage of the duke Frederick, who defrayed the expence of his education, both at school, and at the university of Wittemberg, where he took his master’s degree in 1676. Having devoted much of his attention to the Hebrew language and antiquities, he went to Hamburgh, where he profited by the assistance of Esdras Edzardi and other learned Jews, and was enabled to read the rabbinical writings with facility. From Hamburgh he went to Leipsic, and thence to Jena, from which in 1683 he visited Holland and England, acquiring in both countries the acquaintance of men of learning. On his return, having determined to settle at Jena, he was appointed professor extraordinary of the oriental languages, and on the death of the learned Frischmuth, was advanced to be professorordinary. In these offices he acquired great reputation, and attracted a number of foreign students. Some time after, he was appointed professor of divinity, in which he was no less popular. He died of a stroke of apoplexy, Dec. 20, 1727. He wrote, among many other works, “Sinceritas sacrae Scripturae veteris testamenti triumphans, cujus prodromus Sinceritas Scriptuvae Vet. Test, prevalente Keri vacillans,” Jena, 1713, 4to; and various dissertations in Latin, in controversy with the Jews, or on topics of Jewish antiquities, particularly “Divina Elohim inter coaequales de primo homine condendo deliberatio,1712Inauguratio Christi haud obscurior Mosaica, decem dissert, asserta,” Jena, 1717, 4to and a very ingenious tract entitled “Davidis in Ammonitas devictos mitigata crudelitas,1713.

brother and heir was sir John Danvers, knt. one of the gentlemen of the privy-chamber to Charles I. who was so ungrateful and inhuman, as to sit in judgment upon his

His younger brother and heir was sir John Danvers, knt. one of the gentlemen of the privy-chamber to Charles I. who was so ungrateful and inhuman, as to sit in judgment upon his gracious master, that unfortunate prince, and to be one of those who signed the warrant for his execution. He died before the restoration of king Charles II. but, however, all his estates both real and personal were confiscated in 1661.

, a physician at Amsterdam, who died in 1690, gained some reputation in the seventeenth century,

, a physician at Amsterdam, who died in 1690, gained some reputation in the seventeenth century, by the descriptions he published from 1668 to 1680, in Dutch, of Malabar, Coromandel, Africa, Asia, Syria, Palestine, and America, in as many folio volumes. These were the fruits of very accurate and laborious compilation, for he had never seen one of those countries. The description of Africa, and that of the Archipelago, were translated into French.

, a French military surgeon, who acquired much celebrity for his skill in treating disorders

, a French military surgeon, who acquired much celebrity for his skill in treating disorders in the urethra, particularly for his improved method of making bougies, was born at St. Frajon in Gascony March 6, 1701, and after studying the art, became surgeon-major of the imperial troops, and afterwards practised at Milan, and at Turin, where the king Victor Amadeus promised him great encouragement if tie would remain; but at that time he wished to travel for improvement, and after visiting Rome and Vienna, continued some time at Messina, where he exerted his skill and humanity with great success. Having devoted much of his attention to the disorders of the bladder, he published in 1745, “Recueil d‘Observations Chirurgicales sur les Maladies de l’Urethra,” which has been several times reprinted, and in 1750, was translated into English by Mr. Tomkyns, an eminent surgeon of London, who was able, he says, from his own experience, to attest the superior utility of Daran’s bougies over those that had been commonly used. In the fifth volume of the “Journeaux de Medicine,” there is a communication by Daran, in which he makes mention of a tube he had invented for drawing off the urine. This he describes more particularly in his “Treatise on the Gonorrhoea Virulenta,” first published in 1756. It is a flexible catheter, formed of a spiral wire, covered with the same composition as that used in making the bougies, and was capable of being introduced into the bladder, in many cases, where it would have been dangerous, often impossible, to use the common catheter. Considerable improvements have been since made of this instrument, but the merit of the invention still remains with Daran. The fame he acquired, during his residence at Paris, brought a nun her of strangers to visit him, and the profits of his practice were very great; but his charity to the indigent, and an easiness of temper, which led him into speculations, reduced him at last to very low circumstances, and he was comparatively poor when he died, in 1784. It is much to his honour that when thus reduced, and when the infirmities of age were approaching, he divulged, in 1779, the secret of the composition of his bougies in a work entitled “Composition du remede de Daran, &c.” 12mo, when he could derive no benefit except from the sale of his book. His other publications were, 1. “Reponse a la Brochure de Bayet sur la defense et la conservation des parties les plus essentielles de l'homme,1750, 12mo; and 2. “Lettre sur ua article des Tumeurs.

, of a noble and ancient family in Ireland, was born in Galloway Sept. 18, 1725. His parents, who were attached to the exiled house of Stuart, sent him to Paris

, of a noble and ancient family in Ireland, was born in Galloway Sept. 18, 1725. His parents, who were attached to the exiled house of Stuart, sent him to Paris in 1739, where, being put under the care of M. Clairault, at seventeen years of age he gave a new solution of the problem of the curve of equal pressure in a resisting medium. This was followed the year after by a determination of the curve described by a heavy body, sliding by its own weight along a moveable plane, at the same time that the pressure of the body causes an horizontal motion in the plane. This problem had indeed been solved by John Bernoulli and Clairault; but, besides that chevalier Darcy’s method was peculiar to him, we discover throughout the work traces of that originality which is the leading character of all his productions. The commencement of the war took him off in some measure from his studies, and he served during several campaigns in Germany and Flanders, as captain of the regiment of Conde. In 1746 he was appointed to accompany the troops that were to be sent to Scotland to assist the pretender; but the vessel in which he sailed was taken by the English, and Darcy, whose life was forfeited by the laws of his country, as being taken in arms against her, was saved by the humanity of the English commander. During the course of this war, amidst all its bustle and dangers, he found leisure to contribute two memoirs to the academy. The first contained a general principle of mechanics, that of the preservation of the rotatory motion. Daniel Bernoulli and Euler had found it out in 1745; but, besides that it is not likely their works should have reached Mr. Darcy in the midst of his campaigns, his method, which is different from theirs, is equally original, simple, elegant, and ingenious. This principle, which he again brought forward in 1750, by the name of “the principle of the preservation of action,” in order to oppose it to Maupertuis’s principle of the least action, Darcy made use of in solving the problem of the precession of the equinoxes: here, however, he miscarried; and in general it is to be observed, that though all principles of this kind may be used as mathematical formuloe, two of them at least must necessarily be employed in the investigation of problems, and even these with great caution; so that the luminous and simple principle given by M. d'Alembert in 1742 is the only one, on account of its being direct, which can be sufficient of itself for the sotion of problems.

aining various curious experiments on the charges of powder, &c. and several improvements on Robins (who was not so great a mathematician as he), Darcy continued the

