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

While Mr. Chandler was minister of the congregation at Peckham, some gentlemen of the several denominations of dissenters in the city, came to a resolution to set up and support a weekly evening lecture at the Old Jewry, for the winter half year. The subjects to be treated in this lecture were the evidences of natural and revealed religion, and answers to the principal objections against them. Two of the most eminent young ministers among the dissenters were appointed for the execution of this design, of which Mr. Chandler was one, and Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Lardner, who is so justly celebrated for his learned writings, was another. But after some time this lecture was dropped, and another of the same kind set up, to be preached by one person only, it being judged that it might then be conducted with more consistency of reason and uniformity of design; and Mr. Chandler was appointed for this service. In the course of this lecture he preached some sermons on the confirmation which miracles gave to the divine mission of Christ, and the truth of his religion; and vindicated the argument against the objections of Collins, in his “Discourse of the grounds and reasons of the Christian religion.” These sermons, by the advice of a friend, he enlarged, and threw into the form of a continued treatise, and published in 1725, 8vo, under the following title: “A Vindication of the Christian Religion, in two parts, I. A discourse on the nature and use of Miracles II. An answer to a late book,entitled a Discourse on the grounds and reasons of the Christian religion.” Having presented a copy of this book to archbishop Wake, his grace expressed his sense of the value of the favour, in a letter, which is an honourable testimony to Mr. Chandler’s merit. It appears from the letter, that the archbishop did not then know that the author was any other than a bookseller; for he says: “I cannot but own myself to be surprised to see so much good learning and just reasoning in a person of your profession; and do think it a pity you should not rather spend your time in writing books than in selling them. But I am glad, since your circumstances oblige you to the latter, that you do not wholly omit the former.” Besides gaining the archbishop’s approbation, Mr. Chandler’s performance considerably advanced his reputation in general, and contributed to his receiving an invitation, about 1726, to settle as a minister with the congregation in the Old Jewry, which was one of the most respectable in London. Here he continued, first as assistant, and afterwards as pastor, for the space of forty years, and discharged the duties of the ministerial office with great assiduity and ability, being much esteemed and regarded by his own congregation, and acquiring a distinguished reputation, both as a preacher and a writer.

, a celebrated traveller, the son of an opulent protestant jeweller, was born at Paris Nov. 16, 1643. For some time it is probable that he followed his father’s profession; but he was only twenty-two years old when, in 1664 (not 1665, as Niceron says), he went to the East Indies. There he remained for six years, passing his time chiefly in Persia. He published no regular account of this voyage, which he modestly says he conceived might be uninteresting, but confined himself to a detail of certain events of which he had been an eye-witness. This was contained in a twelves volume printed at Paris in 1671, the year after he returned, under the title of “Le Couronnement de Soliman II. roi de Perse, et ce qui s’est passe de plus memorable darts les deux premieres anne*es de son regne.” In this work he was assisted by a Persian nobleman, Mirza Sefi, one of the most learned men of the kingdom, who was at that time in disgrace, and confined to his palace at Ispahan, where Mr. Chardin was entertained and instructed by him in the Persian language and history. It is introduced by a dedication to the king which, according to the “Carpenteriana,” was written by M. Charpentier. M. Petis de la Croix criticised the work with soijae severity, as to the orthography and etymology of some Persian words, and Tavernier objected to the title, insisting that Soliman never wore the crown; but Chardin found an able defender in P. Ange de la Brosse.

As to his genius, it must ever be the subject of admiration, whether he was, or was not, the author of the poems ascribed to Rowley. If we look at the poems avowedly his own, together with his productions in prose, where shall we find such and so many indubitable proofs of genius at an early age, struggling against many difficulties? Let us contemplate him as a young man, without classical education, and who knew nothing of literary society, but during the few months of his residence in London; and if to this we add what has been most decidedly proved, that he was not only the author of the poems attributed to Rowley, but consumed his early days in the laborious task of disguising them in the garb of antiquity, perpetually harassed by suspicion and in dread of discovery; if likewise we reflect that the whole of his career closed before he had completed his eighteenth year, we must surely allow that he was one of the most extraordinary young men of modern times, and deserves to be placed high among those instances of premature talents recorded by Kleferus in his “Bibliotheca Eruditorurn Praecocium,” and by Baillet in his “Enfans Celebres.” Still our admiration should be chastened by confining it to the single point of ChtUterton’s extreme youth. If we go farther, and consider Rowley’s poems as the most perfect productions of any age; if, with dean Milles, we prefer him to Homer, Virgil, Spenser, and Shakspeare, we go far beyond the bounds of sober criticism, or rather we defy its laws. Wonderful as those poems are, when considered as the productions of a boy, many heavy deductions must be made from them, if we consider them as the productions of a man, of one who has bestowed labour as well as contributed genius, and who has learned to polish and correct, who would not have admitted such a number of palpable imitations and plagiarisms, and would have altered or expunged a multitude of tame, prosaic, and bald lines and metres.

, a celebrated French preacher, was born at Paris Jan. 3, 1652, and entered the society of Jesuits in 1667, where he made a considerable figure, and afterwards taught classical literature and rhetoric at Orleans but his talents being peculiarly calculated for the pulpit, he became one of the most popular preachers of his time in the churches of Paris. It became the fashion to say that Bourdaioue was the Corneille, and Cheminais the Racine of preachers; but his fame was eclipsed by the superior merit of Massillon. When on account of his health he was obliged to desist from his public services, he went every Sunday, as long as he was able, to the country to instruct and exhort the poor. He died in the flower of his age Sept. 15, 1689. Bretonneau, another preacher of note, published his “Sermons” in 1690, 2 vols. 12mo, which were often reprinted, and Bretonneau added a third volume, but the fourth and fifth, which appeared in 1729, were neither written by Cheminais, nor edited by Bretonneau. The only other production of Cheminais was his “Sentimens de Piete,” 1691, 12mo, but it is said he had a turn for poetry, and wrote some verses of the lighter kind.

, a learned philosopher, and one of the most eminent magistrates of Geneva, was born there in 1642. He was the first who taught the philosophy of Descartes at Saumur. In 1669, he was recalled to Geneva, and gave lectures there with great applause. Chouet became afterwards counsellor and secretary of state at Geneva, and wrote a history of that republic. He died September 17, 1731, aged 89. His publications are, “An Introduction to Logic,” in Latin, 1672, 8vo; “Theses Physicae de varia Astrorum luce,” 1674, 4to; “Memoire succinct sur la Reformation,” 1694; “Reponses a des Questions de Milord Townsend sur Geneve ancienne fakes, en 1696, et publiees en 1774.” Besides these, he left in ms. in 3 vols. folio, a work, entitled “Diverses Recherches sur l'Hist. cle Geneve, sur son Gouvernement et sa Constitution.”

, one of the most learned and eloquent of the fathers, was born at Antioch, of a noble family, about the year 354. His father, Secundus, dying when he was very young, the care of his education was left to his mother, Anthusa. He was designed at first for the bar, and was sent to learn rhetoric under Libanius; who had such an opinion of his eloquence, that when asked who would be capable of succeeding him in the school, he answered, “John, if the Christians had not stolen him from us.” He soon, however, quitted all thoughts of the bar, and being instructed in the principles of the Christian religion, was afterwards baptized by Meletius, and ordained by that bishop to be a reader in the church of Antioch, where he converted his two friends, Theodorus and Maximus. While he was yet young, he formed a resolution of entering ugon a monastic life, and in spite of all remonstrances from his mother, about the year 374, he betook himself to the neighbouring mountains, where he lived four years with an ancient hermit; then retired to a more secret part of the desert, and shut himself up in a cave, in which situation he spent two whole years more; till at length, worn out almost by continual watchings, fastings, and other severities, he was forced to return to Antioch, to his old way of living.

Chrysostom was undoubtedly one of the most distinguished of the Greek fathers, and one of the most eloquent preachers of his time. In his works he appears to have aimed earnestly at reformation of manners, and much of the manners of the times may be gleamed from his various writings. We have seen that the intemperance of his zeal sometimes furnished his enemies with advantages which they wduld have sought without success in the purity of his life. He is said to have been from his youth of a peevish and morose temper" but he was open and sincere, spoke what he thought, and was regardless of consequences. The machinations, however, of his enemies, prevailed at last, and shortened the life of one of the most learned, eloquent, pious, and charitable men of his age. His language, says Dr. Blair, is pure, and his style highly figured. He is copious, smooth, and sometimes pathetic. But he fetains, at the same time, much of that character which has been always attributed to the Asiatic eloquence, which is diffuse and redundant to a great degree, and often over-wrought and tumid. He may be read, however, with advantage, for the eloquence of the pulpit, as being freer from false ornaments than the Latin fathers.

We have no account of the precise time of Cicero’s marriage with Terentia, but it is supposed to have been celebrated immediately after his return from his travels to Italy, when he was about thirty years old. He was now disengaged from his quaestorship in Sicily, by which office he had gained an immediate right to the senate, and an actual admission into it during life; and settled again in Rome, where he employed himself constantly in defending the persons and properties of its citizens, and was indeed a general patron. Five years were almost elapsed since Cicero’s election to the qusestorship, the proper interval prescribed by law, before he could hold the next office of sedile; to which he was now, in his thirty-seventh year, elected by the unanimous suffrage of all the tribes. But before his entrance into the office, he undertook the celebrated prosecution of C. Verres, the late praetor of Sicily; who was charged with many flagrant acts of injustice, rapine, and cruelty, during his triennial government of that island. This was one of the most memorable transactions of his life; for which he was greatly and justly celebrated by antiquity, and for which he will in all ages be admired and esteemed by the friends of mankind. The public administration was at that time, in every branch of it, most infamously corrupt, and the prosecution of Verres was both seasonable and popular, as it was likely to give some check to the oppressions of the nobility, and administer relief to the distressed subjects. Cicero had no sooner agreed to undertake it, than an unexpected rival started up, one Q,. Caecilius, a Sicilian by birth, who had been quaestor to Verres; and by a pretence of personal injuries received from him, and a particular knowledge of his crimes, claimed a preference to Cicero in the task of accusing him, or at least to bear a joint share with him. But this pretended enemy was in reality a secret friend, employed by Verres himself to get the cause into his hands in order to betray it: and on the first bearing Cicei'o easily shook off this weak antagonist, rallying his character and pretensions with a great deal of wit and humour, and the cause being committed to Cicero, an hundred and ten days were granted to him by law for preparing the evidence; to collect which, he was obliged to go to Sicily, in order to examine witnesses, and facts to support the indictment. Aware that all Verres’s art would be employed to gain time, in hopes to tire out the prosecutors, and allay the heat of the public resentment, he took along with him his cousin L. Cicero, that he might be enabled to finish his

Augustus, however, now made him a priest or augur, as well as one of those magistrates who presided over the coinage of the public money: and no sooner became the sole master of Rome, than he took him for his partner in the consulship: and by these favours to the son, Augustus made some atonement for his treachery to the father. Soon after his consulship, he was made proconsul of Asia, or, as Appian says, of Syria, one of the most considerable provinces of the empire: from which time we find no farther mention of him in history. He died probably soon after; before a maturity of age and experience had given him an opportunity of retrieving the reproach of his intemperance, and distinguishing himself in the councils of the state. But from the honours already mentioned, it is evident that his life, though blemished by some scandal, yet was not void of dignity; and, amidst all the vices with which he is charged, he is allowed to have retained his father’s wit and politeness.

, one of the most learned divines in the sixteenth century, was born at the castle of Chiaria, near Brescia, 1495. He entered among the religious of Mount Cassino, and appeared with great distinction at the council of Trent. Paul III. gave him the archbishopric of Fuligno, where he died May 28, 1555, aged sixty, in great reputation for sanctity. He left: “Scholia in Biblia,” Venice, 1564, fol. “Scholia in N. Test.” 1544, 8vo, two learned and very useful works, for correcting the text of the Vulgate, and explaining difficult passages in the Scripture; one folio volume of Latin Sermons, and two in 4to. His Letters, with two “Opuscula,” vyere published at Modena, 1705, 4to.

A considerable number of these “Select Psalms and Hymns” having been dispersed by the Society for promoting Christian knowledge, before the alteration of the doxologies was taken notice of, he was charged with a design of imposing upon the society, whereas it was answered that the edition of them had been prepared by him for the use of his own parish only, before the society had thoughts of purchasing any of the copies: and as the usual forms of doxology were not established by any legal authority, ecclesiastical or civil, in this he had not offended. Robinson, however, bishop of London, so highly disliked this alteration, that he thought proper to publish a letter to the incumbents of all churches and chapels in his diocese, against their using any new forms of doxology. The letter is dated Dec. 26, 1718, and begins thus: “Reverend brethren, there is an instance of your care and duty, which I conceive myself at this time highly obliged to offer, and you to regard, as necessary for the preservation of the very foundations of our faith. Some persons, seduced, I fear, by the strong delusions of pride and self-conceit, have lately published new forms of doxology, entirely agreeable to those of some ancient heretics, who impiously denied a trinity of persons in the unity of the Godhead, I do therefore warn and charge it upon your souls, as you hope to obtain mercy from God the Father through the merits of Jesus Christ our Lord, and by the sanctification of the Holy Ghost, three persons and one God blessed for ever, that you employ your best endeavours to prevail with your several flocks, to have a great abhorrence for the abovementioned new forms, and particularly that you do not suffer the same to be used, either in your churches, or in any schools, where you are to prevent that most pernicious abuse, &c.” This letter was animadverted upon by Whiston, in “A Letter of Thanks to the right reverend the lord bishop of London, for his late letter to his clergy against the use of new forms of Doxology, &c.” Jan. 17, 1719; and in a pamphlet entitled “An humble apology for St. Paul and the other apostles; or, a vindication of them and their doxologies from the charge of heresy. By Cornelius Paets,” 1719. Soon after came out an ironical piece entitled “A Defence of the Bishop of London, in answer to Winston’s Letter of Thanks, &c. addressed to the archbishop of Canterbury. To which is added, a Vindication of Dr. Sacheverell’s late endeavour to turn Mr. Winston out of his church.” Winston’s Letter of Thanks occasioned likewise the two following pieces; viz. “The lord bishop of London’s Letter to his Clergy vindicated, <kc. by a Believer, 1719;” and “A seasonable review of Mr. Winston’s account of primitive Doxologies, &c. by a Presbyter, &c. 1719.” This presbyter was supposed to be Dr. William Berriman. To the latter Whiston replied in a second letter to the bishop of London; and the author of “The seasonable Review, &c.” answered him in a second Review, &c. As to Clarke’s conduct in this affair, we are not surprised to find Whiston declaring it to be one of the most Christian attempts towards somewhat of reformation, upon the primitive foot, that he ever ventured upon: but he adds,“that the bishop of London, in the way of modern authority, was quite too hard for Dr. Clarke, in the way of primitive Christianity.”

About this time Dr. Clarke was presented by the lord Lechmere, chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, to the mastership of Wigston’s hospital in Leicester. In 1724 he published seventeen sermons preached on several occasions, eleven of which were never before printed; and the year following a sermon preached at the parish church of St. James, upon the erecting a charity-school for the education of women servants. In 1727, upon the death of sir Isaac Newton, he was offered by the court the place of master of the mint, worth communibus annis 1200 or 1500l. a year. Upon this offer, Whiston tells us, the doctor advised with his friends, and particularly with Mr. Emlyn and himself, ahout accepting or refusing it. They advised him against accepting it, as what he wanted not; as what was entirely remote from his profession, and would hinder the success of his ministry. He was himself generally of the same opinion with them, could not thoroughly reconcile himself to this secular preferment, and therefore absolutely refused it. Whiston seems to wonder that Clarke’s admirers should lay so little stress upon this refusal, as to mention it not at all, or at least very negligently; while “he takes it,” he says, “to be one of the most glorious actions of his life, and to afford undeniable conviction that he vvas in earnest in his religion.”

We have nothing remaining of his works, of whose genuineness we can be certain, excepting one epistle, which Dr. Lardner thinks was written in the year 95 or 96. It was written to the church of Corinth, in the name of the church of Rome, to quiet some disturbances which had been raised by unruly brethren in the former; and to reestablish and confirm them in that faith which had been delivered to them by the apostles, but from which some of them had revolted. This epistle has usually been esteemed one of the most valuable monuments which have come down to us of ecclesiastical antiquity, and affords ample testimony to the antiquity, genuineness, or authority of the books of the New Testament, while it bears itself all the characters of primitive simplicity. References to, and quotations from it, are often to be found among the early writers for Christianity. Here Clemens exhorts the Corinthians to be united, and at peace with one another he enjoins obedience particularly, and submission to their spiritual governors he declares those who had formed cabals against their pastors s and had troubled the church with their seditions, utterly unworthy of the name of Christians: he points out to them the fatal consequences of such divisions: he presses them to return immediately to their duty, by submitting to their rightful pastors, and practising all humility, kindness, and charity one towards another.

, lord chief-justice of England, and one of the most eminent lawyers this kingdom has produced, was descended from an ancient family in Norfolk, and born at Mileham, in that county, 1549. His father was Robert Coke, esq. of Mileham; his mother, Winifred, daughter and coheiress of William Knightley, of Margrave Knightley, in Norfolk. At ten years of age he was sent to a free -school at Norwich; and from thence removed to Trinity-college, in Cambridge. He remained in the university about four years, and went from thence to Clifford Vinn, in London and the year after was entered a student of the Inner Temple. We are told that the first proof he gave of the quickness of his penetration, and the solidity of his judgment, was his stating the cook’s case of the Temple, which it seems had puzzled the whole house, so clearly and exactly, that it was taken notice of and admired by the bench. It is not at all improbable that this might promote his being called early to the bar, at the end of six years, which in those strict times was held very extraordinary. He himself has informed us that the first cause he moved in the King? s-bench, was in Trinity-term, 1578, when he was counsel for Mr. Edward Denny, vicar of Northingham, in Norfolk, in an action of scandalum magnatum, brought against him by Henry lord Cromwell. About this time he was appointed reader of Lyon’s-inn, when his learned lectures were much attended, for three years. His reputation increased so fast, and with it his practice, that when he had been at the bar but a few years, he thought himself in a condition to pretend to a lady of one of the best families, and at the same time of the best fortune in Norfolk, Bridget, daughter and coheiress of John Preston, esq. whom he soon married, and with whom he had in all about 30,000l.

, was an ingenious botanist, whose family is of ancient standing in the north. Peter and James were the great grandsons of Peter Collinson, who lived on his paternal estate called Hugal-Hall, or Height of Hugal, near Windermere Lake, in the parish of Stavely, about ten miles from Kendal in Westmoreland. Peter, who vvus born Jan. 14, 1693-4, whilst a youth, discovered his attachment to natural history. He began early to make a collection of dried specimens of plants; had access to the best gardens at that time in the neighbourhood of London; and became early acquainted with the most eminent naturalists of his time; the doctors Derham, Woodward, Dale, Lloyd, and Sloane, were amongst his friends. Among the great variety of articles which form, that superb collection, now (by the wise disposition of sir Hans Sloane and the munificence of parliament) the British Museum, small was the number of those with whose history Collinson was not well acquainted, he being one of those few who visited sir Hans at all times familiarly; their inclinations and pursuits in respect to natural history being the same, a firm friendship had early been established between, them. Peter Collinson was elected F. R. S. Dec. 12, 1728 and perhaps was one of the most diligent and useful members, not only in supplying them with many curious observations, but in promoting and preserving a most extensive correspondence with learned and ingenious foreigners, in all countries, and on every useful subject. Besides his attention to natural history, he minuted every striking hint that occurred either in reading or conversation; and from this source he derived much information, as there were very few men of learning and ingenuity, who were not of his acquaintance at home; and most foreigners of eminence in natural history, or in arts and sciences, were recommended to his notice and friendship. His diligence and economy of time was such, that though he never appeared to be in a hurry, he maintained an extensive correspondence with great punctuality; acquainting the learned and ingenious in distant parts of the globe, with the discoveries and improvements in natural history in this country, and receiving the like information from the most eminent persons in almost every other. His correspondence with the ingenious Cadwallader Golden, esq, of NewYork, and the celebrated Dr. Franklin of Philadelphia, furnish instances of the benefit resulting from his attention to all improvements. The latter of these gentlemen communicated his first essays on electricity to Collinson, in a series of letters, which were then published, and have been reprinted in a late edition of the doctor’s works. Perhaps, at the present period, the account procured of the management of sheep in Spain, published in the Gentleman’s Magazine for May and June 1764, may not be considered among the least of the benefits accruing from his extensive and inquisitive correspondence. His conversation, cheerful and usefully entertaining, rendered his acquaintance much desired by those who had a relish for natural history, or were studious in cultivating rural improvements; and secured him the intimate friendship of some of the most eminent personages in this kingdom, as distinguished by their taste in planting and horticulture, as by their rank and dignity. He was the first who introduced the great variety of trees and shrubs, which are now the principal ornaments of every garden; and it was owing to his indefatigable industry, that so many persons of the first distinction are now enabled to behold groves transplanted from the Western continent flourishing so luxuriantly in their several domains, as if they were already become indigenous to Britain. He had some correspondents in almost every nation in Europe; some in Asia, and even at Pekin, who all transmitted to him the most valuable seeds they could collect, in return for the treasures of America. Linnæus, during his residence in England, contraded an intimate friendship with Mr. Collinson, which was reciprocally increased by a multitude of good offices, and continued to the last. Besides his attachment to natural history, he was very conversant in the antiquities of our own country, having been elected F. S. A. April 7, 1737; and he supplied the society with many curious articles of intelligence, and observations respecting both our own and other countries. In the midst of all these engagements, he was a mercer by trade, and lived at the Red Lion, in Gracechurch-street. His person was rather short than tall; he had a pleasing and social aspect; of a temper open and communicative, capable of feeling for distress, and ready to relieve and sympathize. Excepting some attacks of the gout, he enjoyed, in general, perfect health and great equality of spirits, and had arrived at his 75th year; when, being on a visit to lord Petre, for whom he had a singular regard, he was seized with a total suppression of urine, which, baffling every attempt to relieve it, proved fatal Aug. 11, 1768. Mr. Collinson left behind him many materials for the improvement of natural history; and the present refined taste of horticulture may in some respects be attributed to his industry and abilities. He married, in 1724, Mary, the daughter of Michael Russell, esq. of Mill Hill, with whom he lived very happily till her death, in 1753. He left issue a son, named Michael, who resided at Mill Hill, and died Aug. 11, 1795, whose son is still living; and a daughter, Mary, married to the late John Cator, esq. of Beckenham, in Kent. Both his children inherited much of the taste and amiable disposition of their father.

After this disaster he went to Lisbon, where he married a daughter of Bartholomew Perestrello, one of the captains employed by Prince Henry in his early navigations, and who had discovered and planted the islands of Porto Santo and Madeira, and by getting possession of his journals and charts, Columbus was seized with an irresistible desire of visiting unknown countries. He first made a voyage to Madeira; and continued during several years to trade with that island, the Canaries, Azores, the settlements in Guinea, and all the other places which the Portuguese had discovered on the continent of Africa. By these means he soon became one of the most skilful navigators in Europe. At this time the great object of discovery was a passage by sea to the East Indies, which was at last accomplished by the Portuguese, by doubling the Cape of Good Hope. The danger and tediousness of the passage, however, induced Columbus to consider whether a shorter and more direct passage to these regions might not be found out; and at length he became convinced that, by sailing across the Atlantic Ocean, directly towards the West, new countries, which probably formed a part of the vast continent of India, must infallibly be discovered. In 1474, he communicated his ideas on this subject to one Paul, a physician in Florence, a man eminent for his knowledge in cosmography, who suggested several facts in confirmation of the plan, and warmly encouraged Columbus to persevere in an undertaking so laudable, and which must redound so much to the honour of his country and the benefit of Europe. Columbus, fully satisfied of the truth of his system, was impatient to set out on a voyage of discovery, and to secure the patronage of some of the considerable powers of Europe, capable of undertaking such an enterprize. He applied first to the republic of Genoa; afterwards to the courts of Portugal, Spain, and England, successively, but met with a variety of mortifying interruptions. At last his project was so far countenanced by Ferdinand of Spain and queen Isabella, that our adventurer set sail with three small ships, the whole expence of which did not exceed 4000l. During his voyage he met with many difficulties from the mutinous and timid disposition of his men. He was the first who observed the variation of the compass, which threw the sailors into the utmost terror. For this phenomenon Columbus was obliged to invent a reason, which, though it did not satisfy himself, yet served to dispel their fears, or silence their murmurs. At last, however, the sailors lost all patience; and the admiral was obliged to promise so r lemnly, that in case land was not discovered in three days, he should return to Europe. That very night, however, the island of San Salvador was discovered, and the sailors were then as extravagant in the praise of Columbus as they had before been insolent in reviling and threatening him. They threw themselves at his feet, implored his pardon, and pronounced him to be a person inspired by heaven with more than human sagacity and fortitude, in order to accomplish a design so far beyond the ideas and conception of all former ages. Having visited several of the West India islands, and settled a colony in Hispaniola, he again set sail for Spain; and after escaping great dangers from violent tempests, arrived at the port of Palos on the 15th of March 1493.

The second classical or canonical book is called “Tchong Yong, or the Immutable Mean;” and treats of the mean which ought to be observed in all things. Tchong signifies meanS) and by Yong is understood that which is constant, eternal, immutable. He undertakes to prove, that every wise man, and chiefly those who have the care of governing the world, should follow this mean, which is the essence of virtue. He enters upon his subject by defining human nature, and its passions; then he brings several examples of virtue and piety, as fortitude, prudence, and filial duty, which are proposed as so many patterns to be imitated in keeping this mean. In the next place he shews, that this mean, and the practice of it, is the right and true path which a wise man should pursue, in order to attain the highest pitch of virtue. The third book, “Yun Lu, or the Book of Maxims,” is a collection of sententious and moral discourses, and is divided into 20 articles, containing only questions, answers, and sayings of Confucius and his disciples, On virtue, good works, and the art of governing well; the tenth article excepted, in which the disciples of Confucius particularly describe the outward deportment of their master. There are some maxims and moral sentences in this collection, equal to those of the seven wise men of Greece, which have always been so much admired. The fourth book gives an idea of a perfect government it is called “Meng Tsee, or the Book of Mentius;” because, though numbered among the classical and canonical books, it is more properly the work of his disciple Mentius. To these four books they add two others, which have almost an equal reputation; the first is called “Hiao King,” that is, “of Filial Reverence,” and contains the answers which Confucius made to his disciple Tseng, concerning the respect which is due to parents. The second is called “Sias Hio,” that is, “the Science, or the School of Children;” which is a collection of sentences and examples taken from ancient and modern authors. They who would have a perfect knowledge of all these works, will find it in the Latin translation of father Noel, one of the most ancient missionaries of China, which was printed at Prague in 1711.

, one of the eminent publicists of Germany, and one of the most illustrious ornaments of the German schools, was born at Embden Nov. 3, 1606, and was educated at Leyden, where he made himself acquainted with the whole circle of sciences, but chiefly applied to theology and medicine; and during his residence here, is said to have been supported by Matthias Overbek, a Dutch merchant, and by G. Calixtus, one of the professors. His eminent attainments soon procured him distinction; and he was appointed professor, first of natural philosophy, and afterwards of medicine, in the university of Brunswick. Turning his attention to the study of history and policy, he became so famous in these branches of knowledge, as to attract the attention of princes. Christina, queen of Sweden, who professed to be a general patroness of learned men, invited Conringius to her court, and upon his arrival received him with the highest marks of respect. The offer of a liberal appointment could not, however, induce him to relinquish the academic life, and after a short time he returned to Juliers. But his uncommon talents for deciding intricate questions on policy were not long suffered to lie dormant. The elector Palatine, the elector of Mentz, the duke of Brunswick, the emperor of Germany, and Louis XIV. of France, all consulted and conferred upon him honours and rewards. And, if universal learning, sound judgment, and indefatigable application, can entitle a man to respect, Conringius merited all the distinction he obtained. The great extent of his abilities and learning appears from the number and variety of his literary productions. His polemic writings prove him to have been deeply read in theology. His medical knowledge appears from his “Introduction to the medical art,” and his “Comparison of the medical practice of the ancient Egyptians, and the modern Paracelsians.” The numerous treatises which he has left on the Germanic institution, and other subjects of policy and law, evince the depth and accuracy of his juridical learning. His book, “De hermerica Medicina,” and his “Antiquitates academicae,” discover a correct acquaintance with the history of philosophy. It is to be regretted, that this great man was never able wholly to disengage himself from the prepossession in favour of the Aristotelian philosophy, which he imbibed in his youth. Although he had the good sense to correct the more barren parts of his philosophy, and was not ignorant that his system was in some particulars defective, he still looked up to the Stagyrite as the best guide in the pursuit of truth. It was owing to his partiality for ancient philosophy, particularly for that of Aristotle, that Conringius was a violent opponent of the Cartesian system. He died Dec. 12, 1681. His works were published entire in six volumes folio, Brunswick, 1730, which renders it unnecessary to specify his separate publications. Bibliographers place a considerable value on his “Bibliotheca Augusta,” Helmstadt, 1661, 4to, an account of the library of the duke of Brunswick, in the castle of Wolfenbuttle, which then contained 2000 Mss. and 116,000 printed volumes. The history of literature is yet more illustrated by his “De antiquitatibus academicis dissertationes septem,” the best edition of which is that of Gottingen, 1739, 4to, edited by Heuman, in all respects a most valuable work. Of Conringius’s enthusiasm in the cause of learning, and his love of eminent literary characters, we have a singular instance, quoted by Dr, Douglas, from Pechlinus’s “Observationes Physico-mediciK.” It is there said, on the authority of his son-in-law, that Conringius, when labouring under an ague, was cured, without the help of medicines, merely by the joy he felt from a conversation with the learned Meibomius.