Having published an “Essay on Artillery” in 1760, containing various curious experiments on the charges of powder, &c. and several improvements on Robins (who was not so great a mathematician as he), Darcy continued the experiments to the last moment of his life, but has left nothing behind him. In 1765 he published his “Memoir on the duration of the sensation of 8i^ht,” the most ingenious of his works, and that which shews him in the best light as an accurate and ingenious maker of experiments: the result of these researches was, that a body may souietimes pass by our eyes without being seen, or marking its presence, otherwise than by weakening the brightness of the object it covers; thus, in turning pieces of card painted blue and yellow, you only perceive a continued circle of green; thus the seven prismatic colours, rapidly turned, produce an obscure white, which is the obscurer as the motion is more rapid. As this duration of the sensation increases with the brightness of the object, it would have been interesting to know the laws, according to which the augmentation of the duration follows the intensity of the light, and, contrarywise, what are the gradations of the intensity of the light of an object which motion makes continually visible; but Darcy, now obliged to trust to other eyes than his own, was forced to relinquish this pursuit. Darcy, always employed in comparing mathematical theory and observation, made a particular use of this principle in his “Memoir on Hydraulic Machines,” printed in 1754. In this he shews how easy it is to make mistakes in looking by experiment for the laws of such effects as are susceptible of a maximum or minimum; and indicates at the same time, how a system of experiments may be formed, which shall lead to the discovery of these laws. All Darcy’s works bear the character which results from the union of genius and philosophy; but as he measured every thing upon the largest scale, and required infinite accuracy in experiment, neither his time, fortune, nor avocations allowed him to execute more than a very small part of what he projected. He was amiable, spirited, lively, and a lover of independence; a passion to which he sacrificed even in the midst of literary society, where perhaps a little aristocracy may not be quite so dangerous.

it by circumstances, loved and respected his old country: the friend and protector of every Irishman who came to Paris, he could not help feeling a secret pride, even

Darcy, though estranged from it by circumstances, loved and respected his old country: the friend and protector of every Irishman who came to Paris, he could not help feeling a secret pride, even in the successes of that enemy, against whom he was so often and so honourably to himself employed. Of his personal history, it yet remains to be added, that in the seven years’ war he served in the regiment of Fitz-James; and in 1770 was appointed mareschal de-camp, and the same year the academy of sciences admitted him to the rank of pensionary. In 1777 he married a niece who was brought up under his care at Paris, and then took the name of Count Darcy. He died two years after this marriage, Oct. 18, 1779. Condorcet wrote his cloge, published in the History of the Academy, and seems throughout anxious to do justice to his talents and character, a circumstance, which, we are told, was very highly honourable to Condorcet, as he had been most unjustly the continual object of Darcy’s aversion and hatred. Darcy’s essays, printed in the Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences, are various and very ingenious, and are contained in the volumes for the years 1742, 1747, 1749, 1750, 1751, 17-52, 1753, 1754, 1758, 1759, 1760, 1765, and in tom. I. of the “Savans Etrangers.

now lost, and that which goes under his name is supposed to have been the work of Septimus Romanus, who flourished about the year 370. There are editions of it of the

, a Trojan priest, celebrated by Homer, is said to have written a history of the Trojan war, which yElian speaks of as extant in his time, but it is now lost, and that which goes under his name is supposed to have been the work of Septimus Romanus, who flourished about the year 370. There are editions of it of the dates 1472, 1541, and one at London, 1675, but it has most generally been printed with Dictys Cretensis, another author of doubtful authenticy.

or, soon after his arrival, to Mr. Inglis, a gentleman of considerable fortune in the neighbourhood, who was ill with fever, and in so dangerous a state that the attending

, a physician and poet, was a native of Elton, near Newark, Nottinghamshire, where he was born December 12, 1731. After going through the usual school education, under the Rev. Mr. Burrows, at the grammar-school at Chesterfield, with credit, he was sent to St. John’s college, at Cambridge. There he only continued until he took his bachelor’s degree in medicine, when he went to Edinburgh to complete his studies; which being finished, and having taken the degree of doctor in medicine, a profession to which he was aUvays attached, he went to Lichfield, and there commenced his career of practice. Being sent for, soon after his arrival, to Mr. Inglis, a gentleman of considerable fortune in the neighbourhood, who was ill with fever, and in so dangerous a state that the attending physician had given up the case as hopeless, the doctor had the good fortune to restore him to health. This gave him so high a degree of reputation at Litchfield, and in the neighbouring towns and villages, that his competitor, who was before in considerable practice, finding himself neglected, and nearly deserted, left the place. Dr. Darwin soon after married miss Howard, the daughter of a respectable inhabitant of Lichfield, by which he strengthened his interest in the place. By this lady he had three sons, who lived to the age of manhood; two of them he survived; the third, Dr. Robert Waring Darwin, is no.v in considerable practice as a physician at Shrewsbury. In 1781, our author, having married a second wife, removed to Derby, where he continued to reside to the time of his death, which happened on Sunday the 18th of April, 1802, in the seventieth year of his age. Six children by his second lady, with their mother, remain to lament the loss of him.

y to his moderation in the use of fermented liquors. This practice he recommended strenuously to all who consulted him. Miss Seward, from whose Memoirs of the Life of

The doctor was of an athletic make, much pitted with the small-pox. He stammered much in his speech. He had enjoyed an almost uninterrupted good state of health until towards the conclusion of his life, which he attributed, and reasonably, to his temperate mode of living, particularly to his moderation in the use of fermented liquors. This practice he recommended strenuously to all who consulted him. Miss Seward, from whose Memoirs of the Life of Dr. Darwin these notices are principally taken, gives him the credit of having introduced habits of sobriety among the trading part of Lichfield, where it had been the custom to live more freely before he went to reside there. His frequent journies into the country on professional business, contributed also in no small degree to the preservation of his health and his faculties, which latter remained unimpaired to the day of his death. His death was sudden, occasioned by a fit of what he was used to call angina-pectoris, which he had several times experienced, and always relieved by bleeding plentifully.

eless to enter into a further examination of theZoonomia, which has long ceased to be popular; those who wish to see a complete refutation of the sophisms contained

In 1753, the author published the first volume of“Zoonomia, or the Laws of Organic Life,” 4to. The second volume, which completed the author’s plan, was printed in 1796. As the eccentric genius of the author was known, great expectations were formed of this work, the labour, we were told, of more than twenty years. It was to reform, or entirely new model, the whole system of medicine, professing no less than to account for the manner in which man, animals, and vegetables are formed. They all, it seems, take their origin from living filaments, susceptible of irritation, which is the agent that sets them in motion. Archimedes was wont to say, “give me a place to stand on, and I will move the earth:” such was his confidence in his know edge of the power of the lever. Our author said, “give me a fibre susceptible of irritation, and I will make a tree, a dog, a horse, a man.” “I conceive,” he says, Zoonomia, vol. I. p. 492, “the primordium, or rudiment of the embryon, as secreted from the blood of the parent, to consist in a single living filament, as a muscular fibre, which I suppose to be the extremity of a nerve of loco-motion, as a fibre of the retina is the extremity of a nerve of sensation; as, for instance, one of the fibrils which compose the mouth of an absorbent vessel; I suppose this living filament, of whatever form it may be, whether sphere, cube, or cylinder, to be endued with the capacity of being exciied into action by certain kinds of stimulus. By the stimulus of the surrounding fluid in which it is received from the mah-, it may bend into a ring, and thus form the lieg'nninj of a tube. This living ring may now embrace, or absorb a nutritive particle of the fluid in which it swims, and by drawing it into its pores, or joining it by compression to its extremities, may increase its own length or crassitude, and, by degrees, the living-ring may become a living tube. With this new organization, or accretion of parts, new kinds of irritability may commence,” &c.; whence, sensibility, which may be only an extension of irritability, and sensibility further extended, beget perception, memory, reason, and, in short, all those faculties which have been, it seems, erroneously attributed to mind, for which, it appears, there is not the smallest necessity; ajid as the Deity does nothing in vain, of course such a being does not exist. It would be useless to enter into a further examination of theZoonomia, which has long ceased to be popular; those who wish to see a complete refutation of the sophisms contained in it will read with satisfaction, “Observations on the Zoonomia of Dr. Darwin, by Thomas Brown, esq.” published at Edinburgh in 8vo, in 1798. In ISOi, the author published “Phytologia, or the Philosophy of Agriculture and Gardening;” but the public, tired with the reveries of the writer, let this large book of 600 pages in 4to pass almost unnoticed. As little attention was paid to a small tract on Female Education, which had little indeed to attract notice. “It is,” Miss Seward observes, “a meagre work, of little general interest, those rules excepted, which are laid down for the preservation of health.” It is, however, harmless, a character that can by no means be accorded to the Zoonomia, as may he gathered from the strictures which the author of his life in the Cyclopædia has justly passed on that work, and to which nothing could have given even a temporary popularity but the activity of a small sect to whom the author’s political and religious, or rather irreligious principles, were endeared. His son, Charles Darwin, who died at Edinburgh the 15th of May, 1778, while prosecuting his studies in medicine, deserves to be noticed for having discovered a. test distinguishing pus from mucus, for which a gold medal was adjudged him by the university. “As the result of numerous experiments,” he says, “when any one wishes to examine the matter expectorated by his patient, let him dissolve a portion of it in vitriolic acid, and another portion of it in caustic alkaline lixivium, and then add pure water to both solutions; if there is a precipitation in each solution, it is clear the expectorated matter is pus; if there is no precipitation, the matter is simply mucus.” Mr. Darwin left an unfinished essay on the retrograde motion of the absorbent vessels of animal bodies in some diseases. This was, some time after the death of the young man, published by his father, together with the dissertation for which he had obtained the prize medal.