, usually called the Great, is memorable for having been the first emperor of the Romans who established Christianity by the civil power, and was born at Naissus, a town of Dardania, 272. The emperor Constantius Chlorus was his father; and was the only one of those who shared the empire at that time, that did not persecute the Christians. His mother Helena was a woman of low extraction, and the mistress of Constantius, as some say; as others, the wife, but never acknowledged publicly: and it is certain, that she never possessed the title of empress, till it was bestowed on her by her son, after the decease of his father. Constantine was a very promising youth, and gave many proofs of his conduct and courage which however began to display themselves more openly a little before the death of his father; for, being detained at the court of Galerius as an hostage, and discerning that Galerius and his colleagues intended to seize upon that part of the empire which belonged to his father, now near his end, he made his escape, and went to England, where Constantius then was. When he arrived there, he found Constantius upon his death-bed, who nevertheless was glad to see him, and named him for his successor. Constantius died at York in 306, and Constantine was immediately proclaimed emperor by the soldiers. Galerius at first would not allow him to take any other title than that of Csesar, which did not hinder him from reigning in England, Gaul, and Spain: but having gained several victories over the Germans and Barbarians, he took the title of Augustus in 308, with the consent of Galerius himself. Some time after, he marched into Italy, with an army of 40,000 men, against the emperor Muxentius, who had almost made desolate the city of Rome by his cruelties; and after several successful engagements, finally subdued him. Eusebius relates, that Constantine had protested to him, that he had seen in that expedition a luminous body in the heavens, in the shape of a cross, with this inscription, Tola vixat, “By this thou shall conquer:” and that Jesus Christ himself appeared to him afterwards in a dream, and ordered him to erect a standard cross-like; which, after his victory, he did in the midst of the city of Rome, and caused the following words to be inscribed on it: “By this salutary sign, which is the emblem of real power, I have delivered your city from the dominion of tyrants, and have restored the senate and people of Rome to their ancient dignity and splendour.” This, which is one of the most striking events in ecclesiastical history, has also been one of the most contested. Gibbon endeavours to explain it thus: While (says this historian) his anxiety for the approaching day, which must decide the fate of the empire, was suspended by a short and interrupted slumber, the venerable form of Christ, and the well-known symbol of his religion, might forcibly offer themselves to the active fancy of a prince who reverenced the name, and had perhaps secretly implored the power of the God of the Christians; and with regard to the credit due to Eusebius, be thinks Eusebius sensible, that the recent discovery of this marvellous anecdote would excite some surprize and distrust amongst the most pious of his readers. Much has certainly been said against the credibility of this story by authors less prejudiced against the Christian religion than Gibbon. By some the whole is regarded as a fiction, a stratagem and political device of Constantine, yet it is related by Eusebius, a grave historian, who declares that he had it from the emperor, who confirmed the narration by an oath. By Fabricius, we are told, that the appearance in the heavens was generally looked upon as a reality, and a miracle: but for his own part, he is inclined to consider it as the result of a natural phenomenon in a solar halo; he accordingly admits of the reality of the phenomenon, but does not suppose it to be properly miraculous. Upon a full and candid review of the evidence, Dr. Lardner seems inclined to doubt the relation given by the emperor, upon whose sole credit the story is recorded, though it was twenty years after the event, when Eusebius wrote his account, during which period he must have heard it frequently from eye-witnesses, if the emperor’s relation were accurate that the appearance was visible to his whole army as well as to himself. The oath of Constantine, on the occasion, with Dr. Lardner, brings the fact into suspicion, and another striking circumstance is that Eusebius does not mention the place where this wonderful sight appeared. Without, however, entering, at present, farther into the discussion, we may observe, that Eusebius has led us to the period, when the sign of the cross began to be made use of by Constantine, among his armies, and at his battles; this was probably the day before the last battle with Maxentius, fought on the 27th of October, 312. About this period, it is admitted, that Constantine became a Christian, and continued so the remainder of his life, taking care also to have his children educated in the same principles. His conversion seems to have been partly owing to his own reflections on the state of things, partly to conversation and discourse with Christians, with whom, the son of Constantius, their friend and favourer, must have been some time acquainted, but perhaps, chiefly to the serious impressions of nis early years, which being once made can never be wholly obliterated. Constantine was however a politician as well as a Christian, and he probably hit upon this method to reconcile the minds of his army to the important change in their religious profession and habits, as well as making use of it as a mean of success in his designs against his enemies, for which purpose he rightly judged, that the standard of the cross, and the mark of it as a device on his soldier’s shields, would be of no small service.

He received a commission, as lieutenant, on the first day of April 1760; and soon after gave a specimen of those abilities which recommended him to the commands which he executed so highly to his credit, that his name will go down to posterity as one of the most skilful navigators which this country has produced. In 1765 he was with sir William B.urnaby on the Jamaica station; and that officer; having occasion to send dispatches to the governor of Jucatan, relative to the logwood-cutters in the bay of Honduras, lieutenant Cook was selected for that employment; and he performed it in a manner which entitled him to the approbation of the admiral. A relation of this voyage and journey was published in 1769, under the title of “Hemarks on a passage from tin? river Balise in the bay of Honduras, to Merida, the capital of the province of Jucatan, in the Spanish West.-Indies, by lieutenant Cook,” in an 8vo pamphlet.

, an eminent astronomer, was born at Thorn in Prussia, January 19, 1473. His father was a stranger, but from what part of Europe is unknown. He settled here as a merchant, and the archives of the city prove that he obtained the freedom of Thorn in 1462. It seems clear that he must have been in opulent circumstances, and of consideration, not only from the liberal education which he bestowed upon his son, but from the rank of his wife, the sister of Luca Watzelrode, bishop of Ermeland, a prelate descended from one of the most illustrious families of Polish Prussia. Nicholas was instructed in the Latin and Greek languages at home; and afterward sent to Cracow, where he studied philosophy, mathematics, and medicine: though his genius was naturally turned to mathematics, which he chiefly studied, and pursued through all its various branches. He set out for Italy at twenty-three years of age; stopping at Bologna, that he might converse with the celebrated astronomer of that place, Dominic Maria, whom he assisted for some time in making his observations. From hence he passed to Rome, where he was presently considered as not inferior to the famous Regiomontanus. Here he soon acquired so great a reputation, that he was chosen professor of mathematics, which he taught there for a long time with the greatest applause and here also he made some astronomical observations about the year 1500.

, a man of wit and learning of the sixteenth century, was born of an illustrious family at Florence. He went into France in the reign of Catherine de Medicis; and that queen, to whom he had the honour of being allied, placed him with her son, the duke of Anjou, as a man of learning, and a good counsellor. Corbinelli paid his court without servility, and was compared to those ancient Romans who were full of integrity, and incapable of baseness. Chancellor de l'Hospital had a high esteem for him. He was a professed friend and patron of the learned, and frequently printed their works at his own expence, adding notes to them, as he did to Fra. Paolo del Rosso’s poem, entitled “La Fisica,” Paris, 1578, 8vo; and to Dante, “De Vulgari Eloquentia,” 1577, 8vo. Corbinelli was also a man of great courage and resolution, address and intrigue. He wrote down every thing which he heard, while Henry IV. was at the gates of Paris, and carried the paper to him openly, as if it had contained only common affairs, or causes. His easy and confident appearance deceived the guard^ who were placed at the gates; and, as he seemed to trust every body, no body mistrusted him. Raphael Corbinelli, his son, was secretary to queen Mary de Medicis, and father of M. Corbinelli, who died at Paris, June 19, 1716. This last was one of the most distinguished beaux esprits of France; and a man of strict honour and integrity, who was a welcome guest in the best companies. A report prevailing that at one of those social suppers which were given by the princes and princesses, who were Mad. de Maintenon’s enemies, all the other party had been lampooned, it was thought that some particulars might be known from Corbinelli, who was present. M. d'Argenson, lieutenant of the police, accordingly visited the gouty epicurean, and asked him “where he supped such a day” “I think I do not remember,” replied Corbinelli, yawning. “Are you not acquainted with such and such princes” “I forget.” “Have you not supped with them” “I remember nothing of it.” “But I think such a man as you ought to remember things of this kind.” “Yes, sir; but in the presence of such a man as you, I am not such a man as myself.” He left “Les anciens Historiens Latins reduits en Maximes,” with a preface, which was attributed to P. Bouhours, printed 1694, 12mb; “Hist, genealogique de la Maison de Gondi,” Paris, 1705, 2 vols. 4to, and other works.

, one of the most celebrated French poets, and called by his countrymen the Shakspeare of France, was born at Roan, June 6, 1606, of considerable parents, his father having been ennobled for his services by Louis XIII. He was brought up to the bar, which he attended some little time; but having no turn for business, he soon deserted it. At this time he had given the public no specimen of his talents for poetry, nor appears to have been conscious of possessing any such: and they tell us, that it was purely a trifling affair of gallantry, which gave occasion to his first comedy, called “Melite.” The drama was then extremely low among the French; their tragedy fiat and languid, their comedy more barbarous than the lowest of the vulgar would now tolerate. Corneille was astonished to find himself the author of a piece entirely new, and at the prodigious success with which his “Melite” was acted. The French theatre seemed to be raised, and to flourish at once; and though deserted in a manner before, was now filled on a sudden with a new company of actors. After so happy an essay, he continued to produce several other pieces of the same kind; all of them, indeed, inferior to what he afterwards wrote, but much superior to any thing which the French had hitherto seen. His “Medea” came forth next, a tragedy, borrowed in part from Seneca, which succeeded, as indeed it deserved, bul indifferently; but in 1637 he presented the “Cid,” another tragedy, in which he shewed the world how high his genius was capable of rising, and seems to confirm Du Bos’s assertion, that the age of thirty, or a few years more or less, is that at which poets and painters arrive at as high a pitch of perfection as their geniuses will permit. All Europe has seen the Cid: it has been translated into almost all languages: but the reputation which he acquired by this play, drew all the wits of his time into a confederacy against it. Some treated it contemptuously, others wrote against it. Cardinal de Richelieu himself is said to have been one of this cabal; for, not content with passing for a great minister of state, he affected to pass for a wit and a critic; and, therefore, though he had settled a pension upon the poet, could not abstain from secret attempts against his play . It was supposed to be under his influence that the French Academy drew up that critique upon it, entitled, “Sentiments of the French academy upon the tragi-comedy of Cid:” in which, however, while they censured some parts, they did not scruple to praise it very highly in others. Corneille now endeavoured to support the vast reputation he had gained, by many admirable performances in succession, which, as Bayle observes, “carried the French theatre to its highest pitch of glory, and assuredly much higher than the ancient one at Athens;” yet still, at this time, he had to contend with the bad taste of the most fashionable wits. When he read his “Polyeucte,” one of his best tragedies, before a company of these, where Voiture presided, it was very coldly received; and Voiture afterwards told him, it was the opinion of his friends that the piece would not succeed. In 1647 he was chosen a member of the French academy; and was what they call dean of that society at the time of his death, which happened in 1684, in his 79th year.

, M. A. a Scotch clergyman, was born at Gifford in East Lothian 1682, and educated in the university of Edinburgh, took his degrees, and was ordained minister at Yester, where he continued some years till he was removed to Haddington. During the time he was minister at Yester, he wrote a volume of “Divine Poems,” which have gone through two editions, and are much esteemed. In 1732 he was translated to Edinburgh, and was much followed as one of the most popular preachers in that city. While he was at Edinburgh; he published three volumes of “Sermons,” in 8vo, chiefly on the principal heads of Christianity; but they are now become scarce. He died at Edinburgh in 1744, aged 62.

It is not to be supposed that a preacher of such eminence, especially at a time when this mode of preaching was rare, should remain unknown or unnoticed. He soon received a presentation from Mr. Lockhart of Cambusnethan, to be minister of that parish and settled there in the year 1737. About this time great opposition was made by the people of Scotland, and particularly by those of Clydesdale, to the manner of appointing ministers by presentations from lay-patrons, and Mr. Craig encountered considerable opposition. Zealous, however, in the discharge of his duty, and hoping, in the conscious ardour of his endeavours, to reconcile his parishioners to that system of instruction which he thought best suited to their condition, and most consistent with Christianity, he refused a presentation to a church in Airshire, offered him by Mr. Montgomery of Coilsfield; and another offered him by the amiable but unfortunate earl of Kilmarnock. At length he accepted of a presentation to a church in Glasgow, the place of his nativity, where most of his relations resided, where he could have opportunities of conversing with his literary friends, and where the field for doing good was more extensive. He was first appointed minister of the Wyndchurch in that city: and, after the building of St. Andrew’s churrh, one of the most elegant places of public worship in Scotland, he was removed thither. His audience was at no time so numerous, but especially during the last fiveand-twenty years of his life, as those who valued good composition and liberality of sentiment apprehended that he deserved.

, a native of the marche of Brandenburg, where he was born in 1648, was one of the most laborious compilers of his time. He taught philosophy at Giessen, was minister near Zell, schoolmaster in Hungary, corrector of the press at Rotterdam and Leyden, and finally master of a boarding-school, and private tutor in the last mentioned city, where he died March 29, 1728, aged 80. Amidst all his employments he found time to publish a great number of collections: “Fasciculi Dissertatiomun et Dissertationes Philologicae,” 2 vols. 12mo; “Commentationes in varios Autores,” 3 vols. 12mo; “Musseum Philologicum,” 2 vols. 12fno; “Thesaurus Librorum Philologicorum,” 2 vols. 8vo; “De Furibus Librariis,” Leyden, 1705, 12mo. The most valued among his works are 3 vols. in 4to, the first entitled, “Consilia et Methodi Studiorum optime instituendorum,” Rotterdam, 1692; the second, “De Philologia,” &c. Leyden, 1696; and the third, “DeEruditione comparanda,” Leyden, 1696. This collection contains all the best rules for studying the different sciences.

The next account we have of Crichton, and which appears to have been transmitted, through sir Thomas Urquharr, to later biographers, is of an extraordinary instance of bodily courage and skill. It is said, that at Mantua there was at this time a gladiator, who had foiled, in his travels, the most famous fencers in Europe, and had lately killed three persons who had entered the lists with him. The duke of Mantua was much grieved at having granted this man his protection, as he found it to be attended with such fatal consequences. Crichton, being informed of his highness’s concern, offered his service, not only to drive the murderer from Mantua, but from Italy, and to fight him for fifteen hundred pistoles. Though the duke was unwilling to expose such an accomplished gentleman to so great a hazard, yet, relying upon the report he had heard of his warlike achievements, he agreed to the proposal; and, the time and place being appointed, the whole court attended to behold the performance. At the beginning of the combat, Crichton stood only on his defence; while the Italian made his attack with such eagerness and fury, that, having over-acted himself, he began to grow weary. Our young Scotchman now seized the opportunity of attacking his antagonist in return; which he did with so much dexterity and vigour, that he ran him through the body in three different places, of which wounds he immediately died. The acclamations of the spectators were loud and extraordinary upon this occasion; and it was acknowledged by all of them, that they had never seen art grace nature, or nature second the precepts of art, in so lively a manner as they had beheld these two things accomplished on that day. To crown the glory of the action, Crichton bestowed the prize of his victory upon the widows of the three persons who had lost their lives in fighting with the gladiator. It is asserted, that, in consequence of this, and his other wonderful performances, the duke of Mantua made choice of him for preceptor to his son Vincentio di Gonzaga, who is represented as being of a riotous temper and a dissolute life. The appointment was highly pleasing to the court. Crichton, to testify his gratitude to his friends and benefactors, and to contribute to their diversion, framed, we are told, a comedy, wherein he exposed and ridiculed all the weaknesses and failures of the several employments in which men are engaged. This composition was regarded as one of the most ingenious satires that was ever made upon mankind. But the most astonishing part of the story is, that Crichton sustained fifteen characters in the representation of his own play. Among the rest, he acted the divine, the philosopher, the lawyer, the mathematician, the physician, and the soldier, with such inimitable grace, that every time he appeared upon the stage he seemed to be a different person . From being the principal actor in a comedy, Crichton soon became the subject of a dreadful tragedy. One night, during the time of carnival, as he was walking along the streets of Mantua, and playing upon his guitar, he was attacked by half a dozen people in masks. The assailants found that they had no ordinary person to deal with; for they were not able to maintain their ground against him. In the issue, the leader of the company, being disarmed, pulled off his mask, and begged his life, telling him that he was the prince his pupil. Crichton immediately fell on his knees, and expressed his concern for his mistake; alleging, that what he had done was only in his own defence, and that if Gonzaga had any design upon his life he might always be master of it. Then, taking his own sword by the point, he presented it to the prince, who immediately received it, and was so irritated by the affront which he thought he had sustained in being foiled with all "his attendants, that he instantly ran Crichton through the heart. Various have been the conjectures concerning the motives which could induce Vincentio di Gonzaga to be guilty of so ungenerous and brutal an action. Some have ascribed it to jealousy, asserting that he suspected Crichton to be more in favour than himself with a lady whom he passionately loved; and sir Thomas Urqnhart has told a story upon this head which is extravagant and ridiculous in the highest degree. Others, with greater probability, represent the whole transaction as the result of a drunken frolic; and it is uncertain, according to Imperiaiis, whether the meeting of the prince and Crichton was by accident or design. However, it is agreed on all hands, that Crichton lost his life in this rencontre. The time of his decease is said, by the generality of his biographers, to have been in the beginning-of July 1583; but lord Buchan, most likely in consequence of a more accurate immiry, fixes it to the same month in the preceding year. There is a difference likewise with regard to the period of life at which Crichton died. The common accounts declare that he was killed in the thirty-second year of his age; but Imperialis asserts that he was only in his twenty-second when that calamitous event took place; and this fact is confirmed by lord Buchan. Criehton’s tragical end excited a very great and general lamentation. If the foolish ravings of sir Thomas Urquhart are to be credited, the whole court of Mantua went three quarters of a year into mourning for him; the epitaphs and elegies that were composed upon his death, and stuck upon his hearse, would exceed, if collected, the bulk of Homer’s works; and, for a long time afterwards, his picture was to be seen in most of the bed-chambers and galleries of the Italian nobility, representing him on horseback, with a lance in one hand and a book in the other. From all this wonderful account we can only infer, with any degree of confidence, that Crichton was a youth of such lively parts as excited great present admiration, and high expectations with regard to his future attainments. He appears to have had a fine person, to have been adroit in his bodily exercises, to have possessed a peculiar facility in learning languages, to have enjoyed a remarkably quick and retentive memory, and to have excelled in a power of declamation, a fluency of speech, and a readiness of reply. His knowledge likewise was probably very uncommon for his years; and this, in conjunction with his other qualities, enabled him to shine in public disputation. But whether his knowledge were accurate or profound, may justly be questioned; and it may equally be doubted whether he would have arisen to any extraordinary degree of eminence in the literary world, which, however, his early and untimely death prevented from being brought to the test of experiment.

, a divine and physician, was born June 11, 1600, at Trapani, a town in Sicily, and received the early part of his medical education under his father, whom he succeeded in his practice, and became one of the most popular physicians of his time. Some years before his death, which happened in 1683, he united the office of priest to that of physician, and retired altogether from business. Among his publications are: “In lethargum febri supervenientem acutæ, Commentarii duo,” Panorini, 1668, 4to, and “De sputo sanguinis a partibus corporis infirmis, supervenientis cum Tussi, &c.” 1682, 4to, the practice recommended in which has been very little altered since his time. He wrote also a treatise on the cure of infectious fever by venisection and cathartics, the mode now recommended in the yellow fever, and another on the most celebrated mineral waters of the island, with an examination of their constituent parts.

, protector of the commonwealth of England, and one of the most remarkable characters in English history, was descended, both by his father and mother, from families of great antiquity. He was the son of Mr. Robert Cromwell, who was the second son of sir Henry Cromwell of Hinchinbrooke, in the county of Huntingdon, knt. whose great grandfather is conjectured to have been Walter Cromwell, the blacksmith at Putney, spoken of in the preceding article; and his grandmother sister to Thomas Cromwell, earl of Essex. Yet we are told that when Goodman, bishop of Gloucester, who turned papist, and was very desirous of making his court to the protector, dedicated a book to him, and presented a printed paper to him, by which he pretended to claim kindred with him, as being himself someway allied to Thomas earl of Essex, the protector with some warmth told him, “that lord was not related to his family in any degree.” For this story, however, told by Fuller, there seems little foundation . Robert Cromwell, father of the protector, was settled at Huntingdon, and had four sons (including the protector) and seven daughters. Though by the interest of his brother sir Oliver, he was put into the commission of the peace for Huntingdonshire, he had but a slender fortune; most of his support arising from a brewhouse in Huntingdon, chiefly managed by his wife. She was Elizabeth, daughter of a Stewart, of Rothseyth in Fifeshire, and sister of sir Robert Stewart, of the isle of Ely, knt. who has been reported, and not without some foundation of truth, to have been descended from the royal house of Stuart; as appears from a pedigree of her family still in being. Out of the profits of this trade, and her own jointure of 60l. per annum, Mrs. Cromwell provided fortunes for her daughters, sufficient to marry them into good families. The eldest, or second surviving, was the wife of Mr. John Desborough, afterwards one of the protector’s major-generals; another married, first, Roger Whetstone, esq. and afterwards colonel John Jones, who was executed for being one of the king’s judges; the third espoused colonel Valentine Walton, who died in exile; the fourth, Robina, married first Dr. Peter French, and then Dr. John Wilkins, a man eminent in the republic of letters, and after the restoration bishop of Chester. It may be also added, that an aunt of the protector’s married Francis Barrington, esq. from whom descended the Barringtons of Essex; another aunt, John Hampden, esq. of Buckinghamshire, by whom she was mother of the famous John Hampden, who lost his life in Chalgrave field; a third was the wife of Mr. Whaley, and the mother of colonel Whaley, in whose custody the king was while he remained at Hampton-court; the fourth aunt married Mr. Dunch.

It is not necessary to dwell particularly upon those wellknown circumstances relating to the king’s being brought before the high court of justice, and to the sentence of death passed upon him there; since the part Cromwell acted therein was open and public. He sat at the court; he signed the warrant; and he prosecuted the accomplishment of it by the bloody execution of the king. When the first proposition was made in the house of commons for trying the king, he rose up, and said, that “if any man moved this upon design, he should think him the greatest traitor in the world; but since Providence and necessity had cast them upon it, he should pray God to bless their councils, though he was not provided on the sudden to give them counsel.” But not long after, he was; for, being a great pretender to enthusiasm and revelations, he told them with consummate hypocrisy, that as he was praying for a blessing from God on his undertaking to restore the king to his pristine majesty, his tongue cleaved to the roof of his mouth, that he could not speak one word more; which he took as a return of prayer, that God had rejected him from being king. Many applications were made to Cromwell for saving the king’s life; and some of the passages relating to them are worth notice. One of the most remarkable, which greatly illustrates the character of the man, is the transaction between the lieutenantgeneral and a cousin of his, colonel John Cromwell, an officer in the service of the States. This gentleman is said to have been in England while the king was in the hands of the army; and that, in a conference he had with the lieutenant-general, the latter made use of this expression, u I think the king the most injured prince in the world;“and then, clapping his hand upon his sword, added,” But this, cousin, shall do him right.“The colonel returning to Holland soon after, reported what he took to be truth, that the lieutenant-general had a great respect for the king. When therefore the news of the king’s trial reached Holland, he was sent over with letters credential from the States, to which was added a blank with the king’s signet, and another of the prince’s, both confirmed by the States, for Cromwell to set down his own conditions, if he would now save his majesty’s life. The colonel went directly to his kinsman’s house; who was so retired and shut up in his chamber, with an order to let none know he was at home, that it was with much difficulty he obtained admittance, after he had declared who he was. Having mutually saluted each other, the colonel desired to speak a few words with him in private; and began with much freedom to set before him the heinousness of the fact then about to be committed, and with what detestation it was looked upon abroad; telling him, that” of all men living he could never have imagined he would have had any hand in it, who in his hearing had protested so much for the king.“To this Cromwell answered,” It was not he, but the army; and though he did once say some such words, yet now times were altered, and Providence seemed to order things otherwise.“And it is said he added, that” he had prayed and tasted for the king, but no return that way was yet made to him.“Upon this the colonel stepped a little back, and Suddenly shut the door, which made Cromwell apprehend he was going to be assassinated; but pulling out his papers, he said to him,” Cousin, this, is no time to trifle with words: see here, it is now in your own power, not only to make yourself, but your family, relations, and posterity, happy and honourable for ever; otherwise, as they changed their name before from Williams to Cromwell, (which was the fact, as appears by their pedigree), so now they must be forced to change it again: for this will bring such an ignominy upon the whole generation of them, as no time will he able to deface.“At this Cromwell paused a little, and then said,” I desire you will give me till night to consider of it; and do yuu go to your inn, but not to bed, till you hear from me.“The colonel did accordingly; and about one in the morning a messenger came to tell him” He might go to rest, and expect no other answer to carry to the prince; for the council of officers had been seeking God, as he also had done the same, and it was resolved by them all that the king must die."

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.

, 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.

, 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.

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.”

, a famous patriarch of Alexandria, afterwards of Constantinople, was born November 12, 1572, in the island of Candia. He studied at Venice and Padua, and was pupil to the celebrated Margunius, bishop of Cythera. Cyril went afterwards into Germany, embraced the doctrine of the reformed religion, and attempted to introduce it into Greece; but the Greeks opposed it, and he wrote a confession of faith, in which he defended his principles. Having been archimandrite, he was raised to the patriarchate of Alexandria, and, some time after, elected to that of Constantinople, 1621; but, continuing firm in his connections with the protestants, he was deposed, and confined in the island of Rhodes. Some time after, however, he was restored to his dignity, at the solicitation of the English ambassador; but in 1638 he was carried from Constantinople and put to death near the Black Sea, by order of the grand signior, in the most cruel manner. He had a mind much superior to the slavish condition of his country, and laboured to promote the interests of genuine Christianity, amidst much opposition and danger. He had collected a very excellent library, rich in Greek Mss. a specimen of which, the celebrated Codex Alexandrinus, one of the most ancient and valuable manuscripts in the world, he presented to king Charles I. by his ambassador sir Thomas Roe. The fate of his other Mss. was peculiarly lamented. In order to secure them, the Dutch resident at Constantinople sent them by a ship bound for Holland, which was wrecked in sight of land, and all her cargo lost.

, 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.

was born in 1709, at Deane, in Cumberland, where his father was then rector. He had his school education at Lowther, in Westmoreland, and thence was removed, at the age of sixteen, to Queen’seollege, in Oxford. When he had taken his first degrees, he was employed as tutor or governor to lord Beauchamp, only son of Algernon Seymour, earl of Hertford, late duke of Somerset. During his attendance on that noble youth, he employed some of his leisure hours in adapting Milton’s “Masque at Ludlow Castle” to the stage, by a judicious insertion of several songs and passages selected from other of Milton’s works, as well as of several songs and other elegant additions of his own, suited to the characters and to the manner of the original author. This was received as a very acceptable present to the public; and it still continues one of the most favourite dramatic entertainments, under the title of “Comus, a masque,” being set to music by Dr. Arne. We cannot omit mentioning to Dalton’s honour, that, during the run of this piece, he industriously sought out a grand-daughter of Milton’s, oppressed both by age and penury; and procured her a benefit from this play, the profits of which to her amounted, it is said, to upwards of 120l. Dr. Johnson wrote the Prologue spoken on this occasion. A bad state of health prevented Dr. Dalton from attending his pupil abroad, and saved him the mortification of being an eye-witness of his death, which was occasioned by the small-pox, at Bologna, in Italy. Soon after, succeeding to a fellowship in his college, he entered into orders, according to the rules of that society.

D'Arquier (Augustine), a French astronomer, fellow of the royal society of Toulouse, correspondent member of the royal academy of Paris, and a member of the Institute, was born at Toulouse, Nov. 23, 1718, and having early cultivated the science of astronomy, and the sciences connected with it, devoted his long life to the same pursuits, and acquired great reputation among his countrymen. Such was his enthusiasm, that, without any assistance from government, he purchased the most valuable instruments, erected an observatory on his house, taught scholars, and defrayed the expence of calculations, &c. He died in his native city, Jan. 18, 1802. He published, 1. “Observations Astronomiques faites a Toulouse, &c.” Paris, 1778, 4to, the most complete collection of observations that had ever been furnished from a provincial city. There are six hundred of the moon, thirtythree oppositions, several observations of Mercury, of the spots in the sun, the satellites of Jupiter, and the eclipses of the stars. One of the most surprizing circumstances in this collection is the great number of the passages of Mercury that have been observed by M. D'Arquier, notwithstanding the pretended difficulties which have discouraged modern astronomers from observing that planet. 2. “Observations Astronomiques,” 1783, 2 vols. 4to, containing a series of the usual astronomical observations, from 1748 to 1781: some useful instructions on the management of the pendulum: and observations on the motion and magnitude of the Georgium sidus. 3. “Lettres sur l'astronome pratique,” 1786, 8vo. Besides these he published some translations, as Simson’s Geometry, Lambert’s Cosmological Letters, and Ulloa’s Observation on the eclipse of the sun in 1778. D'Arquier died Jan. 18, 1802, in Toulouse.