e of the Latin language, was put under the care of Francis Philelphus, an eminent teacher at Sienna, who at the end of two years declared he was his best scholar. Dati,

, a learned Italian writer, the son of a lawyer at Sienna, was born at that place in 1420, and after acquiring some knowledge of the Latin language, was put under the care of Francis Philelphus, an eminent teacher at Sienna, who at the end of two years declared he was his best scholar. Dati, however, at this time suffered not a little from the ridicule of his schoolfellows, owing to a hesitation in his speech, which he is said to have cured by the means which Demosthenes adopted, that of speaking with small pebbles in his mouth. After finishing his classical studies, he learned Hebrew of some Jews, and then entered on a course of philosophy, jurisprudence, and theology. During his application to these branches, Odo Anthony, duke of Urbino, from the very favourable account he had of him, invited him to Urbino to teach the belles lettres. Dati accordingly set out for that city in April 1442, where he was received with every mark of honour and friendship by the duke, but this prosperity was not of long duration. He had not enjoyed it above a year and a half, when the duke, whose excesses and tyranny had rendered him odious, was assassinated in a public tumult, with two of his favourites; and Dati, who was hated by the populace merely because he was respected by the duke, was obliged to take refuge for his life in a church, while the mob pillaged his house. The successor of Odo, prince Frederick, endeavoured to console Dati for this misfortune, and offered him a pension, besides recompense for all he had lost; but Dati could not be reconciled to a residence so liable to interruption, and in 1444 returned to Sienna. Here, after refusing the place of secretary of the briefs, offered to him by pope Nicholas V. he opened a school for rhetoric and the classics, and acquired so much reputation, that the cardinal of Sienna, Francis Piccolomini, formally granted him permission to lecture on the Holy Scriptures, although he was a married man; and at the same time gave him a similar licence to teach and lecture on any subject, not only in his college, but in all public places, and even in the church, where, his son informs us, he once preached during Lent. He was also much employed in pronouncing harangues on public occasions in Latin, many of which are among his works. Nor were his talents confined to literature, but were the means of advancing him to the first offices of the magistracy, and the republic of Sienna entrusted him with the negociation of various affairs of importance at Rome and elsewhere. In 1 J-57 he was appointed secretary to the republic, which he held for two years. Towards the close of his life he laid aside the study of profane authors for that of the Scriptures and ecclesiastical historians. He died of the plague at Sienna, April 6, 1478. His son Nicolas collected his works for publication, “Augustini Dathi, Senensis, opera,” of which there are two editions, that printed at Sienna, 1503, fol. and an inferior in correctness, printed at Venice, 1516. They consist of treatises on the immortality of the soul letters; three books on the history of Sienna; a history of Piombinoj on grammar, &c. &c.

es which many writers have bestowed on him. He behaved with great courtesy to all learned travellers who went to Florence, many of whom expressed their acknowledgment

, professor of polite literature at Florence, where he was born, became famous, as well for his works as for the eulogies which many writers have bestowed on him. He behaved with great courtesy to all learned travellers who went to Florence, many of whom expressed their acknowledgment of it in their writings; but of his personal history, his countrymen have left us little account. He was a member of the academy della Crusca, and in that quality took the name of Smarrito, and became one of the chief ornaments of that society. He made a panegyric upon Lewis XIV. in Italian, and published it at Florence in 1699; the French translation of it was printed at Rome the year following. That monarch gave him a pension of an hundred pistoles, with a liberal invitation to France, which however he declined. He had already published some Italian poems in praise of Louis. The book entitled “Lettera di Timauro Antiate a Filaleti, della vera storia della Cicloide, e della famosissima esperienza dell' argento vivo,” and printed at Florence in 1663, was written by him; for it appears from the 26th page of the letter, that the pretended Timauro Antiate is no other than Charles Dati. In this work he endeavours to prove that father Mursennus is not the inventor of the cycloid, as is said in the history of it, but that the glory of that invention belongs to Galileo; the other, that Torricelli was innocent of plagiarism, when he pretended to be the first who explained the suspension of quicksilver in a glass tube by the pressure of the air, for that he was the real author of this supposition. But the chief work to which our Dati applied himself, was the “Vite dei Pittori,” which he published in 1667. This, which was to have embraced the lives of all the ancient painters, contains only those of Zeuxis, Parrhasius, Apelles, and Protogenes. He published also a valuable collection of elegant and useful lessons for writing Italian, entitled “Prose Fiorentiui.” Few men had studied that language with more attention. He died in 1675, greatly lamented for his personal, as well as public character. Among his numerous correspondents we find the name of our illustrious Milton. There is a recent and much improved edition of his “Vite dei Pittori” by Della Valle, published at Sienna, 1795, 4to.

the “Memoirs of cardinal de Retz,” which were printed in 1723, 12mo, xvith a dedication to Congreve, who encouraged the publication. He was F. R. S. and an able mathematician.

, esq. of the Middle Temple, a barrister at law, afterwards master in chancery, and at the time of his death, Jan. 8, 1763, accomptaiit-general of that court, is noticeable as having translated the “Memoirs of cardinal de Retz,” which were printed in 1723, 12mo, xvith a dedication to Congreve, who encouraged the publication. He was F. R. S. and an able mathematician. In the dispute concerning elliptical arches, at. the time when Bluckfriars bridge was built, application was made by the committee for his opinion on the subject, and his answer may be seen in the London Magazine for March, 1760. He also published in 1761, “A Vindication of the New Calendar Tables, and Rules annexed to the Act for regulating the commencement of the year,” &c. 410.