, a very eminent statesman, and secretary of state in the reign of queen Elizabeth, was, if not a native of Scotland, at least descended from those who were, as himself professed to sir James Mel vile. At what time he came into the court of queen Elizabeth, or in what state, is uncertain. It is most probable, that his parts and learning, together with that extraordinary diligence and wonderful address for which he was always distinguished, recommended him to Mr. Killigrew, afterwards sir Henry Kiiligrew, with whom he went in quality of secretary, at the time he was sent into Scotland, to compliment queen Mary upon the birth of her son. This was in 1566, and there is a good reason to believe that he remained from that time about the court, and was employed in several affairs of great consequence. In 1575, when the states of Brabant and Flanders assumed to themselves the administration of all affairs till his catholic majesty should appoint a new governor of the Low Countries, Mr. Davison was sent over with a public character from the queen to those states, under the plausible pretence of exhorting them to continue in their obedience to his catholic majesty; but, in reality, to see how things actually stood in that part of the world, that her majesty might be the better able to know how to proceed in respect to the several applications made to her from the prince of Orange, and the people of Holland. He executed this commission very successfully, and therefore the queen sent him over as her minister, to pacify the troubles that had arisen at Ghent; and when his presence was no longer necessary there, he was commissioned on her behalf to the States of Holland, in 1579. His conduct there gave equal satisfaction to the queen his mistress, and to those with whom he negotiated. He gave them great hopes of the queen’s assistance and support, and when a sum of money was desired, as absolutely necessary towards providing for their defence, he very readily undertook to procure it upon reasonable security; in consequence of which, a very considerable sum was sent from England, for which all the valuable jewels and fine plate that had been pledged by Matthias of Austria to the States of Holland, and which were the remains of the magnificence of the house of Burgundy, were transported to England. These journies, and the success attending them, gave Mr. Davison great reputation at court, insomuch, that in all matters of a nice and difficult nature, Davison was some way or other continually employed. Thus in 1583, when matters wore a serious aspect in Scotland, he was sent thither as the queen’s ambassador, in order to counteract the French ministers, and to engage the king of Scots and the people, both to slight the offers made them from that country, and to depend wholly upon assistance from England. Affairs in the Low Countries coming at last to a crisis, and the states resolving to depend upon queen Elizabeth, in the bold design they had formed of defending their freedom by force of arms, and rendering themselves independent, Mr. Davison, at this time clerk of the privy council, was chosen to manage this delicate business, and to conclude with them that alliance which was to be the basis of their future undertakings. In this, which, without question, was one of the most perplexed transactions in that whole reign, he conducted things with such a happy dexterity, as to merit the strongest acknowledgments on the part of the States, at the same time that he rendered the highest service to the queen his mistress, and obtained ample security for those expences which that princess thought necessary in order to keep danger at a distance, and to encourage the flames of war in the dominions of her enemy, whom at that juncture she knew to be meditating how he might transfer them into her own. Upon the return of Mr. Davison into England, after the conclusion of this treaty, he was declared of the privy-council, and appointed one of her majesty’s principal secretaries of state, in conjunction with sir Francis Walsingham; so that, at this time, these offices may be affirmed to have been as well filled as in any period that can be assigned in our history, and yet by persons of very different, or rather opposite dispositions; for Walsingham was a man of great art and intrigue, one who was not displeased that he was thought such a person, and whose capacity was still deeper than 'those who understood it best apprehended it to be. Davison, on the other hand, had a just reputation for wisdom and probity; and, though he had been concerned in many intricate affairs, yet he preserved a character so unspotted, that, to the time he came into this office, he had done nothing that could draw upon him the least imputation. It is an opinion countenanced by Camden, and which has met with general acceptance, that he was raised in order to be ruined, and that, when he was made secretary of state, there was a view of obliging him to go out of his depth in that matter, which brought upon him all his misfortunes. This conjecture is very plausible, and yet there is good reason to doubt whether it is well founded. Mr. Davison had attached himself, during the progress of his fortunes, to the potent earl of Leicester; and it was chiefly to his favour and interest that he stood indebted for this high employment, in which, if he was deceived by another great statesman, it could not be said that he was raised and ruined by the same hands. But there is nothing more probable than that the bringing about such an event by an instrument which his rival had raised, and then removing him, and rendering his parts useless to those who had raised him, gave a double satisfaction to him who managed this design. It is an object of great curiosity to trace the principal steps of this transaction, which was, without doubt, one of the finest strokes of political management in that whole reign. When the resolution was taken, in the beginning of October 1586, to bring the queen of Scots? to a trial, and a commission was issued for that purpose, secretary Davison’s name was inserted in that commission; but it does not appear that he was present when that commission was opened at Fotheringay castle, on the llth of October, or that he ever assisted there at all. Indeed, the management of that transaction was very wisely left in the hands of those who with so much address had conducted the antecedent business for the conviction of Anthony Babington, and his accomplices, upon the truth and justice of which, the proceedings against the queen of Scots entirely depended. On the 25th of October the sentence was declared in the star-chamber, things proceeding still in the same channel, and nothing particularly done by secretary Davison. On the 29th of the same month the parliament met, in which Serjeant Puckering was speaker of the house of commons; and, upon an application from both houses, queen Elizabeth caused the sentence to be published, which, soon after, was notified to the queen of Scots; yet hitherto all was transacted by the other secretary, who was considered by the nation in general as the person who had led this prosecution from beginning to end. The true meaning of this long and solemn proceeding was certainly to remove, as far as possible, any reflection upon queen Elizabeth; and, that it might appear in the most conspicuous manner to the world, that she was urged, and even constrained to take the life of the queen of Scots, instead of seeking or desiring it. This assertion is not founded upon conjecture, but is a direct matter of fact; for, in her first answer to the parliament, given at Richmond the 12th of November, she complained that the late act had brought her into a great strait, by obliging her to give directions for that queen’s death; and upon the second application, on the 24th of the same month, the queen enters largely into the consequences that must naturally follow upon her taking that step, and on the consideration of them, grounds her returning no definitive resolution, even to this second application. The delay which followed after the publication of the sentence, gave an opportunity for the French king, and several other princes, to interpose, but more especially to king James, whose ambassadors, and particularly sir Robert Melvile, pressed the queen very hard. Camden says, that his ambassadors unseasonably mixing threatenings with intreaties, they were not very welcome; so that after a few days the ambassadors were dismissed, with small hopes of succeeding. But we are elsewhere told, that, when Melvile requested a respite of execution for eight days, she answered, “Not an hour.” This seemed to be a plain declaration of her majesty’s final determination, and such in all probability it was, so that her death being resolved, the only point that remained under debate was, how she should die, that is, whether by the hand of an executioner, or otherwise. In respect to this, the two secretaries seem to have been of different sentiments. Mr. Davison thought the forms of justice should go on, and the end of this melancholy transaction correspond with the rest of the proceedings. Upon this, sir Francis Walsingham pretended sickness, and did not come to court, and by this means the whole business of drawing and bringing the warrant to the queen to sign, fell upon Davison, who, pursuant to the queen’s directions, went through it in the manner that Camden has related. But it is very remarkable, that, while these judicial steps were taking, the other method, to which the queen herself seemed to incline, proceeded also, and secretary Walsingham, notwithstanding his sickness, wrote the very day the warrant was signed, which was Wednesday, February 1st, 1586-7, to sir Amiss Pawlet and sir Drew Drury, to put them in mind of the association, as a thing that might countenance, at least, if not justify, this other way of removing the queen of Scots. It is true, that Mr. Davison subscribed this letter, and wrote another to the same persons two days after; but it appears plainly from the anssver, that the keepers of the queen of Scots considered the motion as coming from Walsingharn. The warrant being delivered to the lords of the council, they sent it down by Mr. Beale, their clerk, a man of sour and stubborn temper, and who had always shewn a great bitterness against the queen of Scots. The day of his departure does not appear; but queen Mary had notice given her on the Monday, to prepare for death on the Wednesday, which she accordingly suffered. As soon as queen Elizabeth was informed of it, she expressed great resentment against her council, forbad them her presence and the court; and caused some of them to be examined, as if she intended to call them to an account for the share they had in this transaction. We are not told particularly who these counsellors were, excepting the lord treasurer Burleigh, who fell into a temporary disgrace about it, and was actually a witness against Mr. Davison. As for the earl of Leicester and secretary Walsingharn, they had prudently withdrawn themselves at the last act of the tragedy, and took care to publish so much, by their letters into Scotland; but secretary Davison, upon whom it was resolved the whole weight of this business should fall, v.-deprived of his office, and sent prisoner to the Tower, at which nobody seerus to have been so much alarmed as the lord treasurer, who, though himself at that time in disgrace, wrote to the queen in strong terms, and once intended to have written in much stronger. This application bad no effect, for the queen having sent her kinsman Mr. Cary, son to the lord Hunsdon, into Scotland, to excuse the matter to king James, charged with a letter to him under her own hand, in which she in the strongest terms possible asserted her own innocence, there was a necessity of doing something that Davison[?] carry an air of evidence, in support of the turn she had now given to the death of that princess. On the 28th of March following, Davison, after having undergone various examinations, was brought to his trial in the star chamber, for the contempt of which he had been guilty, in revealing the queen’s counsels to her privy counsellors, and performing what he understood to be the duty of his office in quality of her secretary. We have several accounts of this trial, which, in a variety of circumstances, differ from each other. In this, however, they all agree, that the judges, who fined him ten thousand marks, and imprisonment during the queen’s pleasure, gave him a very high character, and declared him to be, in their opinions, both an able ana an honest man. One thing is very remarkable, that, in the conclusion of this business, sir Christopher Wray, chief justice of the queen’s bench, told the court, that though the queen had been offended with her council, and had left them to examination, yet now she forgave them, being satisfied that they were misled b? this man’s suggestions. Sir James Melvile, who wrote at that time, and who seems to have had some prejudice against Davison, said very candidly and fairly upon this occasion, that he was deceived by the council. As soon as the proceeding was over, the queen, to put it out of doubt with the king of Scots, that his mother was put to death without her privity or intention, sent him the judgment given against Davison, subscribed by those who had given it, and exemplified under the great seal, together with another instrument, under the hands of all the judges of England, that the sentence against his mother could not in the least prejudice his title to the succession. As for Mr. Davison, now left to a strange reward for his past services, a long imprisonment, which reduced him to indigence, he comforted himself with the thoughts of his innocence; and, to secure his memory from being blasted by that judgment which had withered his fortune, he had long before written an apology for his own conduct, which he addressed to secretary Walsingham, as the man most interested in it, and who could best testify whether what he affirmed was truth or not. In this he gave a very clear and natural detail of the transaction which cost him all his sufferings. It is allowed by all who have written on this subject, and especially by Camden, that he was a very unhappy, though at the same time a very capable and honest man. As such we have seen him recommended to queen Elizabeth by the treasurer Burleigh, and as such he was strongly recommended by the earl of Essex to king James I. It seems, that noble person stuck fast by him under his misfortunes, which plainly shews the party to which he had always adhered. That lord lost no opportunity of soliciting the queen in his favour, and never let slip any occasion of testifying for him the warmest and thesincerest affection. At length, it seems he was not altogether unsuccessful; for though, upon the death of secretary Walsingham, the queen absolutely rejected his motion, that Mr. Davison should come into his place, yet, afterwards, it seems that she yielded in some degree, as plainly appears by the earl’s letter to king James. That we are under an incapacity of tracing him farther, is owing to the profound silence of the writers of those times.

, an eminent classical and philological scholar, was born March 29, 1612, at Zwickau, became regent of the college in that place 1642, and rector of the same 1662, which office he discharged with great credit till his death, December 26, 1687. He was one of the most learned men of his age he understood Latin, Greek, Hebrew, the Turkish, French, Italian, Spanish, and Bohemian languages, and had a complete knowledge of Arabic. Besides editions of several works, which afford a testimony of his industry and superior talents, he left “Letters,” Jena, 1670, 4to; Dresden, 1697, 8vo; Chemnits, 1709, 8vo, all different: some poems and dissertations, as, “Tractatus de causis amissarum Linguae Latince radicum,” 1642, 8vo and in the “Systema Dissert, rar.” of Grævius, Utrecht, 1701, 4to.

Dr. Deering shewed his attachment to botanical pursuits by his assiduity in collecting such ample materials for his “Catalogue,” in less than two years after settling at Nottingham. It was published under the title “A Catalogue of Plants naturally gruuiog and commonly cultivated in divers parts of England, more especially about Netting-­ham, &e.” 1738, 8vo. This useful work might have been greatly enlarged and improved by the author had he been endowed with some degree of prudence, or a happier temper; but owing to the want of these he very early lost the little interest which his character and success had at first gained. Yet he was a man of great learning, and master of nine languages, ancient and modern. He had also a knowledge of designing, and was an ingenious mechanic. After his failure in the practice of medicine, his friends attempted several schemes to alleviate his necessities. Among others, they procured him a commission in the regiment raised at Nottingham on account of the rebellion; but this proved more honourable than profitable. He was afterwards employed in a way more agreeable to his genius and talents; being furnished with materials, and enabled, with the assistance of John Plumtree, esq. and others, to write “The History of Nottingham,” which, however, he did not live to publish. He had been troubled with the gout at a very early period, and in the latter stage of his life he suffered long confinements in this disease, and became asthmatical. Being at length reduced to a degree of poverty and dependence, which his spirit could not sustain, oppressed with calamity and complicated disease, he died April 12, 1749, Two of his principal creditors administered to his effects, and buried him in St. Peter’s church-yard, opposite the house in which he lived. He left a Hortus Siccus of the plants in his “Catalogue,” a volume of paintings of the fungi, by his own hand, and some Mss. His “Nottinghamia Vetus et Nova,” or History of Nottingham, was published by his administrators, George Ayscough, printer, and Thomas Wellington, druggist, at Nottingham, in 1751, 4to, embellished with plates. One of the most remarkable articles in this volume is, a complete description of that curious machine, the stockingframe, invented upwards of two centuries ago by William Lee, M. A. of St. John’s college, Cambridge, a native of Woodborough, near Nottingham. All the parts are separately and minutely described in the technical terms, and illustrated by two views of the whole, and by a large table, delineating with great accuracy, every constituent part of the machine.

, a clergymnn of Ireland, of considerable celebrity in his day, was born in that kingdom about 1686. His fatiior lived as a servant in the family of sir John fennel, an [rish judge, and afterwards rented a small farm, in which situation he is supposed to have continued to his decease; for, when our author came to be in prosperous circumstances, he was advised by Dr. Swift not to take his parents out of the line of life they were fixed in, but to render them comfortable in it. At what place, and under whom, young Delany received his grammatical education, we are not able to ascertain; but at a proper age he became a sizer in Trinity college, Dublin; went through his academical course; took the customary degree*; and was cnosen, first a junior, and afterwards a senior fellow of the college. During this time he formed an intimacy with Dr. Swift; and it appears from several circumstances, that he was one of the dean of St. Patrick’s chief favourites. It is not unreasonable to conjecture, that, besides his considerable merit, it might be some general recommendation to him, that he readily entered into the dean’s playful disposition. He joined with Swift and Dr. Sheridan in writing or answering riddles, and in composing other slight copies of verses, the only design of which was to pass away the hours in a pleasant manner; and several of Mr. Delany’s exertions on these occasions may be seen in Swift’s works. These temporary amusements did not, however, interfere with our author’s more serious concerns. He applied vigorously to his studies, distinguished himself as a popular preacher, and was so celebrated as a tutor, that by the benefit of his pupils, and ijis senior fellowship, with all its perquisites, he received every year between nine hundred and a thousand pounds. In 1724 an affair happened in the college of Dublin, with regard to which Dr. Delany is represented as having been guilty of an improper interference. Two under-graduates having behaved very insolently to the provost, and afterwards refusing to make a submission for their fault, wefe both of them expelled. On this occasion Dr. Delany took the part of the young men, and (as it is said) went so far as to abuse the provost to his face, in a sermon at the college-chapel. Whatever may have been his motives, the result of the matter was, that the doctor was obliged to give satisfaction to the provost, by an acknowledgement of the otfence. Our author’s conduct in this affair, which had been displeasing to the lord primate Boulter, might probably contribute to invigorate the opposition which the archbishop made to him on a particular occasion. In 1725 he was presented by the chapter of Christ-church, to the parish of St. John’s, in the city of Dublin, but without a royal dispensation he could not keep his fellowship with his new living. Archbishop Boulter, therefore, applied to the duke of Newcastle, to prevent the dispensation from being granted. In 1727 Dr. Delany was presented by the university of Dublin to a small northern living, of somewhat better than one hundred pounds a year; and about the same time, lord Carteret promoted him to the chancellorship of Christ-church, which was of equal value. Afterwards, 1730, his excellency gave him a prebend in St. Patrick’s cathedral, the produce of which did not exceed either of the other preferments. In 1729 Dr. Delany began a periodical paper, called “The Tribune,” which was continued through about twenty numbers. Soon after, our author engaged in a more serious and important work, of a theological nature, the intention of publishing which brought him to London in 1731; it had for title, “Revelation examined with candour,” the first volume whereof was published in 1732. This year appears to have been of importance to our author in a domestic as well as in a literary view; for on the 17th of July he married in England, Mrs. Margaret Tenison, a widow lady of Ireland, with a large fortune. On his return to Dublin, he manifested his regard to the university in which he was educated, and of which he had long been a distinguished member, by giving twenty pounds a year to be distributed among the students. In 1734 appeared the second volume of “Revelation examined with candour,” and so favourable a reception did the whole work meet with, that a third edition was called for in 1735. In 1738 Dr. Delany published a 30th of January sermon, which he had preached at Dublin before the lord-lieutenant, William duke of Devonshire. It was afterwards inserted in the doctor’s volume upon social duties. In the same year appeared one of the most curious of Dr. Delany’s productions, which was a pamphlet entitled, “Reflections upon Polygamy, and the encouragement given to that practice in the scriptures of the Old Testament.” This subject, however, has since been more ably handled by the late ingenious Mr. Badcock, in the two fine articles of the Monthly Review relative to Marian’s “Thelyphthora.” Dr. Deiany was led by his subject to consider in a particular manner the case of David; and it is probable, that he was hence induced to engage in examining whatever farther related to that great Jewish monarch. The result of his inquiries he published in “An historical account of the life and rei^n of David king of Israel.” The first volume of this work appeared in 1740, the second in 1712, and the third in the ame year. It would be denying Dr. Delany his just praise, were we not to say, that it is an ingenious and & learned performance. It is written witli spirit; there are some curious and valuable criticisms in it, and many of the remarks in answer to Bayle are well founded; but it has not been thought, on the whole, a very judicious production. It is not necessary to the honour of the sacred writings, or to the cause of revelation, to defend, or to palliate the conduct of David, in whatsoever respects he acted wrong. It is peculiar to the Scriptures, in the biographical parts, to exhibit warnings as well as examples.

, one of the most eminent philosophers of antiquity, and of noble descent, was a native of Abdera, a town in Thrace, and born, according to Laertius, in the first year of the 80th olympiad, or 460 B. C. He was contemporary with Socrates, Anaxagoras, Archelaus, Parmenides, Zeno, and Protagoras. He is said to have been instructed by some Chaldean magi in astronomy and theology. After the death of his lather, he determined to travel in search of wisdom, and having received his fraternal portion of his father’s estates in money, amounting to one hundred talents, he went first into Egypt, for the sake of learning geometry from the Egyptian priests; and then turned aside into Ethiopia, to converse with the gymnosophists of that country; after which he passed over into Asia, resided some time among the Persian magi, for the purpose of learning magical philosophy, and, as some assert, travelled into India. Whether, in the course of his travels, he visited Athens, or attended upon Anaxagoras, is uncertain. There can be little doubt, however, that, during some part of his life, he was instructed in the Pythagorean school, and particularly that he was a disciple of Leucippus.

, an excellent philosopher and divine, was born at Stoughton near Worcester, Nov. 26, 1657; and educated in grammar-learning at Ulockley in. that county. In May 1675 he was admitted of Trinity college, Oxford and when he took his degree of B. A. was already distinguished for his learning and exemplary character. He was ordained deacon by Compton bishop of London, in May 1681; priest by Ward bishop of Salisbury, in July 1682; and was the same month presented to the vicarage of Wargrave in Berkshire. August 1689, he was presented to the valuable rectory of Upminster in Essex: which living, lying at a moderate distance from London, afforded him an opportunity of conversing and corresponding with the most eminent philosophers of the nation. Here in a retirement suitable to his contemplative and philosophical temper, he applied himself with great eagerness to the study of nature, and to mathematics and experimental philosophy; in which he became so eminent, that in 1702 he was chosen F. R. S. He proved one of the most useful and industrious members of this society, frequently publishing in the Philosophical Transactions curious observations and valuable pieces, as may be seen by their Index. In his younger years he published separately, “The artificial Clock-maker; or, a treatise of watch and clock-work, shewing to the meanest capacities the art of calculating numbers to all sorts of movements; the way to alter clock-work; to make chimes, and set them to musical notes; and to calculate and correct the motion of pendulums. Also numbers for divers movements: with the ancient and modern history of clockwork; and many instruments, tables, and other matters, never before published in any other book.” The fourth edition of this book, with large emendations, was published in 1734, 12mo. In 1711 and 1712 he preached “Sixteen Sermons” at Boyle’s lectures; which, with suitable alterations in the form, and notes, he published in 1713 under the title “Physico-theology; or, a demonstration of the beine: and attributes of God from his works of creation,” 8vo. In pursuance of the same design, he published, in 1714, “Astro-theology or, a demonstrationof the being and attributes of God from a survey of the heavens,” illustrated with copper-plates, 8vo. These works, the former especially, have been highly and justly valued, translated into French and several other languages, and have undergone several editions. In 1716 he was made a canon of Windsor, being at that time chaplain to the prince of Wales; and in 1730 received the degree of D. D. from the university of Oxford by diploma, on account of his learning, and the services he had done to religion by his culture of natural knowledge “Ob libros,” as the terms of the diploma run, “ab ipso editos, quibus physicam & mathesin auctiorem reddidit, & ad religionem veramque fidem exornandam revocavit.” When Eleazer Albin published his natural history of birds and English insects, in 4 vols. 4to, with many beautiful cut?, it was accompanied with very curious notes and observations by our learned author. He also revised the “Miscellanea Curiosa,” published in three volumes, 1726, 8vo. He next published “Christo-theology or, a demonstration of the divine authority of the Christian religion, being the substance of a sermon preached at Bath, Nov. 2, 1729, and published at the earnest request of the auditory, 1730,” 8vo. The last work of his own composition was “A Defence of the Churches right in Leasehold Estates. In answer to a book called ‘An Inquiry into the customary estates and TenantRights of those who hold lands of the Church and other Foundations,’ published under the name of Everard Fleetwood, esq.” 1731, 8vo. But, besides his own, he published some pieces of Mr. Ray, and gave new editions of others, with great additions from the author’s own Mss. To him the world is likewise indebted for the “Philosophical Experiments and observations of the late eminent Dr. Robert Hooke, and other eminent virtuosos in his time, 1726,” 8vo; and he communicated to the royal society several pieces, which he received from his learned correspondents.

, a poet to whom much of the improvement of the French language is attributed, was born at Chartres in 1546, whence he went to Paris. Attaching himself there to a bishop who was going to Rome, he gained an opportunity of visiting that city, and acquiring a perfect knowledge of the Italian language. When he returned to France, he applied himself entirely to French poetry, and was one of the few poets who have enjoyed great affluence, which he owed in part to the great liberality of the princes by whom he was protected. Henry III. of France gave him 10,000 crowns, to enable him to publish his first works. Charles IX. presented him with 800 crowns of gold for his poem of Rodomont. The admiral de Joyeuse gave him an abbey for a sonnet. Besides which, he enjoyed benefices to the amount altogether of 10,000 crowns a year. Henry III. even honoured him with a place in his council, and consulted him on the most important affairs. It is said that he refused several bishoprics; but he loved solitude and retirement, which he sought as often as he could. He was very liberal to other men of letters, and formed a large library, to which he gave them the utmost freedom of access. Some, who were envious of his reputation, reproached him with having borrowed freely from the Italian poets, which he was far from denying; and when a book appeared upon the subject, entitled “Rencontre des Muses de France et d'ltalie,” he said, “If I had known the author’s design, I could have furnished him with many more instances than he has collected.” After the death of Henry III. he joined himself for a time to the party of the League, but afterwards repented, and laboured zealously to serve the interests of Henry IV. in Normandy, and succeeded in obtaining the friendship and esteem of that liberal monarch. He died in 1606. Desportes is acknowledged to have been one of the chief improvers of the French language. His works consist of sonnets, stanzas, elegies, songs, epigrams, imitations, and other poems; some of which were first published in 4to, by Robert Stephens, in 1573. A translation of the Psalms was one of his latest works, and one of the most feeble. A delightful simplicity is the characteristic of his poetry, which is therefore more perfect when applied to amorous and gallant, than to noble subjects. He often imitated and almost translated Tibullus, Ovid, and other classics. A few sacred poems are published in some editions of his Psalms, which have little more merit than the Psalms to which they are subjoined.

Though these labours of sir Symonds contributed not a little to illustrate the general history of Great Britain, as well as to explain the important transactions of one of the most glorious reigns in it, yet two or three circumstances of his life have occasioned him to have been set by writers in perhaps a more disadvantageous light than he deserved; not to mention that general one, common to many others, of adhering to the parliament during the rebellion. Having occasion to write to archbishop Usher in 1639, he unfortunately let fall a hint to the prejudice of Camden’s *' Britannia;“for, speaking of the time and pains he had spent in collecting materials for an accurate history of Great Britain, and of his being principally moved to this task, by observing the many mistakes of the common writers, he adds,” And indeed what can be expected from them, considering that, even in the so much admired ‘Britannia’ of Camden himself, there is not a page, at least hardly a page, without errors?“This letter of his afterwards coming to light, among other epistles to that learned prelate, drew upon him the heaviest censures. Smith, the writer of the Latin life of Camden, assures us, that his” Britannia“was universally approved by all proper judges, one only, sir Symonds D'Ewes, excepted; who,” moved,“says he,” by I know not what spirit of envy, gave out that there was scarce a page,“&c. Nicolson, in his account of Camden’s work, says, that” some early attempts were made by an envious person, one Brook or Brookmouth, to blast the deservedly great reputation of this work but they perished and came to nothing; as did likewise the terrible threats given out by sir Symonds D'Ewes, that he would discover errors in every page.“Bishop Gibson has stated the charge against this gentleman more mildly, in his Life of Camden, prefixed to the English translation of his Britannia.” In the year 1607,“says the bishop,” he put the last hand to his Britannia, which gained him the titles of the Varro, Strabo, and Pausanias of Britain, in the writings and letters of other learned men. Nor did it ever after meet with any enemies that I know of, only sir Symonds D‘Ewes encouraged us to hope for animadversions upon the work, after he had observed to a very great man, that there was not a page in it without a fault. But it was only threatening; and neither the world was the better, nor was Mr. Camden’s reputation e’er the worse for it." Sir Symonds was certainly not defensible for throwing out at random, as it should seem, such a censure against a work universally well received, without ever attempting to support it; yet some have excused him by saying that this censure was contained in a private letter; and that sir Symonds had a high sense of Camden’s merit, whom he mentions very respectfully in the preface to his Journals, &c.

, an eminent divine of the church of Scotland, the son of John Dickson, a merchant in Glasgow, was born about 1583, and educated at the university of his native city. After taking the degree of M. A. he was admitted regent, or professor of philosophy, an office which, at that time, somewhat after the manner of the foreign universities, was held only for a term of years (in this case, of eight years) after which these regents received ordination. Accordingly, in 1618, Mr. Dickson was ordained minister of the town of Irvine, which preferment he held about twenty-three years, and became a very popular preacher. Although always inclined to the presbyterian form of church-government, he had shewn no great reluctance to the episcopal forms until the passing of what are known, in the ecclesiastical history of Scotland, by the name of the Perth articles; five articles, which enjoined kneeling at the sacrament; private adtninistratioa of it in extreme sickness; private baptism, if necessary; episcopal confirmation; and the observation of Epiphany, Christmas, &c. These, however harmless they may appear to an English reader, were matters not only of objection, but abhorrence to a great proportion of the Scotch clergy; and Mr. Dickson having expressed his dislike in strong terms, and probably in the pulpit, was suspended from his pastoral charge, and ordered to remove to Turriff, in the north of Scotland, within twenty days. After much interest, however, had been employed, for he had many friends among persons of rank, who respected his talents and piety, he was allowed in 1623 to return to Irvine. As during the progress of the rebellion in England, the power of the established church decayed also in Scotland, Dickson exerted himself with considerable effect in the restoration of the presbyterian form of church-government, and there being a reluctance to this change on the part of the learned divines of Aberdeen, he went thither in 1637, and held solemn disputations with Doctors Forbes, Barron, Sibbald, &c. of that city, which were afterwards published. In 1641 he was removed from Irvine to be professor of divinity in the university of Glasgow; and in 1643 he assisted in drawing up some of those formularies which are contained in the “Confession of Faith,” a book which is still subscribed by the clergy of Scotland. The “Directory for public worship,” and “The sum of saving knowledge,” were from his pen, assisted, in the former, by Henderson and Calderwood and in the latter, by Durham. Some years after, probably about 1645, he was invited to the elmir of professor of divinity at Edinburgh, which he held until the restoration, when he was ejected for refusing the oath of supremacy. He did not survive this long, dying in 1662. He was esteemed one of the ablest and most useful men of his time, in the promotion of the church of Scotland as now established, and his writings have been accounted standard books with those who adhere to her principles as originally laid down. His principal works are, I. “A Commentary on the Hebrews,” 8vo. 2. “On Matthew,” 4to. 3. “On the Psalms,” 1655, 3 vols. 12mo. 4. “On the Epistles,” Latin and English, folio and 4to. 5. “Therapeutica Sacra, or Cases of Conscience resolved,” Latin 4to, English 8vo. 6. “A treatise on the Promises,” Dublin, 1630, 12mo. Besides these he wrote some pieces of religious poetry for the common people, and left several Mss. As he had had a considerable hand in the “Confession of Faith,” he lectured, when professor of divinity, on that book, the heads of which lectures were afterwards published, as he had delivered them, in Latin, under the title “Prelectiones in Confessionem Fidei,” folio but they have been since translated and often reprinted, under the title of “Truth’s Victory over Error,” one of the most useful, and now, we believe, the only one of his works which continues still popular in Scotland. Prefixed is a life of the author by Woodrow, the ecclesiastical historian, from which we have extracted the above particulars.

, of the academy of Berlin, an eminent French writer, was the son of a cutler, and was bora at Langres, in 1713. The Jesuits, with whom he went through a course of study, were desirous of having him in their order, and one of his uncles designing him for a canonry which he had in his gift, made him take the tonsure. But his father, seeing that he was not inclined to be either a Jesuit or a canon, sent him to Paris to prosegute his studies. He then placed him with a lawyer, to whose instructions young Diderot paid little attention, but employed himself in general literature, which not coinciding with the views of his father, he stopped the remittance of his pecuniary allowance, and seemed for some time to have abandoned him. The talents of the young man, however, supplied him with a maintenance, and gradually made him known. He had employed his mind on physics, geometry, metaphysics, ethics, belles-lettres, from the time he began to read with reflection, and although a bold and elevated imagination seemed to give him a turn for poetry, he neglected it for the more serious sciences. He settled at an early period at Paris, where the natural eloquence which animated his conversation procured him friends and patrons. What first gave him reputation among a certain class of readers, unfortunately for France, too numerous in that country, was a little collection of “Pensees philosophiques,” reprinted afterwards under the title of “Etrennes aux esprits-forts.” This book appeared in 1746, 12mo. The adepts of the new philosophy compared it, for perspicuity, elegance, and force of diction, to the “Pensees de Pascal.” But the aim of the two authors was widely different. Pascal employed his talents, and erudition, which was profound and various, in support of the truths of religion, which Diderot attacked by all the arts of an unprincipled sophist. The “Pensées philosophiques,” however, became a toiletbook. The author was thought to be always in the right, because he always dealt in assertions. Diderot was more usefully employed in 1746, in publishing a “Dictionnaire universelle de Medecine,” with Messrs. Eidous and Toussaint, in G vols. folio. Not that this compilation, says his biographer, is without its defects in many points of view, or that it contains no superficial and inaccurate articles; but it is not without examples of deep investigation; and the work was well received. A more recent account, however, informs us that this was merely a translation of Dr. James’s Medical Dictionary, published in this country in 1743; and that Diderot was next advised to translate Chambers’ s Dictionary; but instead of acting so inferior a part, he conceived the project of a more extensive undertaking, the “Dictionnaire Encyclopedique.” So great a monument not being to be raised by a single architect, D'Alembert, the friend of Diderot, shared with him the honours and the dangers of the enterprise, in which they were promised the assistance of several literati, and a variety of artists. Diderot took upon himself alone the description of arts and trades, one of the most important parts, and most acceptable to the public. To the particulars of the several processes of the workmen, he sometimes added reflections, speculations, and principles adapted to their elucidation. Independently of the part of arts and trades, this chief of the encyclopedists furnished in the different sciences a considerable number of articles that were wanting; but even his countrymen are inclined to wish that in a work of such a vast extent, and of such general use, he had learned to compress his matter, and had been less verbose, less of the dissertator, and less inclined to digressions. He has also been censured for employing needlessly a scientific language, and for having recourse to metaphysical doctrines, frequently unintelligible, which occasioned him to be called the Lycophron. of philosophy; for having introduced a number of definitions incapable of enlightening the ignorant, and which he seems to have invented for no other purpose than to have it thought that he had great ideas, while in fact, he had not the art of expressing perspicuously and simply the ideas of others. As to the body of the work, Diderot himself agreed that the edifice wanted an entire reparation; and when two booksellers intended to give a new edition of the Encyclopedic, he thus addressed them on the subject of the faults with which it abounds: “The imperfection of this work originated in a great variety of causes. We had not time to be very scrupulous in the choice of the coadjutors. Among some excellent persons, there were others weak, indifferent, and altogether bad. Hence that motley appearance of the work, where we see the rude attempt of a school-boy by the side of a piece from the hand of a master; and a piece of nonsense next neighbour to a sublime performance. Some working for no pay, soon lost their first fervour; others badly recompensed, served us accordingly. The Encyclopedic was a gulf into which all kinds of scribblers promiscuously threw their contributions: their pieces were ill-conceived, and worse digested; good, bad, contemptible, true, false, uncertain, and always incoherent and unequal; the references that belonged to the very parts assigned to a person, were never filled up by him. A refutation is often found where we should naturally expect a proof; and there was no exact correspondence between the letter-press and the plates. To remedy this defect, recourse was had to long explications. But how many unintelligible machines, for want of letters to denote the parts!” To this sincere confession Diderot added particular details on various parts; such as proved that there were in the Encyclopedic subjects to be not only re-touched, but to be composed afresh; and this was what a new company of literati and artists undertook, but have not yet completed. The first edition, however, which had been delivering to the public from 1751 to 1767, was soon sold off, because its defects were compensated in part by many well-executed articles, and because uncommon pains were taken to recommend it to the public.