, a poet and dramatic writer of considerable note, was the son of John Davenant, who kept the Crown tavern or inn at Oxford, but owing to an obscure

, a poet and dramatic writer of considerable note, was the son of John Davenant, who kept the Crown tavern or inn at Oxford, but owing to an obscure ins nuation in Wood’s accountof his birth, ithas been supposed that he was the natural son of Shakspeare; and to render this story probable, Mrs. Davenant is represented as a woman of beauty and gaiety, and a particular favourite of Shakspeare, who was accustomed to lodge at the Crown, on his journies between Warwickshire and London. Modern inquirers, particularly Mr. Steevens, are inclined to discredit this story, which indeed seems to rest upon no very sound foundation. Young Davenant, who was born Feb. 1605, very early betrayed a poetical bias, and one of Iris first attempts, when he was only ten years old, was an ode in remembrance of master William Shakspeare: this is a remarkable production for one so young, and one who lived, not only to see Shakspeare forgotten, but to contribute, with some degree of activity, to that instance of depraved taste. Davenant was educated at the grammarschool of All Saints, in his native city, under Mr. Edward Sylvester, a teacher of high reputation. In 1621, the year in which his father served the office of mayor, he entered of Lincoln-college, but being encouraged to try his success at court, he appeared there as page to Frances duchess of Richmond, a lady of great influence and fashion. He afterwards resided in the family of the celebrated sir Ftilke Greville, lord Brooke, who was himself a poet and a patron of poets. The murder of this nobleman in! 628 depriving him of what assistance he might expect from his friendship, Davenant had recourse to the stage, on which he produced his first dramatic piece, the tragedy of Albovine, king of the Lombards.

masks were acted with the greatest applause, and his character as a poet was raised very high by all who pretended to be judges. On the death of Ben Jonson, in 1638,

This play had success enough to procure him the recommendation, if nothing more substantial, of many persons of distinction, and of the wits of the times; and with such encouragement he renewed his attendance at court, adding to its pleasures by his dramatic efforts, and not sparingly to the mirth of his brethren the satirists, by the unfortunate issue of some of his licentious gallantries. For several years his plays and masks were acted with the greatest applause, and his character as a poet was raised very high by all who pretended to be judges. On the death of Ben Jonson, in 1638, the queen procured for him. the vacant laurel, which is said to have given such offence to Thomas May, his rival, as to induce him to join the disaffected party, and to become the advocate and historian of the republican parliament. In 1639, Davenaut was appointed “Governor of the king and queen’s company acting at the Cockpit in Drurv-lane, during the lease which Mrs. Elizabeth Beeston, alias Hutcheson, hath or doth hold in the said house.” When the civil commotions had for some time subsisted, the peculiar nature of them required that public; amusements should be the decided objects of popular resentment, and Davenant, who had administered so copiously to the pleasures of the court, was very soon brought under suspicions of a more serious kind. In May 16M, he was accused before the parliament, of being a partner with many of the king’s friends, in the design of bringing the army to London for his majesty’s protection. His accomplices effected their escape, but Davenant was apprehended at Feversham, and sent up to London. In July following he was bailed, but on a second attempt to withdraw to France, was taken in Kent. At last, however, he contrived to make his escape without farther impediment, and remained abroad for some time. The motive of his flight appears not to have been cowardice, but an unwillingness to sacrifice his life to popular fury, while there was any prospect of his being able to devote it to the service of his royal master. Accordingly, when the queen sent over a considerable quantity of military stores for the use of the earl of Newcastle’s army, Davenant resolutely ventured to return to England, and volunteered his services under that nobleman, who had been one of his patrons. The earl ma.le him lieutenant-general of his ordnance, a post for which, if he was not previously prepared, he qualified himself with so much skill and success, that in September 1643, he was rewarded with the honour of knighthood for the service he rendered to the royal cause at the siege of Gloucester. Of his military prowess, however, we have no farther account, nor at what time he found it necessary, on the decline of the king’s affairs, to retire again into France. Here he was received into the confidence of the queen, who in 1646 employed him in one of her importunate and ill-advised negociations with the king, who was then at Newcastle. About the same time Davenant had embraced the popish religion, a step which probably recommended him to the queen, but which, when known, could only tend to increase the animosity of the republicans against the court, which was already too closely suspected of an attachment to that persuasion. The object of his negociation was to persuade the king to save his crown by sacrificing the church; a proposition which his majesty rejected with becoming dignity; and this, as lord Clarendon observes, “evinced an honest and conscientious principle in his majesty’s mind, which elevated him above all his advisers.” The queen’s advisers in the measure were, his majesty knew, men of no religious principle, and he seems to have resented their sending an ambassador of no more consequence than the manager of a play-house.

On the restoration, he received the patent of a playhouse, under the title of the Duke’s Company, who first performed in the theatre in Portugal row, Lincoln’s-inntields,

On the restoration, he received the patent of a playhouse, under the title of the Duke’s Company, who first performed in the theatre in Portugal row, Lincoln’s-inntields, and afterwards in that in Dorset-gardens. Here he acted his former plays, and such new ones as he wrote after this period, and enjoyed the public favour until his death, April 7, 1668, in his sixty-third year. He was interred with considerable ceremony, two days after, in Westminster-abbey, near the place where the remains of May, his once rival, had been pompously buried by the parliament, but were ordered to be removed. On his grave-stone is inscribed, in imitation of Ben. Jonson’s short epitaph, “O rare sir William Davenant.

his “Gondibert,” but the critics have never been agreed in the share he derives from it. The reader who declines to judge for himself, may have ample satisfaction in

As a poet, his fame rests chiefly on his “Gondibert,” but the critics have never been agreed in the share he derives from it. The reader who declines to judge for himself, may have ample satisfaction in the opinions of the late bishop Hurd, and of Dr. Aikin, as detailed in the conclusion of his life in the Biographia Britannica. It will, probably be found on an unprejudiced perusal of this original and very singular poem, that the opinions of Dr. Aikin and Mr. Headley are founded on those principles of taste and feeling which cannot be easily opposed; yet in considering the objections of Dr. Hurd, allowance is to be made for one who is so powerful and elegant an advocate for the authorized qualities of the Epic species, and for arguments which if they do not attach closely to this poem, may yet be worthy of the consideration of those whose inventive fancy leads them principally to novelty of manner, and who are apt to confound the arbitrary caprices with the genuine powers of a poet. His miscellaneous pieces are of very unequal merit. Most of them were probably written in youth, and but few can be reprinted with the hope of satisfying a polished taste. Complimentary poetry, so much the fashion in his times, is now perused with indifference, if not disgust; and although the gratitude which inspired it may have been sincere, it is not highly relished by the honest independence which belongs to the sons of the muses.

original, with some historical notes by another hand,” 1698. This other hand was Walter Moyle, esq. who addressed his discourse to Dr. Pavenant. There is a passage