, eldest son of Thomas Digges, just mentioned, was born in 1583, and entered a gentleman-commoner of University-college, in Oxford, 1598. Having taken the degree of B. A. in 1601, he studied for some time at the inns of court; and then travelled beyond sea, having before received the honour of knighthood. On his return he led a retired life till 1618, when he was sent by James I. ambassador to the tzar, or emperor of Russia. Two years after he was commissioned with sir Maurice Abbot to go to Holland, in order to obtain the restitution of goods taken by the Dutch from some Englishmen in the East Indies. He was a member of the third parliament of James I. which met at Westminster, Jan. 30, 1621 but was so rule compliant with the court measures, as to be ranked among those whom the king called ill-tempered spirits, he was likewise a member of the first parliament of Charles 1. in 1626; and not only joined with those eminent patriots, who were for bringing Villiers duke of Buckingham to an account, but was indeed one of the most active managers in that affair, for which he was committed to the Tower, though soon released. He was again member of the third parliament of Charles I. in 1628, being one of the knights of the shire for Kent; but seemed to be more moderate in his opposition to the court than he was in the two last, and voted for the dispatch of the subsidies, yet opposed all attempts which he conceived to be hostile to the liberties of his country, or the constitution of parliament. Thus, when sir John Finch, speaker of the house of commons, on June 5, 1628, interrupted sir John Elliot in the house, saying, “There is a command laid upon me, that I must command you not to proceed” sir Dudley Digges vented his uneasiness in these words “I am as much grieved as ever. Must we not proceed Let us sit in silence we are miserable we know not what to do.” In April of the same year, he opened the grand conference between the commons and lords, “concerning the liberty of the person of every freeman,” with a speech, in which he made many excellent observations, tending to establish the liberties of the subject. In all his parliamentary proceedings, he appeared of such consequence, that the court thought it worth their while to gain him over; and accordingly they tempted him with the advantageous and honourable office of master of the rolls, of which he had a reversionary grant Nov. 29, 1630, and became possessed of it April 20, 1636, upon the death of sir Julius Csesar. But he did not enjoy it quite three years; for he died March 8, 1639, and his death was reckoned among the public calamities of those times. He was buried at Chilham church, in Kent, in which parish he had a good estate, and built a noble house.

, was an ancient poet and geographer, concerning whom we have no certain information but what we derive from the elder Pliny. Pliny, speaking of the Persian Alexandria, afterwards called Antioch, and at last Charrax, could not miss the opportunity of paying his respects to a person who had so much obliged him, and whom he professes to follow above all men in the geographical part of his work. He tells us, that *' Dionysius was a native of this Alexandria, and that he had the honour to be sent by Augustus to survey the eastern part of the world, and to make reports and observations about its state and condition, for the use of the emperor’s eldest son, who was at that time preparing an expedition into Armenia, Parthia, and Arabia.“This passage, though seemingly explicit enough, has not been thought sufficient by the critics to determine the time when Dionysius lived, whether under the first Augustus Caesar, or under some of the later emperors, who assumed his name: Vossius and others are of opinion, that the former is the emperor meant by Pliny; but Scaliger and Salmasius think he lived under Severus, or Marcus Aurelias, about A. D. 130 or 150. Dionysius wrote a great number of pieces, enumerated by Suidas and his commentator Eustathius: but his” Periegesis," or survey of the world, is the only one we have remaining; and it would be superfluous to say, that this is one of the most exact systems of ancient geography, when it has been already observed, that Pliny himself proposed it for his pattern. It is written in Greek hexameters; but some think that Dionysius is no more to be reckoned a poet, than any of those authors who have included precepts in numbers, for the sake of assisting the memory. Yet, although his book is more valuable for matter than manner, it has been thought that he had a genius capable of more sublime undertakings, and that he constantly made the Muses the companions, though not the guides, of his travels. As proofs of this, we are referred to his descriptions of the island of Lucca, inhabited by departed heroes; of the monstrous and terrible whales in Taprobana; of the poor Scythians that dwelt by the Meotic lake; to the account of himself, when he comes to describe the Caspian sea, and of the swans and bacchanals on the banks of Cayster, which shew him to have possessed no small share of poetic spirit.

, professor of the law of nature and nations, and of history, at Francfort on the Oder, and a member of the royal society of Berlin, was born March 13, 1677, at Rottenburgh, in Hesse. His father was rector of that place, and became afterwards minister and dean. His son was at first educated under his care, which he amply repaid by a proficiency far beyond his years. In his seventeenth year he went to Marpurg, and studied under Otto, the celebrated orientalist, and Tilemann, professor of divinity, with whom he lodged, and who afterwards procured him the appointment of tutor to the two young barons of Morrien. Dithmar executed this office with general satisfaction, and when he went afterwards to prosecute his studies at Leyden, he was maintained at the expence of the landgrave of He^r Cusstl. He afterwards travelled over some parts of Germany and Holland, as tutor to the son of M. the great president Dancklemann. The learned Perizonius, with whom he became acquainted at Leyden, and who had a great esteem for him, procured him the offer of a professorship at Leyden, with a liberal salary but Dithmar thought himself obliged first to return M. Dancklemann’s sun to his father, who was so sensible of the value of his services, as to procure him a settlement at Francfort on the Oder. Here he was appointed professor of history, then of the law of nature and nations, and lastly, gave lectures on statistics and finance. He had been before this admitted a member of the royal society of Berlin, and was created a counsellor of the order of St. John. His situation at Francfort was in all respects so agreeable, that he refused many offers to remove, and in 1715 again declined a very honourable opportunity of settling at Leyden. He died at Francfort March 13, 1737, after a short illness; and with the reputation of one of the most learned men of his time.

, doctor regent of the faculty of medicine at Paris, where he was born in 1634, was educated not only in the learned languages, but in painting, music, and other elegant accomplishments, and exhibited early such traits of genius and learning, that Guy Patin, not in general very lavish of praise, considered him as one of the most learned men of his time. In a letter to a friend, he called him “Monstrnm sine Vitio,” a character which Adrian Turnebus applied to Scaliger; and in another letter, Patin redoubles his praise of young Dodart, Having in 1660 taken his degree of doctor, he soon attained to distinction in his profession, being the following year called to attend the princess dowager of Conti, and the princes, her children; and some time after he was appointed physician to the king, Louis XIV. In 1673 he was made a member of the academy of sciences, and in compliance with their wishes, he wrote a preface to the “Memoires pour servir a l'Histoire de Flantes,” published by the academy, in 1676, which Chamberlayne in his Lives of the Academicians strangely mistakes for “Memoirs to serve for the History of France!” and gravely argues upon his fitness for the work. Dodart employed some labour in making chemical analyses of plants, with the view of acquiring a more intimate knowlege of their medical virtues, agreeably to the opinions that then prevailed, but which further experience has shewn not to be well founded. He pursued his statical experiments, to find the proportion that perspiration bears to the other excretions, for more than thirty years. The results first appeared in 1699, in the Memoirs of the academy, and were afterwards published separately, under the title of “Medicina Statica Gallica.” In the course of those experiments, he found that during the Lent in one year, he had lost in weight eight pounds five ounces: returning to his ordinary way of living, he recovered what he had lost in a very short time. He once purposed writing a history of music, but only finished a memoir on the voice, which is published among the Memoirs of the Academy. He was of a grave disposition, Fontenelle says, pious and abstemius; and his death, which happened Nov. 5th, 1707, was much regretted.

, a most laborious Italian writer, was born at Venice in 1508. His family was one of the most ancient in the republic, but reduced in circumstances. Lewis remained the whole of his life in his native city, occupied in his numerous literary undertakings, which procured him some personal esteem, but little reputation or wealth. Perhaps his best employment was that of cor-, rector of the press to the celebrated printer Gabriel Giolito, whose editions are so much admired for the beauties of type and paper, and yet with the advantage of Dolce’s attention, are not so correct as could be wished. As an original author, Dolce embraced the whole circle of polite literature and science, being a grammarian, rhetorician, orator, historian, philosopher, editor, translator, and commentator; and as a poet, he wrote tragedies, comedies, epics, lyrics, and satires. All that can be called events in his life, were some literary squabbles, particularly with Ruscelli, who was likewise a corrector of Giolito’s press. He died of a dropsical complaint in 1569, according to Apostolo Zeno, and, according to Tiraboschi, in 1566. Baillet, unlike most critics, says he was one of the best writers of his age. His style is flowing, pure, and elegant; but he was forced by hunger to spin out his works, and to neglect that frequent revisal which is so necessary to the finishing of a piece. Of his numerous works, a list of which may be seen in Niceron, or Moreri, the following are in some reputation: 1. “Dialogo della pittura, intitolato I'Aretino,” Venice, 1557, 8vo. This work was reprinted, with the French on the opposite page, at Florence, 1735. 2. “Cinque priini canti del Sacripante,” Vinegia^ 1535, 8vo. 3. “Primaleone,” 1562, 4to. 4. “Achilles; 1 * and” Jineas,“1570, 4to. 5.” La prima imprese del conte Orlando," 1572, 4to. 6. Poems in different collections, among others in that of Berni. And the Lives of Charles V. and Ferdinand the First.

The Communion of St. Jerom, and the Adam and Eve, are too well known to need a description; and they are universally allowed to be capital works, especially in the expression. In the Palazzo della Torre, at Naples, there is a picture of Domenichino, representing a dead Christ, on the Knees of the Virgin, attended by Mary Magdalen and others. The composition of this picture is very good, and the design simple and true; the head of the Magdalen is full of expression, the character excellent, and the colouring tolerable; but in other respects, the penciling is dry, and there is more of coldness than of harmony in the tints. But in the church of St. Agnes, at Bologna, is an altar piece which is considered as one of the most accomplished performances of this master, and shews the taste, judgment, and genius of this great artist in a true light. The subject is, the Martyrdom of St. Agnes; and the design is extremely correct, without any thing of manner. The head of the saint hath an expression of grief, mixed with hope, that is wonderfully noble and he hath given her a beautiful character. There are three female figures grouped on the right, which are lovely, with an uncommon elegance in their forms, admirably designed, and with a tone of colour that is beautiful. Their dress, and particularly the attire of their heads, is ingenious and simple; one of this master’s excellences consisting in that part of contrivance: in short, it is finely composed, and unusually well penciled; though the general tone of the colouring partakes a little of the greenish cast, and the shadows are rather too dark, yet that darkness may probably have been occasioned or increased by time. Such is the opinion of Pilkington, but it is time now to attend to that of more authorized criticism. “Expression,” says Mr. Fuseli, " which hud languished after the demise of RafTaello, seemed to revive in Domenidiino; but his sensibility was not supported by equal comprehension, elevation of mind, or dignity of motive. His sentiments want propriety, he is a mannerist in feeling, and tacks the imagery of Theocritus to the subjects of Homer. A detail of petty, though amiable conceptions is rather calculated to diminish than inforce the energy of a pathetic whole. A lovely child taking refuge in the lip or bosom of a lovely mother, is an idea of nature, and pleasing in a lowly, pastoral, or domestic subject; but perpetually recurring, becomes common-place, and amid the terrors of martyrdom, is a shred sewed to a purple robe. In touching the characteristic circle that surrounds the Ananias of Raffaello, you touch the electric chain, a genuine spark insensibly darts from the last as from the first, penetrates mul subdues. At the martyrdom of St. Agnes, by Domenichino, you saunter amid the adventitious mob of a lane, where the silly chat of neighbour gossips announces a topic as silly, till you find with indignation, that instead of a broken pot, or a petty theft, you are witness to a scene for which heaven opens and angels descend.

, in Latin Donellus, one of the most learned civilians of the sixteenth century, was born at Chalons on the Saone, in 1537. His school-master had so disheartened him by severity, that neither threats nor promises could make him remain in school. But at last, being afraid he should be placed in a menial situation, he applied more diligently to his studies. He learned civil law at Toulouse, under the professors John Corrasius and Arnold du Ferrier, who had no less than four thousand auditors. He was admitted to the degree of D. C. L. at Bourges, in 1551, and professed that science in the same city with Duaren, Hotman, and Cujacius, and afterwards at Orleans. He was very near being killed in the massacre of 1572, because he was a protestant; and could not have escaped the violence of the murtherers, if some of his scholars, who were Germans by nation, had not saved him by disguising him in a German dress, as one of their domestics. He had embraced the reformation whea rery young, at the instigation of his sister. He staid some time at Geneva, and afterwards he went into the palatinate, where he taught the civil law in the university of Heidelbergh. He was invited to Leyden in 1575, to take upon him the same employment, which he accepted and discharged in a worthy manner, but baring imprudently engaged himself in some political disputes, he was forced to leave Holland in 1588. He returned to Germany, and was professor of law at Altorf until his death, May 4, 1591. He had so happy a memory, that he knew the whole Corpus Juris by heart. His works, most of which had been published separately, were collected under the title of “Commentaria de jure civili,” 5 vols. folio, reprinted at Lucca, 12 vols. folio, of which the last appeared in 1770. 2. “Opera Posthuma,” 8vo. The most valuable of his writings, is his book on the subject of last wills and testaments, which he is said to have treated with great learning and precision.

His prose works are numerous, but except the “PseudoMartyr,” and a small volume of devotions, none of them, were published during his life. The others are, 1. “Paradoxes, problems, essays, characters,” &c. 1653, 12mo. Part of this collection was published at different times before. 2. Three volumes of “Sermons,” in folio the first printed in 1640, the second in 1649, the third in 1660. Lord Falkland styles Donne “one of the most witty and most eloquent of our modern divines.” 3. “Essays in divinity,” &c. 1651, 12mo. 4. “Letters to several persons of honour,” 1654, 4to. Both these published by his son. There are several of Donne’s letters, and others to him from the queen of Bohemia, the earl of Carlisle, archbishop Abbot, and Ben Jonson; printed in a book, entitled, “A collection of Letters made by sir Tobie Matthews, knt. 1660,” 8vo. 5. “The ancient History of the Septuagint; translated from the Greek of Aristeas,” 1633, in 12mo. This translation was revised and corrected by another hand, and published in 1635, 8vo. His sermons have not a little of the character of his poems. They are not, indeed, so rugged in style, but they abound with quaint allusions, which now appear ludicrous although they probably produced no such effect in his days. With this exception, they contain much good sense, much acquaintance with human nature, many striking thoughts, and some very just biblical criticism.

This learned prelate enjoyed a very high share of reputation during a very long life. He was, if not one of the most profound, one of the most general scholars in the kingdom, and the range of his information was most extensive. Nor was he more an enlightened scholar, than a warm friend to men of learning and genius; in private life, he was amiable, communicative, and interesting in his conversation and correspondence. As a divine, if he took no distinguished part in the controversies of the times, he evinced by his “Criterion,” his detection of Lauder, and his controversy with Bower, what a formidable antagonist he could have proved, and what an unanswerable assertor of truth. His character likewise stood high for fidelity and a conscientious discharge of the public duties of his station., and when not employed in the pulpit, for always countenancing public worship by his presence. His punctuality in this last respect is still remembered by the congregations of St. Faith’s and St. Paul’s. In a word, as his talents recommended him in early life to patronage, so he soon demonstrated that he wanted only to be better known to be thought deserving of the highest preferments.

“He inherited,” says his last encomiast, “a native poetic genius, but vitiated by the false taste which prevailed in his age, a fondness for the conceits of the Italian poets, Petrarch and Marino, and their imitators among the French, Ronsard, Bellai, and Du Bartas. Yet many of his sonnets contain simple and natural thoughts clothed in great beauty of expression. His poem entitled” Forth Feasting,“which attracted the envy as well as the praise of Ben Jonson, is superior, in harmony of numbers, to any of the compositions of the contemporary poets of England; and is, in its subject, one of the most elegant panegyrics that ever were addressed by a poet to a prince. In prose writing, the merits of Drummond are as unequal as they are in poetry. When an imitator, he is harsh, turgid, affected, and unnatural; as in his” History of the Five James’s,“which, though judicious in the arrangement of the matter, and abounding in excellent political and moral sentiments, is barbarous and uncouth in its style, from an affectation of imitating partly the manner of Livy, and partly that of Tacitus. Thus, there is a perpetual departure from ordinary construction, and- frequently a violation of the English idiom. In others of his prose compositions, where he followed his own taste, as in the” Irene,“and” Cypress-Grove,“and particularly in the former, there is a remarkable purity and ease of expression, and often a very high tone of eloquence. The” Irene,“written in 1638, is a persuasive to civil union, and the accommodation of those fatal differences between the king and the people, then verging to a crisis. It is a model of a popular address; and allowing for its pushing too far the doctrine of passive obedience, bears equal evidence of the political sagacity, copious historical information, and great moral worth and benevolence of its author.” As the neglect of one age is sometimes repaid by the extravagant commendations of another, perhaps this temperate, judicious, and elegant character of Drummond, copied from lord Woodhouselee’s Life of Kames, will be found more consistent with the spirit of true criticism than some of those impassioned sketches in which judgment has less share.

His translations of Virgil, Juvenal, and Persius, and his Fables, were more successful, as we have observed already. But his poetical reputation is built chiefly upon his original poems, among which his Ode on Saint Caecilia’s Day is justly esteemed one of the most perfect pieces in any language. It has been set to music more than once, particularly in the winter of 1735, by Handel; and was publicly performed with the utmost applause, on the theatre in Covent-garden. Congreve, in the dedication of our author’s dramatic works to the duke of Newcastle, has drawn his character to great advantage. He represented him, in regard to his moral character, in every respect not only blameless, but amiable; and, “as to his writings,” says he, “no man hath written in our language so much and so various matter, and in so various manners, so well. Another thing I may say was very peculiar to him; which is, that his parts did not decline with his years, but that he was an improving writer to the last, even to near se* venty years of age; improving even in fire and imagination, as well as in judgment; witness his Ode on St. Caecilia’s Day, and his Fables, his latest performances. He was equally excellent in verse and in prose. His prose had all the clearness imaginable, together with all the nobleness of expression; all the graces and ornaments proper and peculiar to it, without deviating into the language or diction of poetry. I have heard him frequently own with pleasure, that if he had any talent for English prose, it was owing to his having often read the writings of the great archbishop Tillotson. His versification and his numbers he could learn of nobody; for he first possessed those talents in perfection in our tongue. In his poems, his diction is, wherever his subject requires it, so sublimely and so truly poetical, that its essence, like that of pure gold, cannot be destroyed. What he has done in any one species or distinct kind of writing, would have been sufficient to have acquired him a great name. If he had written nothing but his prefaces, or nothing but his songs or his prologues, each of them would have entitled him to the preference and distinction of excelling in his kind.” It may be proper to observe, that Congreve, in drawing this character of Dryden, discharged an obligation laid on him by our poet, in these lines:

, professor of civil law at Bourges, was born at St. Brien, a city of Bretagne, in France, 1509. He was the son of John Duaren, who exercised a place of judicature in Bretagne; in which place he succeeded his father, and performed the functions of it for some time. He read lectures on the Pandects, at Paris, in 1536; and, among other scholars, had three sons of the learned Budaeus. He was sent for to Bourges in 1538, to teach civil law, three years after Alciat had retired, but quitted his place in 1548, and went to Paris, being very desirous to join the practice to the theory of the law. He accordingly attended the bar of the parliament of Paris, but conceived an unconquerable aversion to the chicanery of the court, and fortunately at this time advantageous offers were made him by the duchess of Berri, sister of Henry II. which gave him a favourable opportunity to retire from the bar, and to resume with honour the employment he had at Bourges. He returned to his professorship of civil law there, in 1551; and no professor, except Alciat, had ever so large a stipend in the university as himself, nor more reputation, being accounted the first of the French civilians who cleared the civil-law-chair from the barbarism of the glossators, in order to introduce the pure sources of the ancient jurisprudence. It was however his failing to be unwilling to share this honour with any person; and he therefore viewed with an envious eye his colleague Eguinard Baron, who blended likewise polite literature with the study of the law. This jealousy prompted him to write a book, in which he endeavoured to lessen the esteem the world had for his colleague, yet, as if ashamed of his weakness, after the death of Baron, he shewed himself one of the most zealous to immortalize his memory 7 and erected a monument to him at his own expence. He had other colleagues, who revived his uneasiness; and Duaren may serve as an example to prove that some of the chief miseries of human life, which we lament so much, and are so apt to charge on the nature and constitution of things, arise merely from ur own ill-regulated passions. He died at Bourses in 1559, without having ever married. He had great learning and judgment, but so bad a memory, that he was obliged always to read his lectures from his notes. Although a protestant, he never had the courage to separate from the church of Home. His treatise of benefices, published in 15 Jo, rendered him suspected of heresy, and Baudouin, with whom he had a controversy, accused him of being a prevaricator and dissembler, which, however, appears to have been unjust.

, son of the preceding, baron of Maipas, viscount L‘Isle, earl of Warwick, and duke of Northumberland, was born in 1502, and afterwards became one of the most powerful subjects this kingdom ever saw. At the time his father was beheaded, he was about eight years old; and it being known that the severity exercised in that act was rather to satisfy popular clamour than justice, his friends found no great difficulty in obtaining from the parliament, that his father’s attainder might be reversed, and himself restored in blood; for which purpose a special act was passed in 1511. After an education suitable to his quality, he was introduced at court in 15-23, where, having a line person, and great accomplishments, he soon became admired. He attended the king’s favourite, Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk, in his expedition to France; and distinguished himself so much by his gallant behaviour, that he obtained the honour of knighthood. He attached himself to cardinal Wolsey, whom he accompanied in his embassy to France; and he was also in great confidence with the next prime minister, lord Cromwell. The fall of these eminent statesmen one after another, did not at all affect the favour or fortune of sir John Dudley, who had great dexterity in preserving their good graces, without embarking too far in their designs; preserving always a proper regard for the sentiments of his sovereign, which kept him in full credit at court, in the midst of many changes, as well of men as measures. In 1542, he was raised to the dignity of viscount L’Isle, and at the next festival of St. George, was elected knight of the garter. This was soon after followed by a much higher instance both of kindness and trust; for the king, considering his uncommon abilities and courage, and the occasion he had then for them, made him lord high admiral of England for life; and in this important post he did many singular services. He owed all his honours and fortune to Henry VII L and received from him, towards the close of his reign, very large grants of church lands, which, however, created him many enemies. He was also named by king Henry in his will, to be one of his sixteen executors; and received from him a legacy of 500l. which was the highest he bestowed on any of them.

, son of John duke of Northumberland, afterwards baron L‘Isle, and earl of Warwick, was born about 1530, and carefully educated in his father’s family. He attended his father into Norfolk against the rebels in 1549, and, for his distinguished courage, obtained, as is probable, the honour of knighthood. He was always very high in king Edward’s favour: afterwards, being concerned in the cause of lady Jane, he was attainted, received sentence of death, and remained a prisoner till Oct. the 18th, 1554; when he was discharged, and pardoned for life. In 1557, in company with both his brothers, Robert and Henry, he engaged in an expedition to the Low Countries, and joined the Spanish army that lay then before St. Q.uintin’s. He had his share in the famous victory over the French, who came to the relief of that place; but had the misfortune to lose there his youngest brother Henry, who was a person of great hopes, and had been a singular favourite with king Edward. This matter was so represented to queen Mary, that, in consideration oftheir faithful services, she restored the whole family in blood and accordingly an act passed this year for that purpose. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, he became immediately one of the most distinguished persons at her court; and was called, as in the days of her brother, lord Ambrose Dudley. He was afterwards created first baron L’Isle, and then earl of Warwick. He was advanced to several high places, and distinguished by numerous honours; and we find him in all the great and public services during this active and busy reign; but, what is greatly to his credit, never in any of the intrigues with which it was blemished: for he was a man of great sweetness of temper, and of an unexceptionable character; so that he was beloved by all parties, and hated by none. In the last years of his life he endured great pain and misery from a wound received in his leg, when he defended New Haven against the French in 1562; and this bringing him very low, he at last submitted to an amputation, of which he died in Feb. 1589. He was thrice married, but had no issue. He was generally called “The good earl of Warwick.”

Captain Duncan quitted the Monarch not long after his arrival in England, and did not receive any other commission until the beginning of 1782, when he was appointed to the Blenheim of 90 guns, a ship newly come out of dock, after having undergone a complete repair. He continued in the same command during near the whole of the remainder of the war, constantly employed with the channel fleet, commanded, during the greater part of the time, by the late earl Howe. Having accompanied his lordship in the month of September to Gibraltar, he was stationed to lead the larboard division of the centre, or commander-in-chief 's squadron, and was very distinguish* edly engaged in the encounter with the combined fleets of France and Spain, which took place off" the entrance of the Straits. The fleet of the enemy was more than one fourth superior to that of Britain; and yet, had not the former enjoyed the advantage of the weather-gage, it was >vas very evident from the event of the skirmish which did take place, that if the encounter had been more serious, the victory would, in all probability, have been completely decisive against them. Soon after the fleet arrived in England, capt. Duncan removed into the Foudroyant, of 84 guns, one of the most favourite ships of the British navy at that time, which had, during the whole preceding part of the war, been commanded by sir John Jervis, now earl St. Vincent. On the peace, which took place in the ensuing spring, he removed into the Edgar of 74 guns, one of the guard-ships stationed at Portsmouth, and continued, as is customary in time of peace, in that command during the three succeeding years; and this was the last commission he ever held as a private captain. On Sept. 14, 1789, he was promoted to be rear-admiral of the blue, and to the same rank in the white squadron on Sept. 22, 1790. He was raised to be vice-admiral of the blue, Feb. 1, 1793; of the white, April 12, 1794; to be admiral of the blue, June 1, 1795; and lastly, admiral of the white, Feb. 14, 1799. During all these periods, except the two last, singular as it may appear, the high merit of admiral Duncan continued either unknown, or unregarded. Frequently did he solicit a command, and as often did his request pass uncomplied with. It has even been reported, we know not on what foundation, that this brave man had it once in contemplation to retire altogether from the service, on a very honourable civil appointment connected with the navy.

At this most alarming and unprecedented crisis, the conduct of admiral Duncan must not be forgotten, although we have no inclination to revive the memory of that unnatural rebellion by a particular narrative. When the mutiny raged in his squadron in a most awful manner, and when left only with three ships, he still remained firm in his station off the Texel, and succeeded in keeping the Dutch navy from proceeding to sea; a circumstance, in all probability, of as high consequence to the nation as his subsequent victory. His behaviour at the time of the mutiny will be best seen from the speech which he made to the crew of his own ship, on the 3d of June, 1797, and which, as a piece of artless and affecting oratory, cannot but be admired by the most fastidious taste. His men being assembled, the admiral thus addressed them from the quarter-deck: “My lads I once more call you together with a sorrowful heart, from what I have lately seen of the disaffection of the fleets; I call it disaffection, for the crews have no grievances. To be deserted by my fleet, in the face of an enemy, is a disgrace which I believe never before happened to a British admiral; nor could I have supposed it. My greatest comfort, under God, is, that I have been supported by the officers, seamen, and marines of this ship; for which, with a heart overflowing with gratitude, I request you to accept my sincere thanks. I flatter myself much good may result from your example, by bringing those deluded people to a sense of the duty which they owe, not only to their king and country, but to themselves. The British navy has ever been the support of that liberty which has been handed down to us by our ancestors, and which, I trust, we shall maintain to the latest posterity and that can only be done by unanimity and obedience. The ship’s company, and others who have distinguished themselves by their loyalty and good order, deserve to be, and doubtless:,v'// be, the favourites of a grateful country; they will also have, from their individual feelings, a comfort which must be lasting, and not like the fleeting and false confidence of those who have swerved from their duty. It has often been my pride with you to look into the Texel, and see a foe which dreaded coming out to meet us. My pride is now humble indeed! My feelings are not easily to be expressed! Our cup has overflowed, and made us wanton. The all-wise Providence has given us this check as a warning, and I hope we shall improve by it. On Him, then, let us trust, where our only security can be found. I find there are many good men among us; for my own part, I have had full confidence of all in this ship; and once more beg to express my approbation of your conduct. May God, who has thus so far conducted you, continue to do so! and may the British navy, the glory and support of our country, be restored to its wonted splendour, and be not only the bulwark of Britain, but the terror of the world But this can only be effected by a strict adherence to our duty and obedience and let us pray that the Almighty God may keep us in the right way of thinking. God bless you all!” The crew of the Venerable were so affected by this impressive address, that, on retiring, there was not a dry eye among them. On the suppression of the mutiny, the admiral resumed his station with his whole fleet off the coast of Holland, either to keep the Dutch squadron in the Texel, or to attack them if they should attempt to come out. It has since been discovered, that the object of the Batavian republic, in conjunction with France, was to invade Ireland, where, doubtless, they would have been cordially welcomed by numerous bodies of the disaffected. Hence it will be seen that the object of watching and checking the motions of the Dutch admiral was of the Utmost consequence. After a long and very vigilant attention to the important trust reposed in him, the English admiral was necessitated to repair to Yarmouth Roads to refit. The Batavian commander seized this favourable interval, and proceeded to sea. That active officer, captain sir H. Trollope, however, was upon the look-out, and, having discovered the enemy, dispatched a vessel with the glad intelligence to admiral Duncan, who lost not an instant of time, but pushed out at once, and in the morning of the 11th of October fell in with captain Trollope’s squadron of observation, with a signal flying for an enemy to the leeward. By a masterly manoeuvre the admiral placed himself between them and the Texel, so as to prevent them from re-entering without risking an engagement. An action accordingly took place between Camperdown and Egmont, in nine fathoms water, and within five miles of the coast. The admiral’s own ship, in pursuance of a plan of naval evolution which he had long before determined to carry into effect, broke the enemy’s line, and closely engaged the Dutch admiral De Winter, who, after a most gallant defence, was obliged to strike. Eight ships were taken, two of which carried flags! All circumstances considered the time of the year, the force of the enemy, and the nearness to a dangerous shore this action will be pronounced, by every judge of nautical affairs, to be one of the most brilliant that graces our annals. The nation was fully sensible of the merit and consequence of this glorious victory; politicians beheld in it the annihilation of the designs of our combined enemies; naval men admired the address and skill which were displayed by the English commander in his approaches to the attack; and the people at large were transported with admiration, joy, and gratitude. The honours which were instantly conferred upon the venerable admiral received the approbation of all parties. October 21, 1797, he was created lord viscount Duncan, of Camperdown, and baron Duncan, of Lnndie, in the shire of Perth. On his being introduced into the house of peers, on Nov. 8, the lord chancellor communicated to him the thanks of the house, and in his speech said, “He congratulated his lordship upon his accession to the honour of a distinguished seat in that place, to which his very meritorious and unparalleled professional conduct had deservedly raised him that conduct (the chancellor added) was such as not only merited the thanks of their lordships’ house, but the gratitude and applause of the oountry at large; it had been instrumental, under the auspices of Providence, in establishing the security of his majesty’s dominions, and frustrating the ambitious and destructive designs of the enemy.” A pension of 2000l. per annum was also granted his lordship, for himself and the two next heirs of the peerage.

In 1728, a letter by Mr. Duncombe, signed Philopropos, was printed in the London Journal of March 30, containing some animadversions on the “Beggar’s Opera,” then exhibiting with great applause at Lincoln’s-i-intheatre, shewing its pernicious consequences to the practice of morality and Christian virtue. And the same popular entertainment having been soon after most seasonably condemned in a sermon preached at Lincoln’s-inn chapel by Dr. Herring (afterwards archbishop of Canterbury), of whom Mr. Duncombe was a constant auditor, in a subsequent letter on the same subject in the London Journal of April 20, subscribed Benevolus, he paid a just compliment to the “clear reasoning, good sense, and manly rhetoric, the judicious criticism, as well as the Christian oratory,” there displayed. This introduced him to the acquaintance and friendship of that excellent divine, which continued without interruption till his grace’s death, in March 1757; this favour being gratefully acknowledged by him “as one of the most generous and disinterested offers of friendship which he ever received from any one since he was acquainted with the world.” In August of the same year, our author published a pamphlet (without a name) entitled “Remarks on M.Tindal’s Translation of M. de Rapin Thoyras’s History of England, in a letter to S. T. [Sigismund Trafford,] esq.” criticising Tindal’s style, which is certainly none of the best.

On June 14, 1760, Mr. Dundas was appointed president of the court of session. This was the aera of the splendour of his public character. Invested with one of the most important trusts that can be committed to a subject, he acquitted himself of that trust, during the twentyseven years in which he held it, with such consummate ability, wisdom, and rectitude, as must found a reputation durable as the national annals, and transmit his memory with honour to all future times. At his first entry upon office, the public, though well assured of his abilities, was doubtful whether he possessed that power of application and measure of assiduity, which is the first duty of the station that he now filled. Fond of social intercourse, and of late engaged in a sphere of life where natural talents are the chief requisite to eminence, he had hitherto submitted but reluctantly to the habits of professional industry. But it was soon seen, that accidental circumstances alone had prevented the developement of one great feature of his character, a capacity of profound application to business. He had no sooner taken his seat as president of the session, than he devoted himself to the duties of his office with an ardour of which that court, even under the ablest of his predecessors, had seen no example, and a perseverance of attention which suffered no remission to the latest hour of his life. He maintained, with great strictness, all the forms of the court in the conduct of business. These he wisely considered as essential, both to the equal administration of justice, and as the outworks which guard the law against those too common, but most unworthy artifices which are employed to prostitute and abuse it. To the bar he conducted himself with uniform attention and rQspect. He listened with patience to the reasonings of the counsel. He never anticipated the arguments of the pleader, nor interrupted him with questions to shew his own acuteness; but left every man to state his cause his own way: nor did he ever interfere, unless to restrain what was either manifestly foreign to the subject, or what wounded, in his apprehension, the dignity of the court. In this last respect he was most laudably punctilious. He never suffered an improper word to escape, either fromthe tongue or pen of a counsel, without the severest animadversion; and so acute was that feeling which he was know n to possess, of the respect that was due to the bench, that there were but few occasions when it became necessary for him to express it.

, one of the most learned lawyers of the thirteenth century, was born at Puimoisson in Provence; and was Henry of Suza’s pupil, and taught canon law at Modena. He afterwards was made chaplain and auditor of the sacred palace, legate to Gregory X. at the council of Lyons, and bishop of Mende, 1286. He died at Rome, November J, 1296. His works are, “Speculum Juris,” Rome, 1474, fol. a work which gained him the jiame of Speculator. “Rationale divinorum officiorum;” the first edition is Mentz, 1459, fol. very scarce. “Repertorium Juris,” Venice, 1496, fol. &c. He is to be distinguished from his nephew, William Durand, who succeeded him as bishop of Mende, and died 1328. There is an excellent treatise by this last; “De la maniere de celebrer le Concile general,” Paris, 154-5, 8vo. He wrote it on occasion of the council of Vienne, to which he was summoned by Clement V. 1310. This treatise may also be found in a collection of several works of the same kind, published by M. Fourte, doctor of the Sorbonne.

, so called from a town in Auvergne, a learned French divine of the fourteenth century, entered the Dominican order, took a doctor’s degree at Paris, was master of the sacred palace, bishop of Puy in Velay, and afterwards bishop of Meaux, where he died in 1333. Durand was one of the most eminent divines of his age he left Commentaries on the four books of Sentence, Paris, 1550, 2 vols. fol. and “Trait de TOrigine des Jurisdictions,” 4to. He frequently combats the opinions of St. Thomas, being an adherent of Scotus, and displayed so much ingenuity in his disputes, as to be called the Most resolute Doctor. Although the Thomists could not conquer him in his life, one of the number contrived to dispose of him after death, in these lines:

As Durer did not make so much use of the pencil as the graver, few of his pictures are to be met with, except in the palaces of princes. His picture of Adam and Eve, in the palace at Prague, is one of the most considerable of his paintings, and Bullart, who relates this, adds, that there is still to be seen in the palace a picture of Christ bearing his cross, which the city of Nuremberg presented to the emperor; an adoration of the wise men; and two pieces of the Passion, that he made for the monastery at Francfort; an Assumption, the beauty of which was a good income to the monks, by the presents made to them for the sight of so exquisite a piece: that the people of Nuremberg carefully preserve, in the senators -hall, his portraits of Charlemagne, and some emperors of the house of Austria, with the twelve apostles, whose drapery is very remarkable: that he sent to Raphael his portrait of himself done upon canvass, without any colours or touch of the pencil, only heightened with shades and white, but with such strength and elegance, that Raphael was surprised at the sight of it; and that this excellent piece, coming afterwards into the hands of Julio Romano, was placed by him among the curiosities of the palace of Mantua.

, an eminent Scotch divine of the seventeenth century, the eldest son of John Durham of Easter-Powrie, esq. and descended from the ancient family of Grange Durham in the county of Angus, was born about 1622, and educated at the university of St. Andrew’s, which he left without taking a degree, as he had then no design of following any of the learned professions. When the civil wars broke out, he served in the army, with the rank of captain, but was so much affected by his narrow escape from being killed in an engagement with the English, that, encouraged by Dr. David Dickson, professor of divinity at Glasgow, he determined to devote himself to the church. With this view he went to Glasgow, studied divinity under Dr. Dickson, and in 1646 was licensed by the presbytery of Irvine to preach. In the following year he was ordained minister of the Black-friars 7 church in Glasgow, where he became one of the most popular preachers of his time. In 1650 he was chosen to succeed Dr. Dickson as professor, and about the same time attended Charles II. when in Scotland, as one of his chaplains. In 1651, when Cromwell and his army were at Glasgow, Durham preached before the usurper, and upbraided him to his face for having invaded the country. Next day Cromwell sent for him, and told him he thought he had been a wiser man than to meddle with public affairs in his sermons. Durham answered that it was not his common practice, but that he could not help laying hold of such an opportunity of expressing his sentiments in his presence. Cromwell dismissed him with a caution, but met with so many other instances of similar rebuffs from the Scotch clergy, that he thought it unadvisable to pursue any more severe course. Durham was a man of such moderation of temper and sentiment, as to be able to conduct himself without giving much offence in those troublesome times, and gained the favour of all parties by the conscientious discharge of his pastoral duties. This character gave him unusual authority in the country where he lived; but his incessant labours both as a preacher and writer brought on a consumptive disorder, of which he died June 25, 1658, in the prime of life. He wrote, 1. “A Commentary on the Revelations.” 2. “Sermons on the liii. of Isaiah.” 3. “Sermons on the Song of Solomon.” 4. “A treatise on Scandal.” 5. “An Exposition of the Commandments:” the two latter posthumous; with some single sermons and pious tracts, which have been often reprinted.

On his return to England, he closely pursued his favourite study of natural history; applying himself to the drawing and colouring of such animals as fell under his notice. His earliest rare was rather to preserve natural than picturesque beauty. Birds first engaged his particular attention; and some of the best pictures of these subjects being purchased by him, he was induced to make a few drawings of his own. These were admired by the curious, who, by paying a good price for them, encouraged him in labours- which now procured him a decent subsistence and a large acquaintance. In 1731 he was enabled to remit his industry, and, in company with two of his relations, made an excursion to Holland and Brabant, where he collected several scarce books and prints, and had an opportunity of examining the original pictures of various great masters, at Antwerp, Brussels, Utrecht, and other large cities. In December 1733, by the recommendation of sir Hans Sloane, president of the college of physicians, he was chosen their librarian, and had apartments assigned him in the college. This, which was the principal epocha of his private life, fixed him in an office that was particularly agreeable to his taste and inclination. He had now an opportunity of a constant recourse to a valuable library, filled with scarce and curious books on those subjects of natural history which he most assiduously studied. By degrees he became one of the most eminent ornithologists in our own or any other country, and in acquiring this character, such was his scrupulous industry, that he never trusted to others what he could perform himself; and when he found it difficult to give satisfaction to his own mind, frequently made three or four drawings to delineate the object in its most lively character, attitude, and representation.

Of Dr. Edwards’s piety, a high, and we doubt not, a just character is given by his biographer: the only thing which his brethren objected to him, was his great zeal for the Calvinistic doctrines, and his maintaining a close connection between Arminianism and Popery. That he was a man of extensive learning cannot be denied; and by his admirers he was said to have been the Paul, the Augustine, the Brad ward ine, the Calvin, and one of the most valuable writers of his age.

His works consist of several volumes of sermons, printed at various times, and often reprinted in this country as well as in America. To one of these, consisting of eighteen Sermons, reprinted at Glasgow in 1785, is prefixed his life written by Dr. Hopkins. Besides these he wrote, 1. “A Treatise concerning religious Affections,” 1746, 8vo. 2. “An Account of the Life of the Rev. David Brainerd,” 1749, 8vo. 3. “An Inquiry into the Qualifications for full communion in the Visible Church,” 1749, intended as a vindication of his principles in the matter which occasioned his dismission from Northampton. 4. “A careful and strict inquiry into the modern prevailing notion of that Freedom of Will, which is supposed to be essential to moral agency,” 1754. 5. “The great Christian doctrine of Original Sin defended, containing a reply to the objections of Dr. John Taylor,” 1753. A very recent critic, while he censures with much asperity Mr. Edwards’s treatise on original sin, asserts at the same time that his treatise on free will deserves to be regarded as one of the most stupendous monuments of metaphysical argument ever erected by the human understanding. 6. “An History of Redemption.” 7. “Miscellaneous Observations on important Theological Subjects,” London, 1793. 8. w Remarks on important Theological Controversies," ibid. 1796. Some of these were posthumous, as were a few other tracts of lesser importance written by him.

It is not always that men distinguished in public appear to advantage in their private characters. We shall consider the life of our prelate in both these views, and each will throw a lustre upon the other. In the following sketch we mean to delineate such select traits only as are not common to all other men, but were more peculiar in him. His person was tall and well formed, it had both elegance and strength; his countenance was ingenuous, animated, and engaging. By nature he was endowed with strong and lively parts, a good temper, “and an active disposition. Descended from noble ancestors, and initiated from his birth in the most honourable connections, his manners and sentiments were cast from an early age in the happiest mould, and gave all the advantages of that ease and propriety of behaviour, which were so very observable even in the most indifferent actions of his life. In his address there was a peculiar mixture of dignity and affability, by which he had the remarkable art both of encouraging those who were diffident, and checking those who were presumptuous. The vivacity of his spirits and conversation, and the peculiar propriety of his manners, made him universally admired and caressed. His memory was accurate and extensive. In describing the characters, and in relating the anecdotes and transactions with which he had been acquainted, he took particular delight; and this, when his health permitted, he did with much spirit, and often with the utmost pleasantry and humour; but scrupulously taking care that the desire of ornamenting any narrative should never in the smallest degree induce him to depart from the truth of it. With so rare and happy a talent for description, with a mind stored with much information, and a memory very retentive, he was one of the most instructive and entertaining of companions; his conversation was enriched with pertinent and useful observations, and enlivened by genuine wit and humorous anecdote. He had a very peculiar art of extricating himself with much immediate address from those little embarrassments which perplex and confound many, and which often occur in society from thf awkwardness of others, or from a concurrence of singular and unexpected circumstances. When pressed by improper questions, instead of being offended with them himself, or giving offence by his replies, be had a talent of returning very ready and very dextrous answers. In every sort of emergency, as well in personal danger as in difficulties of an inferior nature, he shewed an uncommon presence of mind. He possessed a great reach of understanding, and was singularly gifted with a quick and ready judgment, deciding rightly upon the instant when it was necessary. No man was better qualified, or at the same time more averse to give his opinion; which, upon many occasions, he found a difficulty in avoiding, its value being so well known, that it was often solicited by his friends; and, when he was prevailed upon, he delivered it rather with the humility of one who asked, than with the authority of one who gave advice. In forming his friendships, he was as cautious as he was steady and uniform in adhering to them. He was extremely partial to the friendships of his youth, and made a particular point of being useful to those with whom he had been thus early connected. In all the domestic relations of life he was exemplary, as a husband, a master, and a parent. Instead of holding over his children an authority founded upon interest, during his life he put them into possession of a great part of such fortunes as they would have inherited from him upon his death, willing to have their obedience proceed not merely from a sense of duty, but from gratitude, and from pure disinterested affection. Though he was ever disinclined to write for the public, yet his merit as a scholar was, however, well known, and properly estimated, by such of his private friends as were them” selves distinguished by their erudition, particularly by archbishop Seeker, Benson bishop of Gloucester, Butler bishop of Durham, the late lord Lyttelton, the late lord Egremont, the late Mr. George Grenville, Mr. William Gerard Hamilton, Mr. Ansty, Mr. Richard Owen Cambridge, Mr. Garrick, Mr. Stillingfleet, Mr. J. Nourse, author of several pieces of poetry in Dodsley’s collection, Dr. Croxall, sir William Draper, &c. &c. His only publications were three sermons one preached before the lords, the llth of February, 1757, being a general fast another before the lords, the 30th of January, 1761 and a third before the society for the propagation of the gospel, on the 18th of February, 1763. In the early part of his life he was fond of those manly exercises which give strength and vigour both to the body and mind, without suffering them to interrupt his studies; a practice, which thus regulated, instead of being injurious, is serviceable to learning, and which men eminent for their judgment have lamented was not more cultivated and improved. His usual relaxations were such as exercised the understanding; chess was his favourite amusement, and he played well at that game. The Greek and Latin tongues were familiar to him. He spoke the French and Italian languages; and wrote, and spoke his own with purity and precision. Of books he had a competent knowledge, and collected a good library. In every thing he had a pure taste. In history, anecdotes, and memoirs, in the belles-lettres, in the arts and sciences, and in whatever else may be supposed to fall within the circle of polite education, he was by no means uninstructed.

It is understood that his grace before be came of age, digested the plans which he afterwards prosecuted with such success, and proceeded to put them in execution as soon as he obtained possession of his paternal inheritance. Among other estates, the duke had one at Worsley, in Lancashire, rich in coal-mines, but, owing to the expence of land-carriage, of inconsiderable value: desirous, therefore, of working those mines to greater advantage, he projected a canal from his estate at Worsley, to the rich and flourishing town of Manchester. With this view he applied to the ingenious Mr. Brindley, who had previously manifested unusual talents; and that artist, after surveying the ground, pronounced the execution of the work to be practicable. As, however, we have detailed the early history of this undertaking in our article of Bkindley, (vol. VII.) it may suffice to refer to it; and briefly notice in this place that the duke caused a bill to be introduced into Parliament in 1758-9, which met with uncommon opposition in its progress, though it ultimately passed both houses; and further powers, as well for the purpose of effecting the original design, as for extending the line of navigation, being afterwards found necessary, application was again made to parliament, and they were much more readily obtained than the former. This canal begins at Worsley-Mill, about seven miles from Manchester, where his grace cut a bason capacious enough to hold all his boats and a body of water to serve as a reservoir for his navigation. The canal enters a hill by a subterraneous passage of nearly a mile in length, that admits flat-bottom boats, which are toweci along by hand-rails to the coal-works: this passage afterwards divides into two; is in some places cut through the solid rock, in others arched with brick; and is provided with several air-funnels, cut to the top of the hill. At the entrance, the arch is about six feet wide,and in some parts of sufficient breadth to admit of boats passing each other. Five or six of those boats, which carry seven tons each, are drawn by one horse to Manchester. In other places, the canal is carried over public roads by means of ardhes; and where the road is too high, it is gradually lowered, and rises on the opposite side. But one of the most arduous works accomplished on this canal is the aqueduct over the river Irwell, where the canal runs forty feet over the river, and where the barges are seen passing on the former, and the vessels on the latter in full sail under them. This aqueduct begins three miles from Worsley, and is carried for more than two hundred yards over a valley. When the works approached the river, several artists pronounced their completion impracticable; and one went so far as to call it “building a castle in the air.” Had the duke attended to these opinions, without doubt delivered by men of skill and penetration, he would have relinquished his purpose; but his own sagacity, and his confidence in the assurances of Mr. Brindley, determined him to persevere; and the aqueduct over the river Irwell will for ages remain as a monument of the public spirit of his grace the late duke of Bridgewater, and of the rare abilities of the artist; while it may also read a salutary lecture on the imbecility of human judgment and human foresight.

He was undoubtedly one of the most useful persons of his age in the infant state of America; -and such was his charity that he distributed all he received from his own congregation among the Indians. He wrote several pamphlets, giving accounts of the “Progress of the Gospel among the Indians in New England,” 4to, which were regularly sent over to the corporation in London, and printed by them. He published also an “Indian Grammar,” Camb. 1666, 4to; and “The Logiek Primer for the use of the Indians,” 1672, 16mo. We are also told that he was the author of a tract or volume called “The Christian Republic,” which is said to have been published in England about 1660, but that the governor and council of Massachusetts, conceiving that it militated against the established governments, and especially against the monarchy of the mother country, insisted upon its being suppressed, and that the author should retract his sentiments. This he is said to have done, by allowing that a government by king, lords, and commons, has nothing in it hostile to Christianity. Other works ace ascribed to him, which, we do not find mentioned by any of his biographers.

, queen of England, one of the most celebrated sovereigns of this or of any country, was the daughter of Henry VIII. by his queen Anne Boleyn, and born in the year 1533. JShe was educated in the principles of the protestant religion, and was distinguished for her attainments in classical literature. By the last will of her father, she was nominated third in order of succession, but by the influence of the duke of Northumberland, she was by an act of Edward VI. excluded from the crown, to which nevertheless she attained on the death of her sister Mary. During, however, the reign of that sister, she was treated with the utmost indignity and severity, committed to the Tower, and threatened with still greater calamities. Her confinement in this fortress was short, for even the judges of Mary could find no plea against her, and she was sent from thence to Woodstock, where, though kept in safe custody, she was treated with much respect. Her sufferings and her principles endeared her to the nation, and she became so extremely popular that it was, in a short time, deemed impolitic to put any restraint upon her. When set at liberty she chose study and retirement, and was very submissive to the will of her sister. Attempts were made to draw her into some declarations respecting her religion, which might be laid hold of; but in every instance she acted with so much prudence and caution as to give her enemies no advantage of that kind, and seemed to comply with the external forms of the established religion, though it was well known, she was attached to that of the reformation.

The armada had now reached Calais, and cast anchor before that place; in expectation that the duke of Parma, who had gotten intelligence of their approach, would put to sea and join his forces to them. The English admiral practised here a successful stratagem upon the Spaniards. He took eight of his smaller ships, and filling them with all combustible materials, sent them one after another into the midst of the enemy. The Spaniards fancied that they were fireships of the same contrivance with a famous vessel which had lately done so much execution in the Scheld near Antwerp; and they immediately cut their cables, and took to flight with the greatest disorder and precipitation. The English fell upon them next morning while in confusion; and besides doing great damage to other ships, they took oV destroyed about twelve of the enemy. By this time it was become apparent, that the intention for which these preparations were made by the Spaniards, was entirely frustrated. The vessels provided by the duke of Parma were made for transporting soldiers, not for fighting; and that general, when urged to leave the harbour, positively refused to expose his flourishing army to such apparent hazard; while the English were not only able to keep the sea, but seemed even to triumph over their enemy. The Spanish admiral found, in many rencounters, that while he lost so considerable a part of his own navy, he had destroyed only one small vessel of the English and he foresaw that by continuing so unequal a combat, he must draw inevitable destruction on all the remainder. He prepared therefore to return homewards; but as the wind was contrary to his passage through the channel, he resolved to sail northwards, and making the tour of the island, reach the Spanish harbours by the ocean. The English feet followed him during some time; and had not their ammuniiion fallen short, by the negligence of the offices in supplying them, they had obliged the whole armada to surrender at discretion. The duke of Medina had once taken that resolution; but was diverted from it by the advice of his confessor. This conclusion of the enterprize would have been more glorious to the English; but the event proved almost equally fatal to the Spaniards. A violent tempest overtook the armada after it passed the Orkneys; the ships had already lost their anchors, and were obliged to keep to sea; the mariners, unaccustomed to such hardships, and not able to govern such unwieldy vessels, yielded to the fury of the storm, and allowed their ships to drive either on the western isles of Scotland, or on the coast of Ireland, where they were miserably wrecked^ Not a half of the navy returned to Spain; and the seamen as well as soldiers who remained, were so overcome with hardships and fatigue, and so dispirited by their discomfiture, that they filled all Spain with accounts of the desperate valour of the English, and of the tempestuous violence of that ocean which surrounds them. Such was the miserable and dishonourable conduct of an enterprize which had been preparing for three years, which had exhausted the revenue and force of Spain, and which had long filled all Europe with anxiety or expectation, and which was intended to have destroyed the civil liberties, as well as the reformed religion, in England. Soon after this, which was one of the most important events in the history of Elizabeth, or any other sovereign of England, Elizabeth became the ally of Henry IV. in order to vindicate his title, and establish him firmly on the throne of France, and for some years the Englisii auxiliaries served in France, while several naval expeditions, undertaken by individuals, or by the queen, raised the reputation of England to an extraordinary height. At this period Robert Devereux earl of Essex, the queen’s favourite, highly distinguished himself; but the events of his unfortunate life have been already given. (See Devereux.)

, daughter of the emperor Maximilian II. and wife of Charles IX. king of France, was married at Mezieres, Nov. 26, 1570. She was one of the most beautiful persons of her time, and her virtue is said to have surpassed her beauty. The deplorable and fatal night of St Bartholomew afflicted her extremely; on hearing the news of what had past, when she rose in the morning, bathed in tears, she threw herself at the foot of her crucifix to: ask mercy of God on the perpetrators of so atrocious a deed, which she detested with horror. Elizabeth had but very little share in what passed in France under the tumultuous reign of Charles IX. She attended to pothing but her domestic concerns, and conducted her fat-­niily by the principles of prudence and honour for which she xvas highly remarkable. Sensible to the irregularities of, her husband, whom she loved and honoured extremely, she never let him perceive those jealous disquietudes which often augment and seldom remedy the evil. She was mild and patient Charles was lively and impetuous; the ardour of the king was moderated by the serenity of Elizabeth accordingly she never lost his affection and his esteem, and he recommended her, when dying, to Henry IV. then king of Navarre, with the utmost tenderness: “Take cart? of my daughter and my wife,” said he; “my brother, take care of them; I recommend them to the generosity of your heart.” During his illness, Elizabeth spent all the time when she was not attending upon him, in prayers for his recovery. When she went to see him, she did not place herself by his bedside, as she had a right to do; but kept at a little distance, and by her modest silence, by her tender and respectful looks, she seemed to cover him in her heart with the love she bore him “then,” adds Brantome, “she was- seen to shed tears so tender and so secret, that a common spectator would have known nothing of it; and wiping her watery eyes, excited the liveliest emotions of pity in all that were present: for,” continues he, “I was a witness to it.” She stifled her grief; she dared not let her tenderness appear, fearing lest the king should perceive it. The prince could not avoid saying, when speaking of her, that he might boast of having an amiable wife, the most discreet and the most virtuous woman, not in all France, not in all Europe, but in the whole world. He was nevertheless as reserved with her as the queen mother, who, apprehending that she might have some power over the king, doubtless employed her influence in preventing that prince from reposing in her confidence, which would have disconcerted her schemes. "While she was at the court of France, she honoured with a tender affection Margaret queen of Navarre, her sisterin-law, though of a conduct so totally opposite to hers; and, after her return to Germany, Elizabeth always kept up an epistolary correspondence with her. She even sent her, as a pledge of her friendship, two books of her own composing: the one, on the word of God; the other, on the most considerable events that had happened in France in her time. Tins virtuous princess, after the death of the king her husband, retired to Vienna, where she died in 1592, aged only thirty-eight, in a convent of her own foundation.

, F. R. S. an eminent naturalist, is thought to have been born in London, about 1710, but of his early life and occupations no certain information has been obtained, except that he was engaged in mercantile pursuits. He imbibed a taste for natural history, probably when young, made collections of natural curiosities, and by attentive observation and depth of thought soon rose superior to the merit of a mere collector. It is to him we owe the discovery of the animal nature of corals and corallines, which is justly said to form an epocha in natural science. The first collection he made of these new-discovered animals, after being presented to, and examined by the royal society, was deposited in the British museum, where it till remains. His mind was originally turned to the subject by a collection of corallines sent him from Anglesey, which he arranged upon paper so as to form a kind of natural landscape. But although the opinion he formed of their being animals was confirmed by some members of the royal society, as soon as he had explained his reasons, he determined to make farther observations, and enlarge his knowledge of corallines on the spot. For this purpose he went, in August 1752, to the isle of Sheppy, accompanied by Mr. Brooking, a painter, and the observations which he made still further confirmed him in his opinions. In 1754, he prevailed on Ehret, the celebrated botanist and artist, to accompany him to Brighthelmstone, where they made drawings, and formed a collection of zoophites. In 1755, he published the result of all his investigations, under the title of an “Essay to wards a Natural History of Corallines,” 4to, one of the most accurate books ever published, whether we consider the plates, the descriptions, or the observations which demonstrate the animal nature of the zoophites. His opinions on this subject were opposed by Job Easier, a Dutch physician and naturalist, who published various dissertations in the Philosophical Transactions in order to prove that corallines were of a vegetable nature. But his arguments were victoriously refuted by Ellis, whose opinions on the subject were almost immediately assented to by naturalists in general, and have been further confirmed by every subsequent examination of the subject.

, sister of Mr. William Elstob, and engaged in the same learned pursuits, was born at Newcastle, Sept. 29, 1683. It is said, that she owed the rudiments of her extraordinary education to her mother; of which advantage, however, she was soon deprived; for at the age of eight years she had the misfortune of losing this intelligent parent. Her guardians, who entertained different sentiments, discouraged as much as they were able her progress in literature, as improper for her sex; but she had contracted too great a fondness for literary studies to be diverted from the prosecution of them. During her brother’s continuance at Oxford, she appears to have resided in that city, where she was esteemed and respected by Dr. Hudson and other Oxonians. Upon her brother’s removal to London, she probably removed with him; and, it is certain, that she assisted him in his antiquarian undertakings. The first public proof which she gave of it was in 1709, when, upon Mr. Elstob’s printing the homily on St. Gregory’s day, she accompanied it with an English translation. The preface, too, was written by her, in which she answers the objections made to female learning, by producing that glory of her sex, as she calls her, Mrs. Anna Maria Schurman. Mrs. Elstob’s next publication was a translation of madame Seudery’s “t-ssay on Glory.” She assisted, also, her brother in an edition of Gregory’s pastoral, which was probably intended to have included both the original and Saxon version; and she had transcribed all the hymns, from an ancient manuscript in Salisbury cathedral. By the encouragement of Dr. Hickes, she undertook a Saxon Homilarium, with an English translation, notes, and various readings. To promote this design, Mr. Bowyer printed for her, in 1713, “Some testimonies of learned men, in favour of the intended edition of the Saxon Homilies, concerning the learning of the author of those homilies, and the advantages to be hoped for from an edition of them. In a letter from the publisher to a doctor in divinity.” About the same time she wrote three letters to the lord treasurer, from which it appears, that he solicited and obtained for her queen Anne’s bounty towards printing the homilies in question. Her majesty’s decease soon deprived Mrs. Elstob of this benefit; and she was not otherwise sufficiently patronized, so as to be able to complete the work. A lew only of the homilies were actually printed at Oxford, in folio. Mrs. Elstob’s portrait was given in the initial letter G of “The English. Saxon Homily on the Birth-day of St, George.” In 1715, she published a Saxon grammar, the types for which had been cut at the expence of the lord chief justice Parker, afterwards earl of Macclesfield. Mrs. Elstob had other literary designs in view, but was prevented from the prosecution of them, by her distressed circumstances, and the want of due encouragement. After her brother’s death, she was so far reduced, that she was obliged to retire to Evesham in Worcestershire, where she subsisted with difficulty by keeping a small school. In this situation she experienced the friendship of Mr. George Ballard, and of Mrs. Capon, wife of the rev. Mr. Capon, who kept a boarding-school at Sianton, in Gloucestershire. These worthy persons exerted themselves among their acquaintance, to obtain for Mrs. Elstub some annual provision. At length she was recoiflmended to queen Caroline, who granted her a pension of twenty guineas a year. This being discontinued on the queen’s decease, Mrs. Elstob was again brought into difficulties, and, though mistress of eight languages, besides her own, was obliged to seek for employment as a preceptress of children. She may, however, be considered as having been very fortunate in the situation which she obtained in this capacity; for, in 1739, she was taken into the family of the duchess Dowager of Portland, where she continued till her death, which happened on the 30th of May 1756. She was buried at St. Margaret’s, Westminster. Mr. Rowe Mores describes her as having been the indefessa comes of her brother’s studies, and a female student of the university; and as having originally possessed a genteel fortune, which, by pursuing too much the drug called learning, she did not know how to manage. He adds, that upon visiting her in her sleeping-room at Bulstrode, he found her surrounded with books and dirtiness. She was, however, one of the most extraordinary women of her age, the first, and as far as we know, the last of her sex, who was a Saxon scholar. A more particular account of her Mss. and other productions is given in our first authority.

Sir Thomas Elyot’s Castle of Health, we are told by the same author, subjected him to various strictures. When some gallants had mocked at him for writing a book of medicine, and said in derision, that he was become a physician, he gave this answer: “Truly, if they call him a physician which is studious about the weal of his country, I vouchsafe they so name me. For, during my life, I will in that affection always continue.” Indeed, sir Thomas’s work exposed him to the censures both of the gentry and the medical faculty. To the former, who alleged that it did not beseem a knight to write upon such a subject, he replied, “that many kings and emperors (whose names he sets down) did not only advance and honour that science with special privileges, but were also studious in it themselves.” He added, “that it was no more shame for a person of quality to be the author of a book on the science of physic, than it was for king Henry the Eighth to publish a book on the science of grammar, which he had lately done.” What offended the physicians was, that sir Thomas should meddle in their department, and particularly that he should treat of medicine in English, to make the knowledge thereof common. But he justified himself by endeavouring to shew, that his work was intended for their benefit. As for those who found fault with him for writing in English, he, on the other hand, blamed them for affecting to keep their art a secret. To such of the college as reflected upon his skill, he represented, that before he was twenty years old, one of the most learned physicians in England read to him the works of Hippocrates, Galen, Oribasius, Paulus Celius, Alexander Trallianus, Pliny, Dioscorides, and Joannicius. To these sir Thomas afterwards added the study of Avicen, Averroes, and many more. Therefore, though he had never been at Montpelier, Padua, or Salerno; yet he said, “that he had found something in physic, by which he had experienced no little profit for his own health.”

On the whole, sir Thomas Elyot was both one of the most learned, and one of the wisest men of his time. Having in the earlier part of his life served his king and country in embassies and public affairs, he devoted his latter years to the writing of such discourses as he hoped would be serviceable in promoting true wisdom and virtue. From his youth he had a great desire after knowledge, and an earnest solicitude to be useful to his countrymen. The books which he most diligently perused, and which he eagerly sought after wherever they could be found, were all the ancient works, whether in Greek or Latin, that treated of moral philosophy, and the right institution of Jife. Strype has produced some examples of the wisdom of our knight in those weighty sentences which often came from his pen.