His first political work was, “An Essay upon Ways and Means of supplying the War,1695. In this treatise he wrote with so much strength and perspicuity upon the nature of funds, that whatever pieces came abroad from the author of the Essay on Ways and Means, were sufficiently recommended to the public; and this was the method he usually took to distinguish the writings he afterwards published. 2. “An Essay on the East-India Trade,1697. This was nothing more than a pamphlet, written in form of a letter to the marquis of Normandy, afterwards duke of Buckinghamshire. 3. “Discourses on the public revenues, and of the trade of England. Part I. To which is added, a discourse upon improving the revenue of the state of Athens, written originally in Greek by Xenophon, and now made English from the original, with some historical notes by another hand,1698. This other hand was Walter Moyle, esq. who addressed his discourse to Dr. Pavenant. There is a passage in it which shews, that there were some thoughts of sending over our author in quality of director-general to the East-Indies; and is also a clear testimony what that great man’s notions were, in regard' to the importance of his writings. It is this: “The great trade to the East-Indies, with some few regulations, might be established upon a bottom more consistent with the manufactures of England; but in all appearance this is not to be compased, unless some public-spirited man, with a masterly genius,” meaning Dr. Davenant himsrlf, “be placed at the head of our affairs in India. And though we, who are his friends, are loth to lose him, it were to be wished for the good of the kingdom, that the gentleman, whom common fame and the voice of the world have pointed out as the ablest man for such a station, would employ his excellent judgment and talents that way, in the execution of so noble and useful a design.” 4. “Discourses on the Public Revenues, and on the Trade of England, which more immediately treat of the foreign traffic of this kingdom. Part II.” 1698. 5. “An Essay on the probable Method of making the people gainers in the Balance of Trade,1699. 6. “A Discourse upon Grants and Resumptions: shewing, how our ancestors have proceeded with such ministers as have procured to themselves grants of the crown revenue; and that the forfeited estates ought to be applied to the payment of public debts,1700. 7. “EsMiys upon the Balance of Power; the right of making War, Peace, Alliances; Universal Monarchy. To which is added, an Appendix, containing the records referred to in the second essay,1701. It was in this book that our author was carried away by his zeal to treat the church, or at least some churchmen, in so disrespectful a manner, as to draw upon himself a censure from one of the houses of convocation. 8. “A picture of a Modern Whig, in two parts,1701. There is, however, nothing but general report, founded upon the likeness of style and other circumstantial evidence, to prove that this bitter pamphlet fell from the pen of our author; and, if it did, he must be allowed to have been the greatest master of invective that ever wrote in our language; others have attributed it to Defoe. 9. “Essays upon Peace at Home and War Abroad, in two parts,1704. This is the first piece our author published after the time that he is supposed to have reconciled himself to the ministry; it was suspected to be written at the desire of lord Halifax, and was dedicated to the queen. It drew upon him the resentment of that party, by whom he had been formerly esteemed, but who now bestowed upon him as ill language, or rather worse, than he had received from his former opponents. 10. “Reflections upon the Constitution and Management of the Trade to Africa, through the whole course and progress thereof, from the beginning of the last century to this time,” &c. 1709, fol. in 3 parts. 11. “A Report to the honourable the Commissioners for putting in execution the Act, entitled, an Act for the taking, examining, and stating the Public Accounts of the Kingdom, from Charles Davenant, LL. D. inspector-general of the exports and imports,” 1712, part I. 12. “A Second Report to the Honourable the Commissioners,” &c. 1712. It may be necessary to observe, that several of the above-recited pieces were attacked in the warmest manner, at the time they were published; but the author seems to have satisfied himself in delivering his sentiments and opinions, without shewing any further concern to defend and support them against the cavils of party zeal and contention. Most of his political works were collected and revised by sir Charles Whitworth, 1771, in 5 vols. 8vo.

river near Paris, he was unfortunately drowned in the sight of his pupil, to the great regret of all who knew him, having added to great natural parts, by an assiduous

, younger brother to the former, and fourth son to sir Wiiliam Davenant, was educated at Magdalen hall, in the university of Oxford, where he took the degree of bachelor of arts, July 19, 1677. He translated into English from the French a book entitled, “Animadversions upon the famous Greek and Latin Historians,” written by the celebrated Mr. la Mothe le Vayer, tutor to the French king Louis XIII., which was very well received. He took the degree of master of arts July 5, 1680, and about the same time entering into holy orders, was presented to a living in the county of Surrey, by his patron Robert Wymondsole, of Putney, esq. with whom he travelled into France; and in the summer of 1681, as he was diverting himself by swimming in a river near Paris, he was unfortunately drowned in the sight of his pupil, to the great regret of all who knew him, having added to great natural parts, by an assiduous application to study, as much sound learning and true knowledge as could be expected in a person so young.

Jesuits, namely, one called Sancta Clara, alias Davenport, a dangerous person and Franciscan friar, who hath written a popish and seditious book, entitled, ‘ Dens,

, a learned Englishman, was born at Coventry, in Warwickshire, about 1598, and educated in grammar-learning at a school in that city. He was sent to Merton-college in Oxford at fifteen years of age; where, spending two years, he, upon an invitation from some Romish priest, afterwards went to Doway. He remained there for some time; and then going to Ypres, he entered into the order of Franciscans among the Dutch there, in 1617. After several removals from place to place, he became a missionary into England, where he went by the name of Franciscus a Sancta Clara; and at length was made one of the chaplains to Henrietta Maria, the royal consort of Charles I. Here he exerted himself to promote the cause of popery, by gaining disciples, raising money among the English catholics to carry on public matters abroad, and by writing books for the advancement of his religion and order. He was very eminent for his uncommon learning, being excellently versed in school-divinity, in fathers and councils, in philosophers, and in ecclesiastical and profane histories. He was, Wood tells us, a person of very free discourse, while his fellowlabourer in the same vineyard, Hugh Cressey, was reserved; of a lively and quick aspect, while Cressey was clouded and melancholy: all which accomplishments made him agreeable to protestants as well as papists. Archbishop Laud, it seems, had some knowledge of this person; for, in the seventh article of his impeachment, it is said, that “the said archbishop, for the advancement of popery and superstition within this realm, hath wittingly and willingly received, harboured, and relieved divers popish priests and Jesuits, namely, one called Sancta Clara, alias Davenport, a dangerous person and Franciscan friar, who hath written a popish and seditious book, entitled, ‘ Dens, Natura, Gratia,’ &c. wherein the thirtynine articles of the church of England, established by act of parliament, are much traduced and scandalized: that the said archbishop had divers conferences with him, while he was writing the said book,” &c. To which article, the archbishop made this answer: “I never saw that Franciscan friar, Sancta Clara, in my life, to the utmost of my memory, above four times or five at most. He was first brought to me by Dr. Lindsell: but 1 did fear, that he would never expound the articles so, that the church of England might have cause to thank him for it. He never came to me after, till he was almost ready to print another book, to prove that episcopacy was authorised in the church by divine right; and this was after these unhappy stirs began. His desire was, to have this book printed here; but at his several addresses to me for this, I still gave him this answer: That I did not like the way which the church of Rome went concerning episcopacy; that I would never consent, that any such book from the pen of a Romanist should be printed here; that the bishops of England are very well able to defend their own cause and calling, without any help from Rome, and would do so when they saw cause: and this is all the conference I ever had with him.” Davenport at this time absconded, and spent most of those years of trouble in obscurity, sometimes beyond the seas, sometimes at London, sometimes in the country, and sometimes at Oxford. After the restoration of Charles II. when the marriage was celebrated between him and Catherine of Portugal, Sancta Clara became one of her chaplains; and was for the third time chosen provincial of his order for England, where he died May 31, 1680, and was buried in the church-yard belonging to the Savoy. It was his desire, many years before his death, to retire to Oxford to die, purposely that his bones might be laid in St. Ebb’s churcb, to which the mansion of the Franciscans or grey-friars sometime joined, and in which several of the brethren were anciently interred, particularly those of his old friend John Day, a learned friar of his order, who was there buried in 165;s. He was the author of several works: 1. “Paraphrastiea expositio articulorum confessionis Anglicae:” this book was, w r e know not why, much censured by the Jesuits, who would fain have had it burnt; but beino-soon after licensed at Rome, all farther rumour about it stopped. 2. “Deus, Natura, Gratia sive, tractatus de praedestinatione, de mentis,” &c. this book was dedicated to Charles I. and Prynne contends, that the whole scope of it, as well as the paraphrastical exposition of the articles, reprinted at the end of it in 1635, was to reconcile the king, the church, and the articles of our religion, to the church of Rome. He published also a great number of other works, which are not now of consequence enough to be mentioned.

close of this synod, St. Dubricius, archbishop of Caerleon upon Usk, resigned his see to St. David, who translated it to Menevia, now called St. David’s. Here he died