Mr. Emlyn was one of the most eminent divines of the Arian persuasion which this country has produced, but liis writings are not now so much read as they formerly were. He was what is called a high Ariao; believing our blessed Saviour to be the first of derived beings, the Creator of the world, and an object of worship; but several persons who are advocates for the pre-existence of Christ, do not entirely coincide with the sentiments which Mr. Emlyn has advanced upon these subjects.

, one of the most celebrated philosophers of antiquity, the real merit of whose system, however, still remains doubtful, was an Athenian of the Egean tribe, and born at Gargettus, in the vicinity of Athens, at the beginning of the third year of the 109th oh mpiad, or B. C. 344. His father Neocles, and his mother Chaerestrata, were of honourable descent, but being reduced to poverty, they were sent with a colony of 2000 Athenian citizens, to the island of Samos, which Pericles had subdued, to divide the lands among them by lot; but wljat fell to their share not proving sufficient lor their subsistence, Neocles took up the profession of a schoolmaster. Epicurus remained at Samos till he was eighteen years of age, when he removed to Athens, which the tyranny of Perdiccas soon made him leave; but after passing one year at Mitylene, and four at Lampsacus, he returned to Athens. From his fourteenth to his thirty-sixth year, he studied under the various philosophers of his day, and therefore when we read in Cicero that he boasted he was a selftaught philosopher, we are to understand only that his system of philosophy was the result of his own reflections, after comparing the doctrines of other sects. About th thirty-second year of his age he opened a school at Mitylene, which he soon removed to Lampsacus, where he had disciples from Colophon, but not satisfied with this obscure situation, he determined to make his appearance on the more public theatre of Athens. Finding, however, the public places in the city proper for this purpose, already occupied by other sects, he purchased a pleasant garden, where he took up his constant residence, and taught his system of philosophy; and hence the Epicureans were called the Philosophers of the Garden. Besides this garden, Epicurus had a house in Melite, a village of the Cecropian tribe, to which he frequently retreated with his friends. From this time to his death, notwithstanding all the disturbances of the state, Epicurus never left Athens, unless in two or three excursions into Ionia to visit his friends. During the siege of Athens by Demetrius, which happened when Epicurus was forty -four years of age, while the city was severely [harassed by famine, Epicurus is said to have supported himself and his friends on a small quantity of beans, which he shared equally with them.

, a celebrated lawyer, was born at Roorda, in Friesland, in 1529. He studied at Cologne and Louvain, and made such rapid progress in the acquisition of the learned languages, that at the age of twenty he gave public lectures on Homer. He afterwards taught, not only at Louvain but at Paris, jurisprudence, the belles lettres, and theology, and afterwards went to Geneva with a view to inquire if the religious principles of Calvin were worthy of the reputation they had gained. Not satisfied, however, with them, -tie returned to the church of Rome in which he had been educated, and confining his studies to the civil and canon law, took the degree of doctor in. 1561, at Toulouse, where he had studied under Berenger Ferdinand, one of the most learned lawyers of his time. He then returned to Louvain, where he lectured until he was chosen one of the professors of the new university of Douay, an office which he held for twenty-seven years, He died Nov. 16, 1599. He wrote a great many works on law, ecclesiastical history, &c. among which are, 1. “Juliani Archiepiscopi Prognosticon, sive de futuro seculo, libri tres,” 1564, 8vo. 2. “Antiquitatum Ecclesiasticarum Syntagmata,” 1578, 8vo. 3, “Heroicarum et Ecclesiasticarum Q.uestionum libri sex.” 4. “De Jure sacro, vel principiorum Juris pontificii, libri tres,” 1588, 3 vols. 8vo. In 1711 a new edition of his works was begun to be published at Brussels, but we have not discovered whether it was completed.

, one of the most illustrious of the revivers of learning, was born at Rotterdam, October 28, 1467. His father Gerard, who was of Tergou, in that neighbourhood, fell in love with Margaret, the daughter of one Peter, a physician of Sevenbergen; and after promises of marriage, as Erasmus himself suggests, connected himself with her, though the nuptial ceremonies were not performed. From this intercourse Gerard had a son, whom Erasmus calls Anthony, in a letter to Lambert Grunnius, secretary to pope Julius II. and whose death, in another letter he tells us, he bore better than he did the death of his friend Frobenius. About two years after, Margaret proved with child again; and then Gerard’s father and brethren (for he was the youngest of ten children) beginning to be uneasy at this attachment, resolved to make him an ecclesiastic. Gerard, aware of this, secretly withdrew into Italy, and went to Rome; he left, however, a letter behind him, in which he bade his relations a final farewell; and assured them that they should never see his face more while they continued in those resolutions. At Rome he maintained himself decently by transcribing ancient authors, which, printing being not yet commonly used, was no unprofitable employment. In the mean time, Margaret, far advanced in her pregnancy, was conveyed to Rotterdam to lie in, privately; and was there delivered of Erasmus. He took his name from this city, and always called himself Roterodamus, though, as Dr. Jortin, the writer of his life, intimates, he should rather have said Roterodamius, or Roterodamensis. The city, however, was not in the least offended at the inaccuracy, but made proper returns of gratitude to a name by which she was so much ennobled; and perpetuated her acknowledgments by inscriptions, and medals, and by a statue erected and placed at first near the principal church, but afterwards removed to a Station on one of the bridges. Gerard’s relations, long ignorant what was become of him, at last discovered that he was at Rome and now resolved to attempt by stratagem what they could not effect by solicitation and importunity. They sent him word, therefore, that his beloved Margaret was dead; and he lamented the supposed misfortune with such extremity of grief, as to determine to leave the world, and become a priest. And even when upon his return to Tergou, which happened soon after, he found Margaret alive, he adhered to his ecclesiastical engagements; and though he always retained the tenderest affection for her, never more lived with her in any other manner than what was allowable by the laws of his profession. She also observed on her part the strictest celibacy ever after. During the absence of his father, Erasmus was under the care and management of his grandmother, Gerard’s mother, Catharine. He was called Gerard, after his father, and afterwards took the name of Desiderius, which in Latin, and the surname of Erasmus, which in Greek, signify much the same as Gerard among the Hollanders, that is, “amabilis,” or amiable. Afterwards he was sensible that he should in grammatical propriety have called himself Erasmius, and in fact, he gave this name to his godson, Joannes Erasmius Frobenius. As soon as Gerard was settled in his own country again, he applied himself with all imaginable care to the education of Erasmus, whom he was determined to bring up to letters, though in low repute at that time, because he discovered in him early a very uncommon capacity. There prevails indeed a notion in Holland, that Erasmus was at first of so heavy and sl9w an understanding, that it was many years before they could make him learn any thing; and this, they think, appears from a passage in the life written by himself, where he says, that “in his first years he made but little progress in those unpleasant studies, for which he was not born; in literis ill is inamoenis, quibus non natus erat.” When he was nine years old, he was sent to Dav enter, in Guelderland, at that time one of the best schools in the Netherlands, and the most free from the barbarism of the age; and here his parts very soon shone 'out. He apprehended in an instant whatever was taught him, and retained it so perfectly, that he infinitely surpassed all his companions. Rhenanus tells us that Zinthius, one of the best masters in the college of Daventer, was so well satisfied with Erasmus’s progress, and so thoroughly convinced of his great abilities, as to have foretold what afterwards came to pa>s, that “he would some time prove the envy and wonder of all Germany.” His memory is said to have b~?en so prodigious, that he was able to repeat all Terence and Horace by heart. We must nojt forget to observe, that pope Adrian VI. was his schoolfellow, and ever after his friend, and the encourager of his studies.

In 1525 he published his “Diatribe de libero arbitrio,” already noticed, which Luther replied to, in a treatise entitled “De servo arbitrio.” In this he mixes compliment, praise, scorn, insult, ridicule, and invective, together; at which Erasmus was much provoked, and immediately wrote a reply, which was the first part of his “Hyperaspistes:” the second was published in 1527. The year after he published two treatises, in the way of dialogue, entitled “The pronunciation of the Greek and Latin languages,” and “The Ciceronianus.” In the former, which is one of the most learned of all his compositions, are contained very curious researches into the pronunciation of vowels and consonants; in the sec.ond, which is one of the most lively and ingenious, he rallies agreeably some Italian purists, who scrupled to make use of any word or phrase which was not to be found in Cicero: not that he condemned either Cicero or his manner of writing, but only the servility and pedantry of his imitators, which he thought, and very justly, deserving of ridicule. On the contrary, when Froben engaged him, the very same year, to revise a new edition of the Tusculan Questions, he prefixed to it an elegant preface, in which he highly extols Cicero, both for his style and moral sentiments, and almost makes a saint of him: and Julius Scaliger, who censured Erasmus for his treatment of the Ciceronians, declared afterwards, that he was willing to forgive him his blasphemies, and to be at peace with him thenceforward, for the sake of this preface; which he considered as a kind of penance, and of satisfaction made to the manes of the Roman orator.

He had been ill at Friburg, and continued so at Basil. In the summer of 1536 he grew worse; and the last letter which we have of his writing is dated June the 20th of that year. He subscribes it thus, “Erasmus Rot. aegra manu.” He was for almost a month ill of a dysentery; and he knew that his disease would prove mortal. He had foreseen for several months, that he could not hold out long; and he foretold it again three days, and then two days, before his death. He died July 12, in the sixty-ninth year of his age; and was buried in the cathedral church of Basil, where his tomb is to be seen, with a Latin inscription on the marble, of which a copy it inserted in the first volume of his works. He had made his will in February, in which he left handsome legacies to his friends, and the remainder to be distributed to relieve the sick and poor, to marry young women, and to assist young men of good characters: by which it appeared, that he was not in low circumstances, nor so bad an ceconomist as he sometimes, between jest and earnest, represented himself. His friend Beatus Rhenanus has given us a description of his person and manners, and tells us, that he was low of stature, but not remarkably short; that he was well-shaped, of a fair complexion, with hair in his youth of a pale yellow, grey eyes, a cheerful countenance, a low voice, and an agreeable utterance; that he was neat and decent in his apparel; that he had a very tender and infirm constitution, and a tenacious memory; that he was a pleasant companion, a very constant friend, generous and charitable, &c. He had one peculiarity belonging to him, which was, that he could not endure even the smell of fish; so that, however he might be a papist in other respects, he had, as he says, a very Lutheran stomach. He used to dine late, that he might have a long morning for study. After dinner, he would converse cheerfully with his friends upon all sorts of subjects, and deliver his opinions freely upon men and things. Erasmus objected long to sit for his picture; but he conquered that aversion, and was frequently drawn by Holbein. He dwelt longer at Basil than at any other place. He delighted in that city; and though he sometimes made excursions, yet he was sure to return. The revolution in religion was the only cause that hindered him from fixing his abode there all his days. At Basil they show the house in which he died; and the place where the professors of divinity read their winter-lectures is called the college of Erasmus. His cabinet is one of the most considerable rarities of the city; it contains his ring, his seal, his sword, his knife, his pencil, his will written with his own hand, and his picture by Holbein, which is a masterpiece. The magistrates bought this cabinet, in 1661, for nine thousand crowns, of the descendants of Erasmus’s heir: and, if we may believe Patin, they made a present of it to the university; but others say, they sold it for a thousand crowns. Nothing has made the city of Rotterdam more famous, than its having given birth to this great man: nor has it been insensible of the honour, but has testified its high regard to him. The house in which he was born is adorned with an inscription, to inform both natives and strangers of this illustrious prerogative; the college, where Latin, Greek, and rhetoric are taught, bears the name of Erasmus, and is consecrated to him by an inscription on th6 frontispiece; a statue of wood was raised to him in 1549; a statue of stone in 1555, and one of copper in 1622, which is admired by the connoisseurs. It is in an open part of the city, standing on a bridge over a canal, upon a pedestal adorned with inscriptions, and surrounded with iron rails.

, was born at Tacnnstadt in Thuringia, Aug. 4, 1707, was educated at Witternberg and Leipsic, and became one of the most learned philologers of Germany. He studied theology as a profession; and in 1734 was chosen rector of St. Thomas’s school. In 1742 he was appointed professor extraordinary of ancient literature, in 1756 professor of eloquence, and in 1758 doctor and professor of divinity, the functions of all which offices he discharged with great assiduity and high reputation, and yet found leisure for his numerous original publications, and those excellent editions of the classics which have made his name familiar in the learned world. As a divine, he disliked the modern philosophical innovations in the study of theology, and was alike hostile to infidelity and superstition. He died, with the character of a man of consummate learning and irreproachable character, Sept. 11, 1781. Among his valuable editions of the classics are, 1. His “Homer,” Leipsic, 1759, 5 vols. 8vo, which may be ranked among the very best. It is formed on the basis of Clarke’s, containing his text and notes, and the various readings of a Leipsic manuscript, with those of the ancient editions. 2. “Callimachus,” Ley den, 1761, 2 vols. 8vo, containing, besides the preface, notes, and version of Ernesti, many grammatical and critical observations of Hemsterhusius and Ruhnkenius, and the whole of what is valuable in Gravius. 3. “Cicero,” of whose works he published three editions, the first at Leipsic, 1737, 5 vols. the others at Halle, 1758 and 1774, in 8 vols. 8vo. The second and third, which are the most correct, contain the famous “Clavis Ciceroniana,” which has been published separately. 4. “Tacitus,” Leipsic, 1752, 1772, 2 vols. 8vo, both valuable, although there are more errors and omissions than could have been wished; yet the preface, notes, and indexes are interesting and useful. 5. “Suetonius,” two editions, at Leipsic, 1748 and 1775, 8vo, but neither correct, or indeed at all valuable. 6. Aristophanes’ s Nubes,“Leipsic, 1788, a very useful edition, with the ancient scholia, and remarks by the editor and by Nagelius. 7. Xenophon’s” Memorabilia,“of which there have been several editions, 1737, 1742, 1755, &c. The best is that of Leipsic, 1772. Ernesti’s other works are, 8.” Initia doctrinse solidioris,“Leipsic, 1783, 8vo, the seventh edition. 9.” Institutio interpretis Novi Testamenti,“Leipsic, 1775, 8vo, the third edition, which Alberti of Leyden calls a” golden work.“10. An improved edition of Hederic’s Lexicon, 1754 and 1767. 11. A” Theological Library,“1760 1771, 11 vols. 8vo. 12.” Opuscula Oratoria, Orationes, Prolusiones et Elogia x “Leyden, 1762, 8vo. This contains thirteen very elegant and judicious academical discourses, pronounced on different occasions, with the same number of historical eloges. The subjects of the discourses are, 1. Of the study of the belles lettres. 2. That eloquence has its real source in the heart. 3. That we must conform to the laws of criticism in the study of divinity. 4. Of the revolutions of eloquence. 5. Of the conditions to be observed for studying and teaching philosophy with success. 6. Of the advantages of real learning. 7. The arts of peace and war. 8. A parallel between the Greek and Roman writers. 9. Of the name of on’s country. 10. Of joining the art of thinking to that of speaking. 11. Of the desire of praise and reputation. 12. Of popular philosophy and, 13. Of moral or practicable philosophy. These discourses are written in an easy flowing style, and in elegant Latinity. II.” Opusculorum oratoriorum, novum volumen,“Leipsic, 1791, 8vo: this and another volume published in 1794, forms a complete collection of Ernesti’s smaller tracts. 12.” Archaeologia literaria,“Leipsic, 1768, 8vo, to which we may add his excellent new edition, of which he lived to publish only 3 volumes, of” Fabricii Bibl. Graeca." His nephew, Augustus William Ernes n, was born in 1733, and died in 1801 at Leipsic, where he was professor of eloquence in that university from 1770, and well known by his edition of Livy, Quintilian, and other classics. To the university library there he bequeathed his very complete collection of the works of Camerarius; and to that of the Senate, his collection of the editions and Mss. of Cicero, to complete the Ciceronian collection already in it.

, an eminent canonist, was born at Louvain in 1646, “and after taking his degree of doctor of laws in 1675, filled a chair in the college of pope Adrian VI. with great success. Being fond of retirement and study, he is only known to the world by his writings. Having lost his sight in the sixty-fifth year of his age, by a cataract, which was removed two years afterwards, he neither lost any thing of his vivacity nor his application. His sentiments on the Formulary, and on the frull Unigenitus, and the kind of approbation which he gave to the consecration of Steenoven, archbishop of Utrecht, brought on him much unmerited persecution, chiefly from the envy of individuals. What they made him suffer, however, forced him to retire to Maestricht, and then to Amersfort, where he died, Oct. 2, 1728, at the age of eighty-three. Van Espen is doubtless one of the most learned canonists of his times. His principal work, still consulted, is his” Jus ecclesiasticum universum,“in which the most important points of ecclesiastical discipline are circumstantially discussed with profound knowledge of. the subject. At Paris, under the imprint of Louvain, was published, in 1753, a collection of all the works of Van Espen, in 4 vols. folio. This edition, which is enriched with the observations of Gibert on the” Jus ecclesiasticum," and the notes of father Barre, a canoiv-regular of St. Genevieve, contains every particular of importance in ethics, the canon, and even the civil law, and since that time a supplementary volume was published by Gabriel de Bellegarde.

, a learned French divine, was born at Chalons-sur-Marne in 1511, of noble parents, became a doctor of the Sorbonne, and was rector of the university of Paris. He preached with considerable applause; but having in one of his sermons called the “Légende Doreée” the “Légende Ferrée,” it was concluded that he did not believe in the worship of the saints; especially from his doubting of certain facts related by the legendary writers in the “Golden Legend,” of which he ventured to speak thus disrespectfully. The faculty of Paris was about to pass a censure on him; but he explained himself in another discourse, and the transient storm was succeeded by a calm. The cardinal de Lorraine, who was well aware of his merit, employed him in several affairs of importance. D‘Espence attended him to Flanders in 1544, for the purpose of ratifying the peace between Charles V. and Francis I. His eminence took him afterwards to Rome in 1555, where he made so conspicuous a figure, that Paul IV. would have honoured him with the purple, in order to retain him. But his intention was set aside (says fatrjer, Berthier) as being apparently contrary to the interests of France. The imperialists requested the hat for three monks; and therefore the cardinal de Lorraine, who IV voured the design of getting D’Espence into the sacred college, relinquished the idea. “I rather chose,” says he in a letter to the king, “that he should not be there, than that three monks should get in; accordingly I entreated his holiness to think no more of it, and, by that means, I kept out the whole crew.” D'Espence, liking far less to live at Rome than at Paris, returned to France, and appeared with consequence at the assembly of the states of Orleans in 1560, and at the conference of Poissy in 1561, where he attached himself to the Calvinists, which gave much offence to his popish brethren. He died of the stone at Paris, Oct. 5, 1571, in the sixtieth year of his age. He was one of the most moderate and judicious doctors of the age in which he lived, and with all his attachment to popery, was the declared enemy of all violent measures, and disapproved of persecutions. He was well versed in the sciences, both ecclesiastical and profane. His works are almost all written in Latin, with an elegance scarcely known to the theologians of that period. The principal of them are, 1. “A treatise on Clandestine Marriages;” in which he proves that the sons of distinguished families cannot validiy contract marriage, without the consent of their relations. 2. “Commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul to Timothy and Titus,” full of long digressions on the hierarchy and the ecclesiastical discipline. 3. Several controversial tracts, some in Latin and others in French. Ah his Latin works were collected at Paris in 1619, folio.

That his long seven years’ silence is not to be pardon'd." Which shews that the poem in which these lines are written was just before the publication of our author’s last comedy. Sir George was addicted to great extravagances, being too free of his purse in gaming, and of his constitution with women and wine; which embarrassed his fortune, impaired his health, and exposed him to many reflections. Gildon says, that for marrying a fortune he was knighted; but it is said in a poem of those times, which never was printed (ms collection of satires, in the Harleian collection), that, to make some reparation of his circumstances, he courted a rich old widow; whose ambition was such, that she would not marry him unless he could make her a lady; which he was forced by the purchase of knighthood to do. This was probably about 1683. We hear not of any issue he had by this lady; but he cohabited, whether before or after this said marriage is not known, for some time with Mrs. Barry, the actress, and had a daughter by her on whom he settled five or six thousand pounds but she died young. From the same intelligence we have also learnt, that sir George was, in his person, a fair, slender, genteel man; but spoiled his countenance with drinking, and other habits of intemperance; and, in his deportment, very affable and courteous, of a sprightly and generous temper; which, with his free, lively, and natural vein of writing, acquired him the general character of Gentle George and Easy Etherege; in respect to which qualities we may often find him compared with sir Charles Sedley. His courtly address, and other accomplishments, won him the favour of the duchesi of York, afterwards, when king James was crowned, his queen; by whose interest and recommendation he wa sent ambassador abroad. In a certain pasquil that was written upon him, it is intimated as if he was sent upon ome embassy to Turkey. Gildon says, that, being in particular esteem with king James’s consort, he was sent envoy to Hamburgh but it is in several books evident, that he was, in that reign, a minister at Ratisbon at least from 1686 to the time that his majesty left this kingdom, if not later and this appears also from his own letters which he wrote thence some to the earl of Middleton, inverse to one of which his lordship engaged Mr. Dryden to return a poetical answer, in which he invites sir George to write another play; and, to keep him in countenance for his having been so dilatory in his last, reminds him hovr long the comedy, or farce, of the “Rehearsal” had been hatching, by the duke of Buckingham, before it appeared: but we meet with nothing more of our author’s writing for the stage. There are extant some other letters of his in prose, which were written also from Ratisbon; two of which he sent to the duke of Buckingham when he was in his recess. As for his other compositions, such as have been printed, they consist, for the greatest part, of little airy sonnets, lampoons, and panegyrics, of no great poetical merit, although suited to the gay and careless taste of the times. All that we have met with, of his prose, is a short piece, entitled “An Account of the rejoycing at the diet of Ratisbonne, performed by sir George Etherege, knight, residing therefrom his majesty of Great Britain; upon occasion of the birth of the prince of Wales. In a letter from himself.” Printed in the Savoy, 1688. How far beyond this or the next year he lived, the writers on our poets, who have spoken of him, have been, as in many other particulars of his life, so in the time when he died, very deficient. In Gildon’s short and imperfect account of him, it is said, that after the revolution he went for France to his master, and died there, or very soon after his arrival thence in England. But there was a report, that sir George came to an untimely death by an unlucky accident at Ratisbon; for, after having treated some company with a liberal entertainment at his house there, in which having perhaps taken his glass too freely, and being, through his great complaisance, too forward in waiting on some of his guests at their departure, flushed as he was, he tumbled down the stairs and broke his neck. Sir George had a brother, who lived and died at Westminster; he had been a great courtier, yet a man of such strict honour, that he was esteemed a reputation to the family. He had been twice married, and by his first wife had a son; a little man, of a brave spirit, who inherited the honourable principles of his father. He was a colonel in king William’s wars; was near him in one of the most dangerous battles in Flanders, probably it was the battle of Landen in 1693, when his majesty was wounded, 'and the colonel both lost his right eye, and received a contusion on his side. He was offered, in queen Anne’s reign, twenty-two hundred pounds for his commission, but refused to live at home in? peace when his country was at war. This colonel Ktherege died at Ealing in Middlesex, about the third or fourth year of king George I. and was buried in Kensington church, near the altar; where there is a tombstone over his vault, in which were also buried his wife, son, and sister. That son was graciously received at court by queen Anne; and, soon after his father returned from the wars in Flanders under the duke of Marlborough, she gave him an ensign’s commission, intending farther to promote him', in reward of his father’s service but he died a youth and the sister married Mr. Hill of Feversham in Kent but we hear not of any male issue surviving. The editors of the Biographia Dramatica observe, that, as a writer, sir George Etherege was certainly born a poet, and appears to have been possessed of a genius, the vivacity of which had littlecultivation; for there are no proofs of his having been a scholar. Though the “Comical Revenge” succeeded very well upon the stage, and met with general approbation for a considerable time, it is now justly laid aside on account of its immorality. This is the case, likewise, with regard to sir George’s other plays. Of the “She would if she could,” the critic Dennis says, that though it was esteemed by men of sense for the trueness of some of its characters, and the purity, freeness, and easy grace of its dialogue, yet, on its first appearance, it was barbarously treated by the audience. If the auditors were offended with the licentiousness of the comedy, their barbarity did them honour; but it is probable that, at that period, they were influenced by some other consideration. Exclusively of its loose tendency, the play is pronounced to be undoubtedly a very good one; and it was esteemed as one of the first rank at the time in which it was written. However, ShadwelPs encomium upon it will be judged to be too extravagant.

Photius has said of Eusebius, that he was a man of extensive learning, but that his style is neither agreeable nor polite. Dupin observes, that he was one of the most learned men of antiquity, as his friends and enemies have equally acknowledged and that there was none among the Greek writers who had read so much but remarks, that he never applied himself to the polishing his works, and is very negligent in his style. Dr. Jortin styles Eusebius “the most learned bishop of his age, and the father of ecclesiastical history. Like the illustrious Origen,” says he, “of whom he was very fond, he hath had warm friends and inveterate enemies; and the world hath ever been divided in judging of his theological sentiments. The Arians and Unitarians have always laid claim to him and in truth any party might be glad to have him. He scrupled at first to admit the word Consubstantial, because it was nnscriptural; but afterwards, for the sake of peace and quiet, he complied with it in a sense which he gave to it. He seems to have been neither an Arian nor an Athanasian, but one who endeavoured to steer a middle course, yet inclining more to the Arians than the Athanasians.” Le Clerc had a dispute with Cave about the orthodoxy of Eusebius; who, as Cave said, was a Consubstantialist, but, according to Le Clerc, an Arian, which last opinion appears to us most probable, as he associated with Arius, and joined in the condemnation of the Athanasians. Brucker, speaking of his “Preparatio et Demonstrate Evangelica,” says, that had this celebrated work been more free from prejudice; had he taken more care not to be imposed upon by spurious authorities; had he more clearly understood, from the leading principles of each sect, its peculiar language; had he distinguished the pure doctrine of Plato from that of the later Platonists; had he more accurately marked the points of difference between the tenets of the sectarian philosophers and the doctrine of Christ, his works would have been much more valuable.

, one of the most celebrated anatomists of the sixteenth century, was a native of San Severino, a village in Italy. He was educated at Rome, where he first conceived a bias in favour of medicine, and especially of anatomy, and cultivated the latter with such success, that he was appointed to the professor’s chair in that college. His life probably passed in the quiet pursuit of his studies and exercise of his profession, as no other events are on record concerning him. He died at Home in 1574. Eustachius was the author of several works, the greater part of which are lost. His treatise “De Controversiis Anatomicorum,” which was one of the most considerable of his productions, is much regretted. His opuscula which remain appeared under the following titles, “Opuscula Anatomica, nempe de Renum structura, officio, et administratione de auditus organo ossium examen de mom capitis de vena quae azygos dicitur, et de alia, quae in flexn brachii communem profundam producit de dentibus,” Venet. 1563, and again in 1674, with the notes of Pinus. An edition was also published at Leyden, in 1707, under the superintendance of Boerhaave. He has the merit of several discoveries in anatomy; being the tirst who described the renal capsules, the thoracic duct, and the passage leading from the throat to the internal ear, which is still called from him the Eustachian tube. A series of figures engraved on copper were mentioned in his “Opuscula” as nearly finished; but they were not discovered until 1714, when they were published at Rome by Lancisi, physician to pope Clement XL in one volume, folio. These plates were again published, but not well printed, at Geneva in 1717. The edition of Rome in 1728 is excellent; but the one published at the same city in 1740, by Petrioli, is less valuable. The same work was twice published at Leyden, under the direction of Albinus, viz. in 1744 and 1762. Eustachius edited the lexicon of Erotran at Venice in 1666, under the title of “Erotiani, Graeci scriptoris vetustissimi, vocum, quae apud Hippocratem sunt, collectio, cum annotatiombus Eustachii,” in quarto.

, of Ascalon in Palestine, a Greek mathematician of the sixth century, was one of the most intelligent of those who lived in the decline of Greek literature. He wrote Commentaries on the Conies of Apollonius, which were addressed to Anthcmius, and are inserted in Halley’s edition of that author, published at Oxford in 1710; and on the most important works of Archimedes, which lately appeared with every advantage of elegance and correctness, in the folio edition of Archimedes, jssued from the Clarendon press in 1792, which was prepared for publication by Torelli of Verona. Eutocius has some of the best qualities of a commentator. He very seldom passes over a difficult passage in his author without explaining it, or a chasm in the reasoning without supplying the defect. His remarks are usually full; and so anxious is he to render th text perspicuous, that sometimes he undertakes to elucidate where his author may be thought sufficiently clear. Writers have differed about his age; Saxius, one of the latest, and generally most accurate, authorities, places him in the fifth century; but Eutocius addresses Anthemius; and we find from his own writings, that Isidorus was his preceptor, both of whom were, according to Procopius, the architects of the church of St. Sophia, built at Constantinople, about the year 532; consequently, Eutocius must have flourished in the middle of the sixth century.

, one of the most determined opponents of revealed religion in modern times, was born at Warrington, Lancashire, April, 1731, and at first educated by an uncle, who sent him to Emanuel college, Cambridge, when in his fourteenth year. Here he took the degree of Ib. A. in 1749, and that of M. A. in 1753. At a proper age he was ordained, and for several years officiated as curate to his uncle, who had the living of Mitcham in Surrey. In 1768 he obtained the vicarage of South Mirnms, near Barnet, and resided in the vicarage house about two years, when, by the interest of John Dodd, esq. M. P. for Reading, lord Camden, then lord chancellor, presented him to the rectory of Tewkesbury. In conjunction with this, Mr. Evanson held the vicarage of Longton, a village in Worcestershire, about five miles from Tewkesbury, for which he exchanged that of South Mimms. While settled at Tewkesbury, he seems first to have inclined to those deviations from the opinions of his church, which by degrees led him much farther than he could find any to follow him, even among those who had hitherto been most distinguished for their hostility to orthodoxy. We are told that almost as soon as he began to entertain doubts concerning the doctrine of the Trinity, he wrote a letter to the archbishop of Canterbury, stating the rise of his first scruples, with the grounds of them, and requesting of his grace to favour him, by means of his secretary, with such information as might assist in removing those doubts, and enable him conscientiously to remain in his office as a minister of the Gospel, &c. At what precise time, or to what archbishop this letter was written, we have not been informed, but no answer was returned, or could indeed have been reasonably expected. Perhaps, however, it was about the same time that Mr. Evanson began to take such liberties in reading the Liturgy as suited his new opinions; and for this, and some of those opinions delivered in the pulpit, particularly in a sermon preached in 1771, on the doctrine of the resurrection, a prosecution was commenced against him, which, after a considerable expence incurred on both sides, on account of some irregularity in the proceedings of the prosecutors, ended in a nonsuit. Seven years after this Mr. Evanson published the sermon, with an affidavit to its literal authenticity. To this he appears to have been obliged by the publication, on the part of his opponents, of “A narrative of the origin and progress of the prosecution against the rev. Edward Evanson.” This last was followed by “A word at parting; being a few observations on a mutilated sermon, and an epistle dedicatory to the worthy inhabitants of Tewkesbury, lately published by Edward Evanson, M. A.: to which are added, the arguraents of counsel in the court of delegates touching Mr. Evanson’s prosecution.” Both these were published by the late Neast Havard, esq. town clerk of Tewkesbury, who had been principally active in instituting the prosecution. In favour of Mr. Evanson, however, we are told that it was only “a small party” who found fault with his doctrines, and that the principal inhabitants of Tewkesbury supported him by subscribing a very large sum to defray his expences. The inhabitants of Longdon were still more partial, for it is said that “they would willingly have kept him among them, permitting him to make, as he had been accustomed, any alterations in the church service that his own views of the subject might have dictated:” Mr. Evanson, however, does not appear to have set a very great value on a licence of this description, and acted a more fair and wise part in resigning both his livings. He then (in 3778) returned to Mitcham, and undertook the education of a few pupils, the father of one of whom, col. EvelynJames Stuart, settled an annuity upon him, which was regularly paid until his death.

This scheme, which is characteristic of the state of Mr. Evelyn’s mind, at a time when good men sickened at the contemplation of successful rebellion, would, in all likelihood, have gradually departed from its principles, and is perhaps too romantic to have stood the collision of human passions and human events. But, when a prospect appeared of better times, it occasioned some change in his sentiments; and, upon an attempt being made to damp the desires of the people for the king’s return, he drew his pen in that critical season in defence of his majesty’s character, which, at such a juncture, was both an acceptable and a very important service. The conduct of Mr. Evelyn in this critical year, 1659, which was in truth the most active in his whole life, is hardly taken notice of by any of those who have undertaken to preserve his memoirs. After the death of Oliver and the deposition of Richard Cromwell, there were many of the commanders in the army that shewed an inclination to reconcile themselves to the king; which disposition of theirs was very much encouraged by such as had his majesty’s interest truly at heart. Amongst these, Mr. Evelyn had a particular eye upon colonel Herbert Morley, an old experienced officer in the parliament army, who had two stout regiments entirely at his devotion, was very much esteemed by his party, and had the general reputation of being a person of probity and honour. It was a very dangerous step, as things then stood, to make any advances to one in his situation; yet Mr. Evelyn, considering how much it might be in that gentleman’s power to facilitate the king’s return, fairly ventured his life, by advising the colonel freely to make his peace with, and enter into the service of, the king. The colonel, as might well be expected, acted coldly and cautiously at first, but at last accepted Mr. Evelyn’s offer, and desired him to make use of his interest to procure a pardon for himself, and some of his relations and friends whom he named, promising in return to give all the assistance in his power to the royal cause. At the same time that Mr. Evelyn carried on this dangerous intercourse with colonel Morley, he formed a resolution of publishing something that might take off the edge of that inveteracy, expressed by those who had been deepest in the parliament’s interest, against such as had always adhered to the king and with this view he wrote a small treatise, which had the desired effect, and was so generally well received, that it ran through three impressions that year. The title of this piece was, “An Apology for the Royal Party, written in a letter to a person of the late council of state; with a touch at the pretended plea of the army,” Lond. 1659, in two sheets in 4to. But while Mr. Evelyn and other gentlemen of his sentiments were thus employed, those of the contrary party were not idle; and, amongst these, Marchamont Needham, who first wrote with great bitterness for the king against the parliament, and afterwards with equal acrimony for the parliament against the king, was induced to write a pamphlet, which was deservedly reckoned one of the most artful and dangerous contrivances for impeding that healing spirit that began now to spread itself through the nation, and with that view was handed to the press by Praisegod Barebones, one of the fiercest zealots in those times, the title of which, at large, runs thus: “News from Brussels, in a letter from a near attendant on his majesty’s person, to a person of honour here, dated March 10th, 1659.” The design of this pretended letter was to represent the character of king Charles II. in as bad a light as possible, in order to destroy the favourable impressions that many had received of his natural inclination to mildness and clemency. All the king’s friends were extremely alarmed at this attempt, and saw plainly that it would be attended with most pernicious consequences; but Mr. Evelyn, who had as quick a foresight as any of them, resolved to lose no time in furnishing an antidote against this poison, and with great diligence and dexterity sent abroad in a week’s time a complete answer, which bore the following title: “The late news or message from Brussels unmasked,” London, I 659, 4to. This very seasonable and very important service, for his own safety, our author managed with such secrecy, that hardly any body knew from whom this pamphlet came. But how much soever he had reason to be pleased with the success of his pen upon this occasion, he could not help being extremely mortified at the change he perceived in his friend colonel Morley’s behaviour, who on a sudden grew very silent and reserved, and at length plainly avoided any private conversation with Mr. Evelyn. In this situation our author had the courage to write him an expostulatory letter, which was in effect putting his life into his hands, and yet even this failed of procuring him the satisfaction he expected. However, he felt no inconvenience from it; for this alteration in colonel Motley’s countenance towards him was not the effect of any change in his disposition, but arose from his having entered into new engagements for the king’s service with sir Anthony Ashley Cooper and general Monk, who had tied him down to such absolute secrecy that he was not able at that juncture to give Mr. Evelyn any hint that might make him easy; but the latter soon saw plainly enough, from the colonel’s public behaviour, that he had no reason to apprehend any mischief from the confidence he had reposed in him.

As considerable light is thrown on the history and merits of Mr. Evelyn from the account given of his works, little apology need be made for the length of the article, taken principally from the Biographia Britannica. These were, 1. His treatise “Of Liberty and Servitude,” 1649, 12mo. This was a translation, and in all probability the first essay of our author’s pen. 2. “A Character of England, as it was lately presented in a letter to a nobleman of France, with reflections upon Callus Castratus,” 1651, 16to. The third edition of this book appeared in 1659; at present it is very scarce. 3. “The State of France,” London, 1652, 8vo. 4. “An Essay on the First Book of Titus Lucretius Carus, de renim natura, interpreted, and made into English verse, by J. Evelyn, esq.” London, 1656, 8vo. The frontispiece to this book was designed by his lady, Mary Evelyn. There is a copy of verses by F.dmun.l Waller, esq. of Beaconsfield, prefixed and directed to his worthy friend Mr. Evelyn, perhaps too extravagant. As there are many faults, however, in this work which do not belong to the author, we shall subjoin the transcript of a ms note in his own hand-writing in the copy at Wotton: “Never was book so abominably misused by printer; never copy so negligently surveied by one who undertooke to looke over the proofe-sheetes with all exactnesse and care, naqely Dr. Triplet, well knowne for his abiilitie, and who pretended, to oblige me in Hiv absence, and so readily offer'd himselfe. This good yet I received by it, that publishing it vaiiu-ly, its ill succese at the printer’s discouraged me with troubling the world with the rest.” 5. “The French Gardener, instructing how to cultivate all sorts of fruit-trees and herbs for the garden, together with directions to dry and conserve them in their natural,” &c. Lond. 1658, in 12mo, and several times after. In most of the editions is added, “The English Vineyard vindicated, by John Rose, gardener to his majesty king Charles II. with a' tract of the making and ordering of wines in France.” The third edition of this French Gardener, which came out in 1676, was illustrated with sculptures. 6. “The golden book of St. Oh ry sos torn, concerning the Education of Children.” Lond. 1659, 12mo, in the preface to which is a very interesting account of his son Richard, an amiable and promising child, who died in infancy, Jan. 27, 1657. This little narrative, as Mr. Evelyn’s work is scarce, may be seen in decade first of Barksdale’s Memorials, which, however, is almost as scarce. 7. “An Apology for the Royal Party, c.” 1659, 4to, mentioned above. 8. “The late News or Message from Brussels unmasked,” 1659, 4 to, also mentioned above. 9. A Panegyric at his, majesty king Charles II. his Coronation,' 1 Loncl. 1661, fol. 10. “Instructions concerning the erecting of a Library, written by Gabriel Naude”, published in English, with some improvements,“Lond. 1661, 8vo. ll.” Fumifugium or the inconveniences of the air and the smoke of London dissipated together with some remedies humbly proposed,“London, 1661, 4to, in five sheets, addressed to the king and parliament, and published by hisma jesty’s express command. Of this there was a late edition in 1772. 12.” Tyrannies or the Mode in a discourse of sumptuary laws“Lond. 1661, 8vo. 13.” Sculptnra; or the history a-id art of Chalcography and Engraving in Copper, with an ample enumeration of the most renowned masters and their works; to which is annexed, a new manner of engraving, or mezzo-tinto,. communicated by his highness prince Rupert to the author of this treatise,“Lond. 1662, 8vo. In the dedication to Mr. Robert Boyle, dated: at Sayes-court, April 5th, 1662, he observes, that he wrote this treatise at the reiterated instance of that gentleman. The first chapter treats of sculpture, howderived and distinguished, with the styles and instruments belonging to it. The second, of the original of sculpture in general. la this chapter our author observes, that letters, and consequently sculpture, were lon.g before the flood, Suidas ascribing both letters and all the rest of the sciences to Adam. After the flood, as he supposes, there were but few who make any considerable question, that it might not be propagated by Noah to his posterity, though some admit of none before Moses. The third chapter treats of the reputation and progress of sculpture among the Greeks and Romans down to the middle ages, with a discussion of some pretensions to the invention of copper cuts and their impressions. The fourth, of the invention and progress of chalcography in particular, together with an ample enumeration of the most renowned masters and their works. The fifth, of drawing and design previous to the art of chalcography, and of the use of pictures in order to theeducation of children. In this chapter, our author, in honour of the art upon which he writes, discourses thus:” It was in the former chapter that we made rehearsal of the most renowned gravers and their works, not that we had no more to add to that number, but because we would not mingle these illustrious names and qualities there, which we purposely reserved for the crown of this discourse. We did, therefore, forbear to mention what his highness prince Rupert’s own hands have contributed to the dignity of that art, performing things in graving, of which some enrich our collection, comparable to the greatest masters; such a spirit and address there appears in all that he touches, and especially in that of the mezzotinto, of which we shall speak hereafter more at large, having first enumerated those incomparable gravings of that his new and inimitable style, in both the great and little decollations of St. John the Baptist, the soldier holding a spear and leaning his hand on a shield, the two Mary Magdalens, the old man’s head, that of Titian, &c. after the same Titian, Georgion, and others. We have also seen a plate etched by the present French king, and other great persons; the right honourable the earl of Sandwich, sometimes, as we are told, diverting himself with the burine, and herein imitating those ancient and renowned heroes, whose names are loud in the trumpet of fame for their skill and particular affection to these arts. For such of old were Lucius Manilius, and Fabius, noble Romans, Pacuvius, the tragic poet, nephew to Ennius. Socrates, the wisest of men, and Plato himself, Metrodorus and Pyrrhus the philosopher, did both desigii and paint and so did Valentinian, Adrian, and Severus, emperors so as the great Paulus ^milius esteemed it of such high importance, that he would needs have his son to be instructed in it, as in one of the most worthy and excellent accomplishments belonging to a prince. For the art of graving, Quintilian likewise celebrates Euphranor, a polite and rarely endowed person; and Pliny, in that chapter where he treats of the same art, observes that there was never any one famous in it, but who was by birth or education a gentleman. Therefore he and Galen in their recension of the liberal arts, mention that of graving in particular, amongst the most permanent; and in the same catalogue, number it with rhetoric, geometry, logic, astronomy, yea, r grammar itself, because there is in these arts, say they, more of fancy and invention, than strength of hand, more of the spirit than of the body. Hence Aristotle informs us, that the Grecians did universally institute their children in the art of painting and drawing, for an oeconomique reason there signified, as well as to produce proportions in the mind. Varro makes it part of the ladies 1 education, that they might have the better skill in the works of embroidery, &c. and for this cause is his daughter Martia celebrated among those of her fair sex. We have already mentioned the learned Anna Schurman; but the princess Louisa has done wonders of this kind, and is famous throughout Europe for the many pieces which enrich our cabinets, examples sufficient to vindicate its dignity, and the value that has been set upon it, since both emperors, kings, and philosophers, the great and the wise, have not disdained to cultivate and cherish this honourable quality of old, so nobly reputed, that amongst the Greeks a slave might not be taught it. How passionately does Pereskius, that admirable and universal genius, deplore his want of dexterity in this art Baptista Alberti, Aldus Pomponius, Guaricus Durer, and Rubens, were politely learned and knowing men, and it is hardly to be imagined of how great use and conducible a competent address in this art of drawing and designing is to the several advantages which occur, and especially to the more noble mathematical sciences, as we have already instanced in the lunary works of Hevelius, and are no less obliged to celebrate some of ur own countrymen famous for their dexterity in this incomparable art. Such was that Blagrave, who himself cut those diagrams in his Mathematical Jewel; and such at present is that rare and early prodigy of universal science, Dr. Chr. Wren, our worthy and accomplished friend. For, if the study of eloquence and rhetoric were cultivated by the greatest geniuses and heroic persons which the world has produced, and that, by the suffrage of the most knowing, to be a perfect orator a man ought to be universally instructed, a quality so becoming and useful should never be neglected.“In the sixth chapter he discourses of the new way of engraving or mezzotinto, invented and communicated by prince Rupert and he therein observes,” that his highness did indulge him the liberty of publishing the whole manner and address of this new way of engraving; but when I had well considered it, says he (so much having been already expressed, which may suffice to give the hint to all ingenious persons how it is to be performed), I did not think it necessary that an art so curious, and as yet so little vulgar, and which indeed does not succeed where the workman is not an accomplished designer, and has a competent talent in painting likewise, was to be prostituted at so cheap a rate as the more naked describing of it here would too soon have exposed it to. Upon these considerations then, it is, that vvg leave it thus enigmatical; and yet that this may appear no disingenuous rhodomontade in me, or invidious excuse, I profess myself to be always most ready sub sigillo, and by his highness’s permission, to gratify any curious and worthy person with as full and perfect a demonstration of the entire art as my talent and address will reach to, if what I am now preparing to be reserved in the archives of the royal society concerning it be not sufficiently instructive.“There came, however, into the hands of the communicative and learned Richard Micldleton Massey, M. D. and F. 11. S. the original manuscript, written by Mr. Evelyn, and designed for the royal society, entitled” Prince Rupert’s new way of engraving, communicated by his highness to Mr. Evelyn;“in the margin of which is this note:” This I prepared to be registered in the royal society, but I have not yet given it in, so as it still continues a secret.“In this manuscript he first describes the two instruments employed in this new manner of engraving, viz. the hatcher and the style, and then proceeds to explain the method of using them. He concludes with the following words:” This invention, or new manner of chalcography, was the result of chance, and improved by a German soldier, who, espying some scrape on the barrel of his musket, and being of an ingenious spirit, refined upon it, till it produced the effects you have seen, and which indeed is, for the delicacy thereof, much superior to anyinvention extant of this art, for the imitation of those masterly drawings, and, as the Italians call it, that morhidezza expressed in the best of their designs. I have had the honour to be the first of the English to whom it has been yet communicated, and by a special indulgence of his highness, who with his own hands was pleased to direct me with permission to publish it to the world; but I have esteemed it a thing so curious, that I thought it would be to profane it, before I had first offered it to this illustrious society. There is another way of engraving, by rowelling a plate with an instrument made like that which our scriveners and clerks use to direct their rulers by on parchment, only the points are thicker set into the rowel. And when the plate is sufficiently freckled with the frequent reciprocation of it, upon the polished surface, so as to render the ground dark enough, it is to be abated with the style, and treated as we have already described. Of this sort I have seen a head of the queen Christina, graved, if I mistake not, as big as the life, but not comparable to the mezzotinto of prince Rupert, so deservedly celebrated by J. Evelyn."

Mr. Evelyn’s next publication was the most important of all his works: 15. “Sylva; or, a dicourse of Foresttrees, and the propagation of timber in his majesty’s dominions 5 as it was delivered in the royal society the 15th of October, 1662, Upon occasion of certain queries propounded to that illustrious assembly by the honourable the principal officers and commissioners of the navy.” To which is annexed, “Pomona, or, an appendix concerning fruit-trees, in relation to cider, the making and several ways of ordering it: published by express order of the royal society,” Lond. 1664, fol. This was the first work written by the command, and published in virtue of an order, of the royal society, signed by the lord viscount Brouncker, their president, and dedicated to the king. The second edition of it was published in 1669, with a new dedication to king Charles II. dated from Sayes-court, Aug. 24; the first paragraph of which deserves the reader’s notice. “Sir, This second edition of Sylva, after more than a thousand copies had been bought up and dispersed of the first impression, in much less than two years space (which booksellers assure us is a very extraordinary thing in volumes of this bulk), conies now again to pay its homage to your serene majesty, to whose auspices alone it owes the favourable acceptance which it has received in the world. But it is not that alone which it presumes to tell your majesty, but to acquaint you that it has been the sole occasion for furnishing your almost exhausted dominions with more, I dare say, than two millions of timber-trees, besides infinite others, which have been propagated within the three nations at the instigation and by the direction of this work; and that the author of it is able, if need require, to make it out by a competent volume of letters and acknowledgments, which are come to his hands, from several persons of the most eminent quality, many of them illustrious, and divers of them unknoun to him, in justification of what he asserts; which he the rather preserves with the more care, because they are testimonials from so many honourable persons ‘of the benefit they have received from the endeavours of the royal society, which now-a-days passes through so many censures; but she has yet your majesty for her founder and patron, and is therefore the’ less concerned, since no man of worth can lightly speak ill of an assembly v.hich your majesty has thought fit to dignify by so signal a relation to it.” The third edition, with great additions and improvements, was published in 1G79; the fourth in 1705, and the fifth in 1729, both very incorrect. In 1776 a new edition of the “Sylva” was published in 4to, by Dr. Andrew Hunter, of York, a gentleman eminently qualified for the undertaking. Under the care of this gentleman the work appeared with every possible advantage; and was enriched by the judicious editor with ample and copious notes, and adorned with a set of fine engravings. A head of Mr. Evelyn is prefixed, drawn and engraved by Battolozzi. Dr. Hunter’s edition of the Sylva has been four times reprinted. The edition of 1812 contains the deceased editor’s last corrections . 16. “A parallel of the antient architecture with the modern, in a collection of ten principal authors who have written upon the five orders, viz. Palladio and Scammozzi, Serlio and Vignola D. Barbaro and Cataneo L. B. Alberti and Viola, Bullant and De Lorme compared with one another. The three Greek orders, Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian, comprise the first part of this treatise, and the two Latin, Tuscan and Composite, the latter written in French by Roland Freart, sieur de Chambray made English for the benefit, of builders to which is added, an account of architects and architecture^ in an historical and etymological explanation of certain terms, particularly affected by architects; with Leon Baptista Alberti’s treatise of statues,” London, 1664, folio. This work, as well as the former, is dedicated to king Charles II.; and the dedication dated from Sayes-court, August 20th, contains^some curious facts. After an apology for prefixing his royal name to a translation, our author proceeds thus: “I know none, indeed, to whom I could more aptly inscribe a discourse of building, than to so royal a builder, whose august attempts have already given so great a splendour to our imperial city, and so illustrious an example to the nation It is from this contemplation, sir, that after I had, by the commands of the royal society, endeavoured the improvement of timber and the planting of trees, I have advanced to that of building, as its proper and mutual consequent, not with a presumption to incite or instruct your majesty, which were a vanity unpardonable, but, by it, to take occasion of celebrating your majesty’s great example, who use your empire and authority so worthily, as fortune seems to have consulted her reason, when she poured her favours upon you; so as I never cast my eyes on that generous designation in the epigram, Ut donem pastor K tedificem, without immediate reflection on your majesty, who seem only to value those royal advantages you have above others, that you may oblige, and that you may build. And certainly, sir, your majesty has consulted the noblest way of establishing your greatness, and of perpetuating your memory, since, while stones can preserve inscriptions, your name will be famous to posterity; and, when those materials fail, the benefits that are engraven in our hearts will outlast those of marble. It will be no paradox, but a truth, to affirm, that your majesty has already built and repaired more in three or four years, notwithstanding the difficulties and the necessity of an extraordinary ceconomy for the public concernment, than all your enemies have destroyed in twenty, nay than all your majesty’s predecessors have advanced in an hundred, as I could easily make out, not only by what your majesty has so magnificently designed and carried on at that your ancient honour of Greenwich, under the conduct of your most industrious and worthy surveyor, but in those splendid apartments and other useful reformations for security and delight about your majesty’s palace at Whitehall the chargeable covering first, then paving and reformation of Westminster-hall care and preparation for rebuilding St. Paul’s, by the impiety and iniquity of the late confusions almost dilapidated; what her majesty the queen-mother has added to her palace at Somerset-house, in a structure becoming her royal grandeur, and the due veneration of all your majesty’s subjects, for the lioirnir she has done both this your native city, and the whole nation. Nor may I here omit, what I so much desire to transmit to posterity, those noble and profitable amoenities of your majesty’s plantations, wherein you most resemble the divine architect, because your majesty has proposed in it such a pattern to your subjects, as merit their imitation and protoundest acknowledgments, in one of the most worthy and kingly improvements tbat nature is capable of. 1 know not what they talk of former ages, and of the now contemporary princes with your majesty these things are visible and should I here descend to more particulars, which yet were not foreign to the subject of this discourse, I would provoke the whole world to produce me an example parallel with your majesty, for your exact judgment and marvellous ability in all that belongs to the naval architecture, both as to its proper terms and more solid use, in which your majesty is master of one of the most noble and profitable arts that can be wished, in a prince to whom God has designed the dominion of the ocean, which renders your majesty’s empire universal; where, by exercising your royal talent and knowledge that way, you can bring even the antipodes to meet, and the poles to kiss each other; for so likewise, not in a metaphorical but natural sense, your equal and prudent government of this nation has made it good, whilst your majesty has so prosperously guided this giddy bark, through such a storm, as no hand, save your majesty’s, could touch the helm, but at the price of their temerity.” There is also another dedication to sir John Denham, knight of the bath, superintendent and surveyor of all his majesty’s buildings and works, in which there are several matters of fact worth knowing, as indeed there are in all Mr. Evelyn’s dedications; for, though no man was naturally more civil, or more capable of making a compliment handsomely, yet his merit was always conspicuous in his good manners; and he never thought that the swelling sound of a well-turned period could atone for want of sense. It appears from the dedication of the second edition of the Sylva to king Charles II. that there was a second edition of this work also in the same year, viz. 1669, as there was a third in 1697, which was the last in the author’s life-time. In this third edition, which is very much improved, “the account of Architects and Architecture,” which is an original work of Mr. Evelyn’s, and a most excellent one of its kind, is dedicated to sir Christopher Wren, surveyor to his majesty’s buildings and works; and there is in it another of those incidental passages that concern the personal history of our author. Having said in the first paragraph, that, if the whole art of building were lost, it might be found again in the noble works of that great architect, which, though a very high, is no unjust compliment, more especially, continues our author, St. Paul’s church and the Monument; he then adds, “I have named St. Paul’s, and truly not without admiration, as oft as I recall to mind, as frequently I do, the sad and deplorable condition it was in, when, after it had been made a stable of horses and a den of thieves, you, with other gentlemen and myself, were, by the late king Charles, named commissioners to survey the dilapidations, and to make report to his majesty, in order to a speedy reparation. You will not, I am sure, forget the struggle we had with some who were for patching it up any how, so the steeple might stand, instead of new-building, which it altogether needed: when, to put an end to the contest, five days after (August 27, Sept. 1666), that dreadful conflagration happened, out of whose this phoenix is risen, and was by providence designed for you. The circumstance is too remarkable, that I could not pass it over without notice. I will now add no more, but beg your pardon for this confidence of mine, after I have acquainted you that the parallel to which this was annexed being out of print, I was importuned by the bookseller to add something to a new impression, but to which I was no way inclined; till, not long since, going to St. Paul’s, to contemplate that august pile, and the progress you have made, some of your chief workmen gratefully acknowledging the assistance it had afforded them, I took this opportunity of doing myself this honour.” The fourth edition of this work, printed long after our author’s death, viz. in 1733, was in folio, as well as the rest; to which is added “The Elements of Architecture,” by sir Henry Wotton, and some other things, of which, however, hints were met with in our author’s pieces. 17. “Mwrtyj/ov Tjjj AvaiMos; that is, another part of the mystery of Jesuitism, or the new heresy of the Jesuits, publicly maintained at Paris, in the college of Clermont, the twelfth of December, 1661, declared to all the bishops of France, according to the copy printed at Paris. Together with the imaginary heresy, in three letters; with divers other particulars relating to this abominable mystery never before published in English;” Lond. 1664, 8vo. This, indeed, has not our author’s name to it; but that it is really his, and that he had reasons for not owning it more publicly, appears from a letter from him to Mr. Boyle. 18. “Kalendarium Hortense, or the gardener’s almanac, directing what he is to do monthly throughout the year, and what fruits and flowers are in prime,” Lond. 1664, 8vo. The second edition of this book, which seems to have been in folio, and bound with the Sylva and Pomona, as it was in the third edition, was dedicated to Cowley, with great compliments from our author to that poet, to whom it had been communicated before; which occasioned Cowley’s addressing to John Evelyn, esq. his mixed essay in verse and prose, entitled “The Garden.” This passed through at least nine editions. The author made many additions as long as he lived and the best was that printed by way of appendix to the fourth and last edition of the Sylva in his life-time. 19. “The history of the three late famous impostors, viz. Padre Ottotnano, pretended son and heir to the late grand signior; Mahomet Bei, a pretended prince of the Ottoman family, but, in truth, a Wallachian counterfeit: and Sabbatai Sevi, the supposed Messiah of the Jews, in the year 1666; with a brief account of the ground and occasion of tjie present war between the Turk and the Venetian: together with the cause of the final extirpation, destruction, and exile, of the Jews out of the empire of Persia,” Lond. 1668, 8vo. This piece is dedicated to Henry earl of Arlington, and the dedication is subscribed J. E. and, if Mr. Wood had seen it, he would not have said, “I know nothing yet to the contrary but this may be a translation.” The nature and value of this little piece were much better known abroad: one of the best literary journals, “Act. Eruditorum Lipsiensiutn,” A. D. 1690, p. 605, having given, though at some distance of time, a very just character of it, with this very remarkable circumstance, that the pretended Mahomet Bei was at that very juncture in the city of Leipsic. There is added, at the end of this piece, an account of the extirpation of the Jews in Persia during the reign of Shah Abbas the second, which is not so large or perfect as the rest; of which circumstance the author gives a hint, and does not press any thing farther than he is supported by authorities. He mentions a person, who, the very year that the book was published, took upon him the title of brother to the famous count Serini, and that he had the misfortune to be shipwrecked in the west of England, by which he imposed upon persons of quality, till, by unluckily calling for drink upon the road in very audible English, he discovered the cheat. He farther remarks, with regard to Sabbatai Sevi, that he was the twenty-fifth false Messiah that had attempted to impose upon the Jews, even according to their own account. 20. “Public employment and an active life preferred to solitude, in a reply to a late ingenious essay of a contrary title,” Lond. 1667, in 8vo. This was written in answer to a discourse of sir George Mackenzie’s, preferring solitude to public employment, which was at the time of its publication much admired; and, as our author apprehended this might prove an encouragement to indolence and timidity, he therefore wrote against it. We have in the Transactions of the royal society a character of this, and thie piece before mentioned, which follows the account given of the second edition of the “Sylva,” Philosoph. Trans. No. 53; and the reader will find some ingenious strictures on “Public employment, &c.” in vol. 1. of the Censura Literaria, by one who knows well how to improve solitude. 21. “An idea of the perfection of painting, demonstrated from the principles of art, and by examples conformable to the observations which Pliny and Quintilian have made upon the most celebrated pieces of the ancient painters, paralleled with some works of the most famous modern painters, Leonardo da Vinci, Raphael, Julio Romano, and N. Poussin. Written in French by Roland Freart, Sieur de Cambray, and rendered English by J. E. esquire, fellow of the royal society;” Lond. 1668, 8vo, This translation is dedicated to Henry Howard, of Norfolk, heir apparent to that dukedom and the dedication is dated from Say es-court, June the 24th, 1668, 8vo. This piece, like most of Mr. Evelyn’s works, is now become exceeding scarce. In the preface he observes, that the reader will find in this discourse divers useful, remarks, especially where the author “treats of costume, which we, continues he, have interpreted decorum, as the nearest expression our language would bear to it. And I was glad our author had reproved it in so many instances, because it not only grows daily more licentious, but even ridiculous and intolerable. But it is hoped this may universally be reformed! when our modern workmen shall consider, that neither the exactness of their design, nor skilfulness in colouring, ha.s been able to defend their greatest predecessors from just reproaches, who have been faulty in this particular. I could exemplify in many others, whom our author has omitted; and there is none but takes notice what injury it has done the fame of some of our best reputed painters, and how indecorous it is to introduce circumstances, wholly improper to the usages and genius of the places where our histories are supposed to. have beeq acted.” Mr. Evelyn then remarks, that this was not only the fault of Bassano, who would be ever bringing in his wife, children, and servants, his dog and his cat, and very kitchen-stuff, after the Paduan mode; but of the great Titian himself, Georgipn, Tintoret, and the rest; as Paulo Veronese is observed also to have done, in his story of Pharaoh’s daughter drawing Moses out of the river, attended with a guard of Swisses. Malvogius likewise, in a picture then in the king’s gallery at Whitehall, not only represents our first parents with navels upon their bellies, but has placed an artificial stone fountain, carved with imagery, in the midst of his paradise. Nor does that excellent and learned painter, Rubens, escape without censure, not only for making most of his figures of the shapes of brawny Flemings, but for other sphalmata and circumstances of the like nature, though in some he has acquitted himself to admiration, in the due observation of costume, particularly in his crucifixes, &c. Raphael Urbino was, doubtless, one of the first who reformed these inadvertencies; but it was more conspicuous in his latter than in his former pieces. “As for Michael Angelo,” continues Mr. Evelyn, “though I heartily consent with our critic in reproving that almost idolatrous veneration of his works, who hath certainly prodigiously abused the art, not only in the table this discourse arraigns him for, but several more which I have seen; yet I conceive he might have omitted some of those embittered reproaches he has reviled him with, who doubtless was one of the greatest masters of his time, and however he might succeed as to the decorum, was hardly exceeded for what he performed in sculpture and the statuary art by many even of the ancients themselves, and haply by none of the moderns: witness his Moses, Christus in Gremio, and several other figures at Rome to say nothing of his talent in architecture, and the obligation the world has to his memory, for recovering many of its most useful ornaments and members out of the neglected fragments, which lay so long buried, and for vindicating that antique and magnificent manner of building from the trifling of Goths and barbarians.” He observes next, that the usual reproach of painting has been the want of judgment in perspective, and bringing more into history than is justifiable upon one aspect, without turning the eye to each figure in particular, and multiplying the points of sight, which is a point even monsieur Freart, for all the pains he has taken to magnify that celebrated Decision of Paris, has failed in. For the knowing in that art easily perceive, that even Raphael himself has not so exactly observed it, since, instead of one, as monsieur Freart takes it to be, and as indeed it ought to have been, there are no less than four or five; as du Bosse hath well observed in his treatise of “The converted painter,” where, by the way also, he judiciously numbers amongst the faults against costume, those landscapes, grotesque figures, &c. which we frequently find abroad especially for, in our country, we have few or none of those graceful supplements of steeples painted, horizontally and vertically on the vaults and ceilings of cupolas, since we have no examples for it from the ancients, who allowed no more than a frett to the most magnificent and costly of those which they erected. But, would you know whence this universal caution in most of their works proceeded, and that the best of our modern painters and architects have succeeded better than others of that profession, it must be considered, that they were learned men, good historians, and generally skilled in the best antiquities; such were Raphael, and doubtless his scholar Julio; and, if Polydore arrived not to the glory of letters, he yet attained to a rare habit of the ancient gusto, as may be interpreted from most of his designs and paintings. Leon Baptist Alberti was skilled in all the politer parts of learning to a prodigy, and has written several curious things in the Latin tongue. We know that, of later times, Rubens was a person universally learned, as may be seen in several Latin epistles of his to the greatest scholars of his age. And Nicholas Poussin, the Frenchman, who is so much celebrated and so deservedly, did, it seems, arrive to this by his indefatigable industry “as the present famous statuary, Bernini, now living,” says Mr. Evelyn, “has also done so universal a mastery, that, not many years since, he is reported to have built a theatre at Rome, for the adornment whereof he not only cut the figures and painted the scenes, but wrote the play, and composed the music, which was all in recitative. And I am persuaded, that all this is not yet by far so much as that miracle and ornament of our age and country, Dr. Christopher Wren, were able to perform, if he were so disposed, and so encouraged, because he is master of so many admirable advantages beyond them. I alledge these examples partly to incite, and partly to shew the dignity and vast comprehension of this rare art, and that for a man to arrive to its utmost perfection, he should be almost as universal as the orator in Cicero, and the architect in Vitruvius. But, certainly, some tincture in history, the optics and anatomy, are absolutely requisite, and more, iri the opinion of our author, than to be a steady designer, and skilled in the tempering and applying of colours, which, amongst most of our modern workmen, go now for the only accomplishments of a painter.”