, the patron of Wales, was the son of Xantus or Santus, prince of Ceretica, now Cardiganshire, and born about the close of the fifth century. Being brought up to the church, he was ordained priest; he then retired to the Isle of Wight, and for some time lived in the accustomed solitude of those times. From this he at length emerged, and went into Wales, where he preached to the Britons. He built a chapel at Glastonbury, and founded twelve monasteries, the principal of which was in the vale of Ross, near Menevia. Of this monastery frequent mention is made in the acts of the Irish saints. The rules he established for his monasteries were, as usual; rigid, but not so injudicious or absurd as some of the early monastic statutes. One of his penances was manual labour in agriculture, and, for some time at least, there was no accumulation of worldly goods, for whoever was admitted as a member, was enjoined to leave every thing of that kind behind him. When the synod of Brevy in Cardiganshire was held in the year 519, St. David was invited to it, and was one of its chief champions against Pelagianism. At the close of this synod, St. Dubricius, archbishop of Caerleon upon Usk, resigned his see to St. David, who translated it to Menevia, now called St. David’s. Here he died about the year 544 in a very advanced age. He is praised by his biographers for his eloquence and powers in conversion, and has, according to them, been in all succeeding ages the glory of the British church. He wrote the “Decrees of the Synod of Victoria,” which he called soon after he became bishop; the “Rules of his Monasteries;” some “Homilies,” and “Letters to king Arthur,” all of which have perished.

ich, as it happened, was not altogether false; for the magistrates of Basil, understanding at length who he was, about that time, dug tip his corpse, which, together

, a most extraordinary fanatic, was the son of a waterman of Ghent, and educated a glazier, or, as some say, a glass-painter. He began about 1525 to preach that he was the true Messiah, the third David, nephew of God, not after the flesh, but after the spirit. “The heavens,” he said, “being empty, he was sent to adopt children worthy of that kingdom and to restore Israel, not by death, as Christ, but by grace.” With the Sadducees, he denied eternal life, the resurrection, and the last judgment: with the Adamites, he was against marriage, and for a community of women: and with the followers of Manes, he thought that the body only, and not the soul, could be defiled with sin. According to him, the souk of unbelievers ought to be saved, and those of the apostles damned. Lastly, he affirmed it folly to believe that there was any sin in denying Jesus Christ; and ridiculed the martyrs for preferring death to apostacy. A prosecution being commenced against him and his followers, he fled first to Friesland, and from thence to Basil, where he lurked under the name of John Bruck. He died in that city in 1556, promising to his disciples, that he should rise again in three days; which, as it happened, was not altogether false; for the magistrates of Basil, understanding at length who he was, about that time, dug tip his corpse, which, together with his writings, they caused to be burned by the common executioner. This George David had many followers in his life-time, and it is even said that there are still some remains of them in Holstein, Friesland, and other countries, whose temper and conduct seem to discredit the exaggerated account which some writers have given of their founder.

a flat marble stone was laid over his grave, with a plain inscription at his own desire. His mother, who was daughter of sir John Turton, knt. is said to have been living

, an eminent and learned critic, was the son of a merchant in London, and born there April 22, 1679. After being educated in classical learning at the Charterhouse-school, he was, June 8, 1695, admitted of Queen’s-college in Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1698. On July 7, 1701, he was chosen fellow of his college and the year following took the degree of M. A. and was proctor in 1709. In 1711, having distinguished himself by several learned publications hereafter mentioned, he was collated by Moore, bishop of Ely, to the rectory of Fen-Ditton near Cambridge, and to a prebend in the church of Ely; taking the same year the degree of LL. D. Upon the death of Dr. James, or, as Bentham says, Dr. Humphrey Gower, he was, on March 23, 1716-17, chosen master of Queen’s-college; and created D. D. the same year, when George I. was at Cambridge. He died March 7, 1731-2, aged 53, and was buried in the chapel of his college, where a flat marble stone was laid over his grave, with a plain inscription at his own desire. His mother, who was daughter of sir John Turton, knt. is said to have been living in 1743.

t being prevented by death from finishing it, he recommended it in his will to the care of Dr. MeaJ, who put it into the hands of Dr. Thomas Bentley, that he might fit

This learned man was not, as far as we can find, the author of any original works, but only employed himself in publishing some correct editions of Greek and Latin authors of antiquity. In 1703 he published in octavo, 1. “Maximi Tyrii dissertationes, Gr. & Lat. ex interpretatione Heinsii,” &c. 2. “C. Julii Caesaris, et A. Hirtii quas extant omnia,” Cant. 1706, 4to; 1727; the latter the best edition. 3. “M. Minucii Felicis Octavius,” Cant. 1707, 8vo. This was printed again in 1712, 8vo, with the notes greatly enlarged and corrected, and the addition of Commodianus, a writer of the Cyprianic age. 4. He then projected new and beautiful editions of Cicero’s philosophical pieces, by way of supplement to what Graevius had published of that author; and accordingly published in 170y, his “Tusculanarum disputationum, libri quinque,” 8vo. This edition, and that of 1738, which is the fourth, have at the end the emendations of his intimate friend Dr. Bentley. The other pieces were published by our author in the following order: “De Natura Deorum,1713. “De divinauone & de fato,1721. “Academica,” 17-5. “De legibus,1727. “De finibus bonorum & malorum,” 17-8. These several pieces of Tully were printed in 8vo, in a handsome manner, were very favourably received, and have passed, most of them, through several editions. He had also gone as far as the middle of the third book of Cicero’s Offices; but being prevented by death from finishing it, he recommended it in his will to the care of Dr. MeaJ, who put it into the hands of Dr. Thomas Bentley, that he might fit and prepare it for the press. But the house where Dr. Bentley lodged, which was in the Strand, London, being set on fire through his carelessness, as it is said, by reading after he was in bed, Davies’s notes and emendations perished in the flames. 5. Another undertaking published by our learned author, which we have not already mentioned, was, “Lactantii Firmiani epitome divinarum institutionum,” Cantab. 1718, 8vo.

r of parliament, and enjoyed the esteem of Selden, Ben Jonson, and other men of learning and genius, who lamented his premature death in 1618.

, a poet and statesman, was the third son of John Davies, of Tisbury, in Wiltshire, not a tanner, as Anthony Wood asserts, but a gentleman, formerly of New Inn, and afterwards a practitioner of law in his native place. His mother was Mary, the daughter of Mr. Bennett, of Pitt-house in the same county. When not fifteen years of age he was sent to Oxford, in Michaelmas term 1585, where he was admitted a commoner of Queen’s college, and prosecuted his studies with perseverance and success. About the beginning of 1588 he removed to the Middle Temple, but returned to Oxford in 1590, and took the degree of B. A. At the Temple, while he did not neglect the study of the law, he rendered himself obnoxious to the discipline of the place by various youthful irregularities, and after being fined, was at last removed from commons. Notwithstanding this, he was called to the bar in 1595, but was again so indiscreet as to forfeit his privileges by a quarrel with Mr. Richard Martin, whom he beat in the Temple hall. For this offence he was in Feb. 1597-8 expelled by the unanimous sentence of the society. Martin was, like himself, a wit and a poet, and had once been expelled for improper behaviour. Both, however, outlived their follies, and rose to considerable eminence in their profession. Martin became reader of the society, recorder of London, and member of parliament, and enjoyed the esteem of Selden, Ben Jonson, and other men of learning and genius, who lamented his premature death in 1618.

1626, in the fifty-seventh year of his age. He had previously supped with the lord keeper Coventry, who gave him assurances of being chief justice of England. He was

Sir John Davies lived four years after this publication, employed, probably, in the duties of his profession; and at the time when higher honours were within his reach, he died suddenly of an apoplexy in the night of the 7th of December 1626, in the fifty-seventh year of his age. He had previously supped with the lord keeper Coventry, who gave him assurances of being chief justice of England. He was buried in St. Martin’s Church in the Fields, where a monument was erected to his memory, which appears to have been destroyed when the old church was pulled down.

He married, while in Ireland, Eleanor, the third daughter of lord Audley, by whom he had one son, who was an idiot and died young, and a daughter, Lucy, who was married

He married, while in Ireland, Eleanor, the third daughter of lord Audley, by whom he had one son, who was an idiot and died young, and a daughter, Lucy, who was married to Ferdinando lord Hastings, afterwards earl of Huntingdon. Sir John’s lady appears to have been an enthusiast; a volume of her prophecies was published in 1649, 4to. Anthony Wood informs us that she foretold the death of her husband, who turned the matter off with a jest. She was harshly treated during the republic for her officious prophecies, and is said to have been confined several years in Bethlem hospital, and in the Tower of London, where she suffered all the rigour that could be inflicted by those who would tolerate no impostures but their own. She died in 1652, and was interred near her husband in St. Martin’s church. The late earl of Huntingdon informed lord Mountmorres the historian of the Irish parliament, that sir John Davies did not appear to have acquired any landed property in Ireland from his great employments. The character of sir John Davies as a lawyer, is that of great ability and learning. As a politician he stands unimpeached of corruption or servility, and his “Tracts” are valued as the result of profound knowledge and investigation. They were republished with some originals in 1786 by Mr. George Chalmers, who prefixed a Life of the Author, to which the present sketch is greatly indebted.

igrams, nearly all that he had written. The lord Dorset recommended an edition of his works to Tate, who published the “Nosce Teipsum,” with the preface. In 1773 another

According to Wood, he wrote a version of some of the Psalms, which is probably lost. It is more certain that he wrote epigrams, which were added to Mario w’s translation of Ovid’s Epistles, printed at Micldleburgh in 1596. Mr. Ellis has given two of them among his “Specimens,” which do not excite much curiosity for the rest. Mar-low’s volume is exceedingly scarce, which may be accounted for by the following information: in 1599, the hall of the stationers underwent as great a purgation as was carried on in don Quixote’s library. Marston’s Pygmalion, Marlow’s Ovid, the satires of Hall and Marston, the epigrams of Davies, &c. were ordered for immediate conflagration by the prelates Whitgift and Bancroft. There are other pieces frequently ascribed to sir John Davies, which, Mr. Ritson thinks, belong to John Davies of Hereford, but a& our author superintended the edition of his poems printed about four years before his death, he included all that he thought proper to acknowledge, and probably, if we except the epigrams, nearly all that he had written. The lord Dorset recommended an edition of his works to Tate, who published the “Nosce Teipsum,” with the preface. In 1773 another edition was published by Mr. Thomas Davies from a copy corrected by Mr. William Thomson, the poet, including the “Acrostics” and “Orchestra.” The whole have been added to the late edition of the Poets.

ed on this unprosperous business, or when he died, we have not been able to discover. Mr. D'Israeli, who has taken much pains to rescue his name from oblivion, suspects

, a Welsh clergyman, was born in Tre'r-Abbot, in Whiteford parish, Flintshire. Of his personal history little is known, except that he was a good scholar, very conversant in the literary history of his country, and very unfortunate in attempting to turn his knowlege to advantage. He was a vehement foe to Popery, Arianism, and Socinianism, and of the most fervent loyalty. to George I. and the Hanoverian succession. Owing to some disgust, he quitted his native place, and probably his profession when he came to London, as he subscribes himself “counsellor-at-law;” and in one of his volumes has a long digression on law and law-writers. Here he commenced author in the humblest form, not content with dedicating to the great, but hawking his books in person from door to door, where he was often repulsed with rudeness, and seldom appears to have been treated with kindness or liberality. How long he carried on this unprosperous business, or when he died, we have not been able to discover. Mr. D'Israeli, who has taken much pains to rescue his name from oblivion, suspects that his mind became disordered from poverty and disappointment. He appears to have courted the Muses, who certainly were not very favourable to his addresses. The most curious of his works consist of some volumes under the general title of “Athenæ Britannicæ,” 8vo, 1715, &c. a kind of bibliographical, biographical, and critical work, “the greatest part (says Baker, the antiquary) borrowed from modern historians, but containing some things more uncommon, and not easily to be met with.” The first of these volumes, printed in 1715, is entitled Ειχων Μιχρο-βιβλιχε, sive Icon Libellorum, or a Critical History of Pamphlets.“In this he styles himself” a gentleman of the inns of, court.“The others are entitled” Athenæ Britannicæ, or a Critical History of the Oxford and Cambridge Writers and Writings, &c. by M. D.“London, 1716, 8vo. They are all of so great rarity, that Dr. Farmer never saw but one volume, the first, nor Baker but three, which were sent to him as a great curiosity by the earl of Oxford, and are now deposited in St. John’s college, Cambridge. In the British Museum there are seven. From the” Icon Libellorum," the only volume we have had an opportunity of perusing attentively, the author appears to have been well acquainted with English authors, their works and editions, and to have occasionally looked into the works of foreign bibliographers.

y, which he held to his death, Feb. 4, 1761. He was succeeded in his post by the rev. Dr. S. Finley, who died on the 17th of July 1766, being the fourth president that

, an American clergyman of dissenting principles, and known by three volumes of sermons, in 8vo, edited by Dr. Gibbons, of London, was born November 3, 1721, in the county of Newcastle in Delaware, in America, and was early designed by his parents for the ministry, in which he became very popular. In 1759 he succeeded Mr. Jonathan Edwards as president of his college of New Jersey, which he held to his death, Feb. 4, 1761. He was succeeded in his post by the rev. Dr. S. Finley, who died on the 17th of July 1766, being the fourth president that filled that chair in the short space of less than nine years. In the sermons above mentioned Mr. Davies deserves little praise for style, and his editor not much for judgment of selection.

, the son of a physician who practised in Wales, was born at Shrewsbury, and educated at

, the son of a physician who practised in Wales, was born at Shrewsbury, and educated at Eton, whence he removed to King’s college, Cambridge, and regularly took the degrees of A. B. 1732, A. M. 1737, and D. D. 175y. He was early noticed by his school-fellow, Cornwallis, archbishop of Canterbury, when bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, who appointed him his chaplain, and collated him to a canonry of Lithfield, and in 1751 presented him to the mastership of St. John’s hospital, Lichfield. He was also archdeacon of Derby, and rector of Kingsland, in Herefordshire, in the gift of his family. He died Feb. 6, 1769, much esteemed for his learning and amiable disposition; and his numerous poems, both printed and manuscript, bear ample testimony to his talents. He wrote several of the anonymous imitations of Horace in Buncombe’s edition, 1767, and at the end of vol. IV. is given the character of the ancient Romans from a poem by him, styled “The Progress of Science.” He has many poems in Dodsley’s and Nichols’s collections, and one, in Latin, preserved in the “Alumni Etonenses.” Mr. Pennant also, in his “Tour in Wales,” vol. II. p. 422, has preserved some animated lines by Dr. Davies on Caractacus, which he says were delivered almost extempore at one of the annual meetings held on Caer Caradoc some years ago by gentlemen from different parts, to celebrate the name of that renowned British chieftain, in prose or verse.

, a man of considerable talents, and who prided himself on being through life “a companion of his superiors,”

, a man of considerable talents, and who prided himself on being through life “a companion of his superiors,” was born about 1712. In 1728 and 1729 he was at the university of Edinburgh, completing his education, and became, as Dr. Johnson used to say of him, “learned enough for a clergyman.” That, however, was not his destination, for in 1736 we find him among the dramatis personae of Lillo’s celebrated tragedy of “Fatal Curiosity,” at the theatre in the Hay market, where he was the original representative of young Wilmot, under the management of Henry Fielding. He afterwards commenced bookseller in Duke’s court, opposite the church of St. Martin-in-the-fields, and afterwards in Round court in the Strand, but met with misfortunes which induced him to return to the theatre. For several years he belonged to various companies at York, Dublin, and other places, particularly at Edinburgh, where he appears to have been at one time the manager of the theatre. At York he married miss Yarrow, daughter of a performer there, whose beauty was not more remarkable than the blamelessness of her conduct and the amiableness of her manners. In 1753 he returned to London, and with Mrs. Davies was engaged at Drury-lane, where they remained for several years in good estimation with the town, and played many characters, if not with great excellence, at least with propriety and decency. Churchill, in his indiscriminate satire, has attempted to fix some degree of ridicule on Mr. Davies’s performance, which, just or not, had the effect of driving him from the stage, which about 1762 he exchanged for a shop in Russel-street, Covent Garden; but his efforts in trade were not crowned with the success which his abilities in his profession merited. In 1778 he became a bankrupt; when, such was the regard enterr tained for him by his friends, that they readily consented to his re-establishment; and none of them, as he says himself, were more active to serve him than those who had suffered most by his misfortunes. Yet, all their efforts might possibly have been fruitless if his powerful and firm friend Dr. Johnson had not exerted himself to the utmost in his behalf. He called upon all over whom he had any influence to assist Tom Davies; and prevailed on. Mr. Sheridan, patentee of Drury-lane theatre, to give him a benefit, which he granted on the most liberal terms. In. 1780, by a well-timed publication, the “Life of David Garrick,” which has passed through several editions, Mr. Davies acquired much fame, and some money. He afterwards published “Dramatic Miscellanies,” if) 3 yols. of which a second edition appeared a few days only before the author’s death. His other works are, 1. “Some Memoirs of Mr. Henderson.” 2. “A Review of lord Chesterfield’s Characters.” 3. A “Life of Massinger.” 4. Lives of Dr. John Eacharo, sir John Davies, and Mr. Lillo, prefixed to editions of their works, published by Mr. Davies; and fugitive pieces without number in prose and verse in the St. James’s Chronicle, and almost all the public newspapers. The compiler of this article in the last edition of this Dictionary, informs us that he “knew him well, and has passed many convivial hours in his company at a social meeting, where his lively sallies of pleasantry used to set the table in a roar of harmless merriment. The last time he visited them he wore the appearance of a spectre; and, sensible of his approaching end, took a solemn valediction of all the company.” Mr. Davies died the 5th of May, 1785, and was buried, by his own desire, in the vault of St. Paul, Covent Garden, close by the side of his next door neighbour, the late Mr. Grignion, watchmaker. Mrs. Davies died Feb. 9, 1801. Tom Davies, as he was familiarly called, was a good-natured and conscientious man in business as in private life, but his theatrical bias created a levity not consistent with prudence. Had he been rich, he would have been liberal: Dr. Campbell used to say he was not a bookseller, but a gentleman who dealt in books"

uke of Guise had the command of that place. Davila sent a trumpet to him to ask for a fugitive slave who had run off with a horse of great value, which was only a pretext

, a Spanish gentleman, native of Placentia, was commander in the order of Alcantara, and general of cavalry for Charles V. at the siege of Metz in 1552. The duke of Guise had the command of that place. Davila sent a trumpet to him to ask for a fugitive slave who had run off with a horse of great value, which was only a pretext for gaining an observation of the town. The duke of Guise was not a man to be so easily imposed upon: however, he sent him back the horse, which he ransomed with his own money; and, as the slave had pushed on farther, he sent him word, that “he was already a good way in France; and that a slave became free on setting his foot on that ground.” He wrote historical memoirs of the war carried on by that emperor against the protestants of Germany, printed for the first time in Spain, 1546, and afterwards translated into Latin and French. The president Thuanus censures him for his partiality in favour of Charles V. There is also by him, “Memoires de la Guerre d'Afrique.

, a celebrated historian, was the son of Anthony Davila, who was constable of the kingdom of Cyprus when it was under the

, a celebrated historian, was the son of Anthony Davila, who was constable of the kingdom of Cyprus when it was under the power of the Venetians; but having lost his situation by the conquest made by the Turks in 1570, retired to Venice, and being possessed of some property at Sacco in the territory of Padua, determined to settle there. His son was born in this place in 1576, and named Henry Catherine, in honour of Henry III. and Catherine de Medicis, who had shown marks of great respect and kindness for the constable, when he was in France a little before the war of Cyprus. When young Davila had attained his seventh year, his father sent him to France, where he was placed under the care of the marechal D‘Hemery, who had married his father’s sister. D’Hemery, who resided at Villars in Normandy, gave his nephew an excellent education, and at a suitable age introduced him at court as one of the pages to the queen mother. At the age of eighteen, he served in the war against the League, and distinguished himself by an ardour which frequently endangered his life. In 1599, the war being concluded by the peace of Vervins, Davila was recalled by his father and by the Venetians, and returned to Italy. The republic of Venice entrusted him with various employments, both military and civil, such as the government of Candy, and of Dalmatia, and what pleased him most, the title of constable was confirmed to him, and in the senate and on all public occasions he took precedence after the doge. The last office to which he was appointed, but which he never enjoyed, was that of commander of Crema. On his way to this place, the different towns and villages, through which he was to pass, were ordered to furnish him with a change of horses and carriages; but when he arrived at a place near Verona, and requested the usual supplies, they were denied; and on his remonstrating, a brutal fellow shot him dead with a pistol. The assassin was immediately killed by one of Davila’s sons, who happened to be with him. This misfortune happened in 1631, exactly a year after he had published, in Italian, his history of the civil wars of France, under the title “Istoria delle Guerre civili di Francia,” Venice, 4to, reprinted in 1634, 1638, and often since. The finest editions are tnose of Paris, 1644, 2 vols. folio, and of Venice, 1733, 2 vols. folio. We have two old translations into English, 1647, by Aylesbury, and 1678. by dottrel, folio; but the best is that by Farneworth, 1755, 2 vols. 4to. The French have likewise translations by Baudouin, 1642, and by Grosley and the abbe Mallet, 1757, 3 vols. 4to, and there is a Latin translation by Cornazano, Rome, 1743, 3 vols. 4to.

t, as the noble lord goes on in his “Letters on the Study of History,” 1. v. “the suspicious person, who should reject this historian upon such general inducements as

This history is divided into fifteen books, and contains every thing worth notice that passed, from the death of Henry II. 1559, to the peace of Vervins 1598. Lord Bolingbroke calls it a noble history, and says, that he “should not scruple to confess it in many respects equal to that of Livy.” Davila has indeed been accused of too much refinement and subtlety, in developing the secret motives of actions, in laying the causes of events too deep, and deducing them often through a series of progression too complicated, and too artfully wrought. But yet, as the noble lord goes on in his “Letters on the Study of History,” 1. v. “the suspicious person, who should reject this historian upon such general inducements as these, would have no grace to oppose his suspicions to the authority of the first duke of Epernon, who had been an actor, and a principal actor too, in many of the scenes that Davila recites. Girard, secretary to this duke, and no contemptible biographer, relates, that this history came down to the place where the old man resided in Gascony, a little before his death; that he read it to him; that the duke confirmed the truth of the narrations in it; and seemed only surprised, by what means the author could be so well informed of the most secret councils and measures of those times.

Previous Page

Next Page