, more generally known by the name of Hieronymus Fabricius Ab Aquapendente, was born at Aquapendente, in the territory of Orvieto, in Italy, in 1537. His parents, although poor, found the means of procuring him a good education at Padua, where he acquired a knowledge of the Latin and Greek languages, and, after having gone through the usual course of philosophy, he began the study of anatomy and surgery under Gabriel Fallopius, one of the most intelligent professors of his time. His progress under this excellent tutor was such as to acquire for him a character not less distinguished than that of his master, whom he afterwards succeeded in the professor’s chair, in which he taught the same sciences for nearly half a century, in the university of Padua. During the whole of this long period he maintained an uniform character for eloquence and sound knowledge, and continued to excite great interest in his lectures. He died universally regretted in 1619, at the age of eighty-two years.

, one of the most eminenjt and laborious scholars of his time in Europe, was descended both by the father’s and mother’s side from a family originally of Holstein. His father, Werner Fabricius, a native of Itzhoa, in Holstein, was director of the music at St.Paul'p in Leipsic, organist of the church of St. Nicholas in that city, and a poet and a man of letters, as appears by a work be published in 1657, entitled “Delicias Harmonicas.” His mother was Martha Corthum, the daughter of John Corthum, a clergyman of Bergedorff, and the descendant of a series of protestant clergymen from the time of the reformation. He was born at Leipsic Nov. 11, 1668. His mother died in 1674, and his father in 1679; but the latter, while he lived, had begun to instruct him, and on hig death-bed recommended him to the care of Valentine Albert, an eminent divine and philosopher, who employed, as his first master, Wenceslau* Buhl, whom Mayer calls the common Msecenas of orphans; and he appears to have been taught by him for about five years. He also received instructions at the same time under Jo. Goth. Herrichius, rector of the Nicolaitan school at Leipsic, an able Greek and Latin scholar, whose services Fabricius amply acknowledges in the preface to Herrichius’s “Poemata Graeca et Latina,” which he published in 1718, out of regard to the memory of this tutor. In 1684, Valentine Albert sent him to Quedlinburgh to a very celebrated school, of which the learned Samuel Schmidt was at that time rector. It was here that he met with, in the library, a copy of Barthius’s “Adversaria,” and the first edition of Morhoff’s “Polyhistor,” which he himself informs us, gave the first direction to his mind as to that species of literary history and research which he afterwards carried beyond all his predecessors, and in which, if we regard the extent and accuracy of his labours, he has never had an equal. Schmidt had accidentally shown him Barthius^, and requested him to look into it; but it seemed to open to him such a wide field of instruction and pleasure, that he requested to take it to his room and study it at leisure, and from this he conceived the first thought, although, perhaps, at that timfe, indistinct, of his celebrated Bibliothecas. After his return, to Leipsic in 1686, he met with Morhoff, who, he says, gave his new-formed inclination an additional spur. He now was matriculated in the college of Leipsic, and was entirely under the care of his guardian Valentine Albert, one of the professors, with whom he lodged for seven years. During this time he attended the lectures of Carpzovius, Olearius, Feller, Rechenberg, Ittigius, Menckenius, &c. and other learned professors, and acknowledges hisobligations in particular to Ittigius, who introduced him to a knowledge of the Christian fathers, and of ecclesiastical history. It is perhaps unnecessary to add of one who has given such striking proofs of the fact, that his application to his various studies was incessant and successful. His reading was various and extensive, and, like most scholars of his class, he read with a pen in his hand.

, an eminent surgeon and physician, was known also by his surname of Hildanus, from Hilden, a village of Switzerland, where he was born, July 25 t 1560. Like his predecessor of the same name, Fabricius of Aquapendunte, he became one of the most eminent surgeons of his age, and contributed not a. little to the improvement of the art. He repaired to Lausanne in 1586, where he completed himself in the art of surgery, under the instruction of Griffon, an intelligent teacher in that city. Here he pursued his researches with indefatigable industry, and undertook the cure of many difficult cases, in which he was singularly successful. He combined aknowledge of medicine with that of his own art, and began to practise both at Payerne in 1605, where he remained ten years, and in 1615 settled himself at Berne, in consequence of an invitation from the senate, who granted him a pension. Here he enjoyed the universal esteem of the inhabitants. But in the latter period of his life he was prevented by severe and frequent attacks of the gout from rendering his services to his fellow-citizens with his accustomed assiduity. At length, liowever, this malady left him, and he was seized with an asthma, of which he died on the 14th of February, 1634, at the age of seventy-four. His works were written in the German language, but most of them have been translated into the Latin. He published five “Centuries of Observations,” which were collected after his death, and printed at Lyons in 1641, and at Strasburgh in 1713 and 1716. These “Observations” present a considerable number of curious facts, as well as descriptions of a great number of instruments of his invention. His collected treatises were published in Latin, at Francfort in 1646, and again in 1682, in folio, under the title of “Opera Omnia.” And a German edition appeared at Stutgard in 1652.

On his return at this time, he went to Belvoir, the seat of his friend and relation Mr. William Fairfax, and remained several years in his family, undertaking and directing the management of his farms and plantations, and amusing himself with hunting and the pleasures of the field. At length, the lands about Belvoir not answering his expectation, and the foxes becoming less numerous, he determined to remove to a fine tract of land on the western side of the Blue Ridge, or Apalachian mountains, in Frederic county, about eighty miles from Belvoir where he built a small neat house, which he called Greenway-court; and laid out one of the most beautiful farms, consisting of arable and grazing lands, and of meadows two or three miles in length, that had ever been seen in that quarter of the world. He there lived the remainder of his life, in the style of a gentleman farmer, or rather of an English country gentleman. He kept many servants, white and black; several hunters; a plentiful, but plain table, entirely in the English fashion; and his mansion was the mansion of hospitality. His dress corresponded with his mode of life, and notwithstanding he had every year new suits of clothes, of the most fashionable and expensive kind, sent out to him from England, which he never put on, was plain in the extreme. His manners were humble, modest, and unaffected; not tinctured in the smallest degree with arrogance, pride, or self-conceit. He was free from the selfish passions, and liberal almost to excess. The produce of his farms, after the deduction of what was necessary for the consumption of his own family, was distributed and given away to the poor planters and settlers in his neighbourhood. To these he frequently advanced money, to enable them to go on with their improvements; to clear away the woods, and cultivate the ground; and where the lands proved unfavourable, and not likely to answer the labour and expectation of the planter or husbandman, he usually indemnified him for the expence he had been at in the attempt, and gratuitously granted him fresh lands of a more favourable and promising nature. He was a friend and father to all who held and lived under him; and as the great object of his ambition was the peopling and cultivating of that beautiful country of which he was the proprietor, he sacrificed every other pursuit, and made every other consideration subordinate, to this great point

With such views it was impossible to exclude a language which is uncouth only where it is not understood, and which as being the language of those heroes who have elevated the character of their country beyond all precedent and all comparison, merits higher veneration than the technical terms of common mechanics; nor, upon this account, ought the Shipwreck to involve the blame which attaches to the “Cyder” of Philips, or the “Fleece” of Dyer. No art can give dignity to such subjects, nor did they demand the aid of poetry to render them more useful or more pleasing. Falconer’s subject was one of the most sublime inflictions of Providence. He described it for those who might be destined to behold it, and he knew that if among sailors he found no acute critics, he would find intelligent and sympathizing readers. When therefore we consider his whole design, the objection may admit of some apology even from those who will yet regret that a poet of such genuine skill should have narrowed his fame by writing for a class.

, one of the most celebrated historians and poets of his nation in the seventeenth century, was born March 18, 1590, at Sonto near Caravilla in Portugal, of a noble family, both by his father’s and mother’s side. His father’s name was Arnador Perez d'Eiro, and his mother’s Louisa Faria, but authors are not agreed in their conjectures why he did not take his father’s name, but preferred Faria, that of his mother, and Sousa, which is thought to have been his grandmother’s name. In his infancy he was very infirm, yet made considerable progress, even when a puny child, in writing, drawing, and painting. At the age of ten, his father sent him to school to learn Latin, in which his proficiency by no means answered his expectations, owing to the boy’s giving the preference to the Portuguese and Spanish poets. These he read incessantly, and composed several pieces in verse and prose in both languages, but he had afterwards the good sense to destroy his premature effusions, as well as to perceive that the Greek and Roman classics are the foundation of a true style, and accordingly he endeavoured to repair his error by a careful study of them. In 1604, when only in his fourteenth year, he was received in the Tank of gentleman into the household of don Gonzalez de Moraes, bishop of Porto, who was his relation, and afterwards made him his secretary; and during his residence with this prelate, which lasted ten years, he applied himself indefatigably to his studies, and composed some works, the best of which was an abridgment of the historians of Portugal, “Epitome de las historias Portuguesas, desde il diluyio hasta el anno 1628,” Madrid, 1628, 4to. In this he has been thought to give rather too much scope to his imagination, and to write more like an orator than a historian. In 1612 he fell in love with a lady of Porto, whom he calls Albania, and who was the subject of some of his poems; but it is doubtful whether this was the lady he married in 1614, some time after he left the bishop’s house, on account of his urging him to go into the church, for which he had no inclination. -He remained at Porto until 1618, when he paid his father a visit at Pombeiro. The year following he went to Madrid, and into the service of Peter Alvarez Pereira, secretary of state, and counsellor to Philip the III. and IV. but Pereira did not live long enough to give him any other proof of his regard than by procuring to be made a knight of the order of Christ in Portugal. In 1628 he returned to Lisbon with his family, but quitted Portugal in 1631, owing to his views of promotion being disappointed. Returning to Madrid, he was chosen secretary to the marquis de Castel Rodrigo, who was about to set out for Rome as ambassador at the papal court. At Rome Faria was received with great respect, and his merit acknowledged; but having an eager passion for study, he visited very few. The pope, Urban VIII. received him very graciously, and conversed familiarly with him on the subject of poetry. One of his courtiers requested Faria to write a poem on the coronation of that pontiff, which we find in the second volume of his poems. In 1634, having some reason to be dissatisfied with his master, the ambassador, he quitted his service, and went to Genoa with a view to return to Spain. The ambassador, piqued at his departure, which probably was not very ceremonious, wrote a partial account of it to the king of Spain, who caused Faria to be arrested at Barcelona. So strict was his confinement, that for more than three months no person had access to him; until Jerome de Villa Nova, the prothonotary of Arragon, inquired into the affair, and made his innocence known to the king. This, however, had no other effect than to procure an order that he should be a prisoner at large in Madrid; although the king at the same time assured him that he was persuaded of his innocence, and would allow him sixty ducats per month for his subsistence. Faria afterwards renewed his solicitations to be allowed to remove to Portugal, but in vain; and his confinement in Madrid, with his studious and sedentary life, brought on, in 1647, a retention of urine, the torture of which he bore with great patience. It occasioned his death, however, on June 3, 1640. He appears to have merited an excellent character, but was too little of a man of the world to make his way in it. A spirit of independence probably produced those obstacles which he met with in his progress; and even his dress and manner, we are told, were rather those of a philosopher than of a courtier. Besides his History of Portugal, already mentioned, and of which the best edition was published in 1730, folio, he Wote, 1. “Noches claras,” a collection of moral and political discourses, Madrid, 1623 and 1626, 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “Fuente de Aganipr, o Rimes varias,” a collection of his poems, in 7 vols. Madrid, 1644, &c. 3. “Commentarios sobra las Lusiadas de Luis de Camoens,” an immense commentary on the Lusiad, ibid. 1639, in 2 vols. folio. He is said to have began it in 1614, and to have bestowed twentyfive years upon it. Some sentiments expressed here had alarmed the Inquisition, and the work was prohibited. He was permitted, however, to defend it, which he did in, 4. * Defensa o Information por'los Commentaries, &c.“Madrid, 1640 or 1645, folio. 5.” Imperio de la China, &e.“and an account of the propagation of religion by the Jeuits, written by Semedo: Faria was only editor of this work, Madrid, 1643, 4to. 6.” Nobiliario del Concle D. Petro de Barcelos,“&c. a translation from the Portuguese, with notes, ibid. 1646, folio. 7.” A Life of Don Martin Bapt. de Lanuza,“grand justiciary of Arragon,” ibid. 1650, 4to. 8. “Asia Portuguesa,” Lisbon, 1666, &c. 3 vols. folio. 9. “Europa Portuguesa,” ibid. 1678, 2 vols. folio. 10. “Africa Portuguesa,” ibid. 1681, folio. Of this we have an English Edition by John Stevens, Lond. 1695, 3 vols. 8vo. 11. “America Portuguesa.” All these" historical and geographical works have been considered as correct and valuable. Faria appears to have published some other pieces of less importance, noticed by Antonio.

Besides the very liberal and faithful discharge of his duties as master of his college, Dr. Farmer may be considered as a benefactor to the town of Cambridge, for by his exertions every improvement and convenience introduced for the last thirty years of his life, were either originally proposed, or ultimately forwarded and carried into execution by him. The plan for paving, watching, and lighting the town, after many ineffectual attempts, was accomplished in his second vice-chancellorship, greatly to the satisfaction of all parties. As a magistrate, he was active and diligent; and on more than one Occasion of riots, displayed great firmness of mind in dangerous conjunctures. In his office of residentiary of St. Paul’s, if he was not the first mover, he was one of the most strenuous advocates for introducing the monuments of our illustrious heroes and men of talents into the metropolitan cathedral.

was one of the most celebrated of the Provengal poets or troubadours. He had a fine figure, abundance of wit, and a pleasing address, and was much encouraged by the princes o his time. By representing his comedies, he soon acquired considerable riches, which his vanity and his love of debauchery and expence did not suffer him to keep. From a miserable state of poverty he was relieved by the liberality of Richard Cacur de Lion, who had a strong taste for the Provencal poetry. After the death of this protector, he returned to Aix, where he married a young woman of distinguished wit and beauty; but she did not long survive her marriage with this profligate husband. He died soon after, in 1220, at what age is not exactly known, but certainly early in life. Among the many pieces which he wrote, the following are mentioned: I. A poem on the death of his benefactor, Richard I. 2. “The palace of Love,” imitated afterwards by Petrarch. 3. Several comedies, one of which, entitled “Heregia dels Prestes,” the heresy of the priests, a satirical production against the corruptions of the church, was publicly acted at the castle of Boniface, marquis of Montserrat.

, surnamed Fulgentius, who flourished in the sixth century, was an African by birth, and a disciple of St. Fulgentius. When that prelate was banished by the Arians to Sardinia, Ferrandus accompanied him; but on his return he was chosen deacon of the church of Carthage, and entered with much zeal into the question which was the subject of warm discussion at that day, “whether it could be said that one of the persons of the Trinity suffered on the cross.” Ferrandus died about the year 530, leaving behind him many works that were highly esteemed by his contemporaries. The most considerable, “A Collection of Ecclesiastical Canons,” for restoring discipline in the churches of Africa, is one of the most ancient collections of canons among the Latins. It consists of between two and three hundred abridged from the councils of Africa, Ancyra, Laodicea, Nice, Antioch, &c. A life of Fulgentius has also been ascribed to Ferrandus, but by some authors it has been ascribed to another of the prelate’s pupils.

, a Franciscan friar, was born at Coutances in Lower Normandy, in 1541; and might have inherited a large estate, had he addicted himself to the military profession. Bayle thinks that he judged rightly of himself and his talents, and obtained a much greater reputation as a divine than as a soldier. It does not appear, however, that he attained any just eminence. Daille observes, that “he deserved his name Feu-ardent perfectly well: for that he was so transported with anger, hatred, and fury, as to be seldom in his right senses;” and he certainly was as fiery a zealot, and as bitter a persecutor, as the protestants ever had. He was one of the most seditious preachers who raised the disturbances against Henry III. and Henry IV. nor did he spare even the chief of the leaguers, when he thought him guilty of something that might prejudice the cause of the rebels. He wrote commentaries on some books of scripture, and translated some works of the fathers into French. He published at Pearls, in 1576j “The five books of Irenseus,” revised and corrected in several places from an ancient manuscript, with an addition of five entire chapters, which were in his manuscript 4t the end of the fifth book. He has added at the end of each chapter, such notes as he thought necessary for the better understanding of his author, which are for the most part useful and learned. The second edition, printed at Cologne in 1596, and again i 1630, and at Paris in 1639, is better than the first, as it contains the Greek passages of Irenseus, which were in Epiphanius, and some other ancient writers. Feuardent published also some books of controversy, which the catholics themselves own to have been written with too much passion. He died at Paris in 1610, and before his death is said to have attained a more calm and christian-like temper.

, of Ferrara, an artist born in 1532, was nicknamed Gratella by his countrymen, because he was the first who introduced the method of squaring large pictures, in order to reduce them with exactness to smaller proportions, which the Italians call graticolare, a method which he had learned from Michel Angelo, whose scholar he was at Rome, though unknown to Vasari, at least not mentioned in his life. He was the son of Camillo Filippi, who died in 1574, an artist of uncertain school, but who painted in a neat and limpid manner and if we may judge from a half-figure of S. Paul, in an Annunziata of his in S. Maria in Vado, not without some aim at the style of Michel Angelo. From him therefore Bastiano probably derived that ardent desire for it which made him secretly leave his father’s house, and journey to Rome, where he became one of the most indefatigable copyists and dearest pupils of Buonarotti. What powers he acquired is evident from the “Universal Judgment,” which he painted in three years, in the hoir of the metropolitan a work nearer to Michel Angelothau what can be produced by the whole Florentine school. It possesses grandeur of design with great variety of imagery, well disposed groupes, and repose for the eye. It appears incredible that in a subject pre-occupied by Buonarotti, Filippi should have been able to appear so novel and so grand. He imitated the genius, but disdained to transcribe the figures of his model. He too, like Dante and Michel Angelo, made use of that opportunity to gratify his affections or animosities, by placing his friends among the elect, and his enemies with*the rejected. In that hapless host he painted the faithless mistress who had renounced his nuptials, and drew among the blessed another whom he had married in her place, casting a look of insult on her rival. At present it is not easy to decide on the propriety or intemperance of Barui Taldi and other Ferrarese writers, who prefer this painting to that of the Sistina, for decorum and colour, because it has been long retouched; and already made Barotti, in his description of Ferrarese pictures, lament " that the figures which formerly appeared living flesh, now seem to be of wood. 7 ' Of Filippi’s powers, however, as a colourist, other proofs exist at Ferrara in many an untouched picture: they appear to advantage, though his flesh-tints are too adust and bronzed, end his colours too often united into a misty mass.

, a lady of considerable poetical talents, was the daughter of fcir William Kingsmill, of Sidmonton, in the county of Southampton, but the time of her birth is not mentioned. She was maid of honour to the duchess of York, second wife of James II.; and afterwards married to Heneage, second son of Heneage earl of Winchelsea; which Heneage was, in his father’s life-time, gentleman of the bed-chamber to the duke of York, and afterwards, upon the death of his nephew Charles, succeeded to the title of earl of Winchelsea. One of the most considerable of this lady’s poems was that “upon the Spleen,” printed in “A new jniscellany of original Poems on several occasion’s,” pub lished by Mr. Charles Gildon in 1701, 8vo, That poem occasioned another of Mr. Nicholas, Rovye, entitled ^ An Epistle to Flavia, on the sight of tvva Pindaric Odes on the Spleen and Vanity, written by a lady to her friend.“A collection of her poems, was printed in 1713, 8vo; containing likewise a, tragedy called” Aristomenes;" never acted; and many still continue unpublished, a few of which may be seen in the General Dictionary, which Dr. Birch inserted there by permission of the countess of Hertford, in whose possession they were. Her ladyship obtained the good will of Pope, who addressed some verses to her which drew forth an elegant replication, printed in Gibber’s Lives. She died August 5, 1720, without issue as did the earl her husband, Sept. 30, 1726.

,or Fizacre (Richard), a learned scholar in the thirteenth century, was, if not of the city of Exeter, at least a Devonshire man, and a Dominican friar. He studied at Oxford, first in the college of the great hall of the university, but afterwards taking the cowl, he removed to the Dominican convent, and was the first of the order that was honoured with the theological doctorate. His learning is reported to have been general and extensive, and he made so great a proficiency in every branch, that he was esteemed one of the most learned. Aristotle was his principal favourite, whom he read and admired, and carried about with him. But from these philosophical exercises he passed on to the study of divinity, and became as eminent in this as before he had been in arts, which so endeared him to Robert Bacon (see his article), that the two friends were scarce ever asunder. And for this reason Leland thinks he studied at Paris along with Bacon, and there considerably improved his knowledge; but this may be doubted. Leland observes, that writers generally mention the two Dominican friends together, both in respect of their friendship and learning; and indeed the two Matthews, Paris and Westminster, have joined them, and, therefore, it is probable that Fishacre, as well as Bacon, enjoyed the friendship of bishop Grosseteste. They both died in one year, 1248, and were interred among the Dominicans at Oxford. Bale is severe on the memory of. Fishacre for no reason that can be discovered; but Leland speaks very highly of him in point of personal worth as well as learning. Both Leland and Bale have given a list of his works, consisting of theological questions, postils, and commentaries, some of which may yet be found in the public libraries.

Alexander’s successor, the abbot Berthold Voge), who long resided at Salzburg, as professor of canon law and rector of the university, being well acquainted with Fixlmillner’s great knowledge, particularly in the mathematics, appointed him in 1762 to be astronomer at Kremsmunster, with leave to retain his office as professor of canon-law. He now applied with great zeal to render himself more fit for his new occupation, as he had not yet attended much to practical astronomy, and was even but little acquainted with those books from which he could obtain information on the subject. His great attachment, however, to this science, fine genius, and a desire of being useful to the institution in which he resided, and to the world, made him overcome every difficulty. The first book that fell into his hands was Lalande’s “Exposition du Calctil Astronomique,” with which alone, without any ^oral instruction, he began to study and to make observations. This work, together with Ylacq’s Logarithmic Tables, were for a long time his only sources and guides, till he at length obtained Lalande’s large work on astronomy. Fortunately, a carpenter, John Illinger, born in a village belonging to the abbey, though he could neither read nor write, waa able, under the direction of Fixlmillner, to construct for him very neat mural quadrants, zenith sectors, transit instruments, and pendulum clocks. Other instruments were made for him by Brander, of Augsburgh, and he procured achromatic telescopes from Dollond; so that by his activity the observatory at Kremsmunster soon became one of the most celebrated, and best supplied with apparatus, in Germany.

, an English poet and dramatic writer in the reign of Charles II. whose productions, although not without some proportion of merit, would not have preserved his name so long as the satire of Dryden, entitled “Mac Flecnoe,” is said to have been originally a Jesuit, and to have had connections with some persons of high distinction in London, who were of the Roman catholic persuasion. What was the cause of Dryden’s aversion is not determined. Some have said that when the revolution was completed, Dryden, having some time before turned papist, became disqualified for holding his place of poet-laurcat. It was accordingly taken from him, and conferred on Flecknoe, a man to whom Dryden is said to have had already a confirmed aversion; and this produced the famous satire, called from him Mac Flecknoe, one of the most spirited and amusing of Dryden' s poems; and, in some degree, the model of the Dunciad. That this is a spirited poem is as certain, as that all the preceding account from Cihber and his copiers is ridiculous. Shadwell was the successor of Dryden, as laureat, and in this poem is ridiculed as the poetical son of Flecknoe. However con.­temptibly Dryden treated Flecknoe, the latter at one time wrote an epigram in his praise, which, with his religion, might have conciliated both Dryden and Pope. Perhaps Dryden, says a modern critic, was offended at his invectives against the obscenity of the stage, knowing how much he had contributed to it. Be this as it may, Flecknoe himself wrote some plays, but not more than one of them was acted. His comedy, called “Damoiselles a la mode,” was printed in 1667, and addressed to the duke and duchess of Newcastle; the author had designed it for the theatre, and was not a little chagrined at the players for refusing it; He said upon this occasion: “For the acting this comedy, those who have the government of the stage have their humours, and would.be in treated and I have mine, and won't intreat them and were all dramatic writers of my mind, tljeyshould wear their old plays thread-bare, ere they should have any new,till they better understood their own interest, and how todistinguish between good *nd bad.”

, a Spanish Augustine, and one of the most learned Spaniards of the eighteenth century, who died at Madrid about 1772, was the author of a most elaborate collection of ecclesiastical history, in 34 vols. 4to, printed from 1747 to 1784, entitled “L'Espana sagrada, theatro geographico-historico de la Iglesia de Espana,” which, say the editors of the “Diet. Historique,” answers to the French collection entitled “Gallia Christiana.” About 1743 he also published a “Clave historial,” which answers to their “Art de verifier les dates;” and as the latter did not appear until 1750, they do not refuse Florez the merit of the original plan. Another very valuable publication by Florez affords the most complete knowledge we have of the ancient coins of Spain. It is entitled “Meclallas de las Colonias municipios, y pueblos antiguos de Espana,” Madrid, 1757 and 1758, 2 vols. 4to, to which the author added a third, which was published after his death. The merit of this work procured his being elected an associate correspondent of the French academy. He is said also to have been the editor of some Spanish authors; but their names, except that of Ambrosio Moralcz, are not given in our authority.

This great author died in January 1757, without ever having had any violent disorder, or felt any of the maladies of age till he was turned of ninety, after which he was a little deaf, and his eyes in some degree failed. The tranquil ease Of his temper is thought to have contributed to extend his life to this unusual period. A fuller account of hi* works will doubtless be required, which we shall give in chronological order. I. Letters of “the Chav. d'Horny”[??] 1685; a work of wit and fancy. 2. “Discourses on the Plurality of Worlds,” 1686; the character of this performance has been already sketched, as well as that of his, 3. “History of Oracles,” 1687. 4. “Pastoral Poems, with a Discourse on the Eclogue, and a digression on the ancients and moderns,” 1688. It seems to he agreed, that if these are not good eclogues, they are at least elegant poems. It was in the dissertation annexed to these that he made his first attempt to depreciate the ancients, whose merit compared with that of the moderns, was then the subject of a well-known controversy. Among his papers after his death, was found a discourse on the Greek tragedians, which was given to Diderot for insertion in the Encyclopedic, but he said he could not possibly insert in that work, a treatise tending to prove that Æschylus was a madman. 5, Several volumes of “Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences,” to which society he was secretary fortytwo years, from 1699. The general preface to this work is highly excellent; it contains also his “Eloges,” or Eulogies on the academicians, which have been published separately. 6. “History of the French Theatre, to Corneille,” with the life of that great Dramatist. 7. “Reflections on theatrical poetry, particularly Tragedy:” this is reckoned one of the most profound and judicious works of Fontenelle. 8. “Elements of the Geometry of Infinites,” 1727; not much esteemed by mathematicians. 9. “A Tragedy,” in prose, and “Six Comedies,” none of them calculated for theatrical effect. Warburton, it appears by his letters to bishop Hurd, entertained a high opinion of these comedies, and of Fontenelle’s preface to them. 10. “Theory of the Cartesian Vortices.” He remained unfortunately attached to the system of Descartes to the end of his life, having imbibed it very early. 11.“Endymion,” and some other pastoral lyric dramas. 12. “Moral Discourses,” and fugitive pieces. All these, except those on geometry and natural history, were collected in 11 vols, 12mo, under the title “Œuvres Diverses.” Other editions have since been published in folio and quarto. The style of this author is in general elegant and clear, but not altogether free from defects. It is often too negligent and familiar. He betrays at some times an affectation of giving great matters in a small compass; at others he der scends to puerile details unworthy of a philosopher. Ke displays occasionally too much refinement in his ideas; and, at times, is too elaborate in his ornaments. These defects are less offensive in the writings of Fontenelle, than they would be in any others; not only because they are overpowered by many striking beauties of various kinds, but because it is easy to perceive that they are truly natural to the author.

, a very eminent Scottish lawyer, was born at Culloden, in the county of Inverness, in 1685, and educated in the university of Edinburgh, whence he removed to Utrecht, and afterwards to Paris, where he studied the civil law. He returned, in 1710, to Scotland, and was called to the bar in the court of session. His abilities as an advocate were soon noticed, and he obtained great practice. In 1717, he was appointed solicitor-general of Scotland. In 1722, he was returned member for the county of Inverness; and in 1725, was promoted to the dignity of lord-advocate. He was further advanced in 1742, to be lord-president of the court of session, in which high station he acted with such integrity, that he was esteemed and honoured by his country. During the rebellion in 1745 and 6, he used the utmost of his power to oppose the pretender, and mortgaged his estate to support the government. With great reason he applied to the ministry for a repayment of those expences which he had incurred by his loyalty, and their refusal, undoubtedly a stain on the history of the times, is said to have operated so strongly upon his mind, as to produce a fever, of which he died in 1747, at the age of 62. His writings were chiefly on theological subjects, without any reference to his profession; they are, 1. “Thoughts on Religion.” 2. “A Letter to a Bishop.” 3. “Reflections on Incredulity,” 1750, in 2 vols. 12mo. Father Houbigant translated the two former of these works into French, but they were not greatly admired in that country; the solidity of the Scottish lawyer could not be expected to suit with the vivacity of French reasoners. Duncan Forbes of Culloden, says a recent biographer, was in all respects one of the most eminent men of his time. His learning was extensive and profound, reaching even to the oriental languages; and he had that acuteness and subtlety of parts, which is peculiarly fitted for the nice discriminations of the law; but which was always regulated in him by the prevailing principles of his nature, probity, candour, and a strong sense of the beauty of virtue and moral excellence. In the eloquence of the bar, he outshone all his contemporaries; for he united to great knowledge of jurisprudence, a quickness of comprehension that discovered to him at once the strong ground of argument which he was to press, or the weakness of the doctrine he wished to assail. When raised to the presidency of the court, the vigour of his intellect, his patience in the hearing of causes, his promptitude in the dispatch of business, the dignity, of his deportment, and above all, the known probity and integrity of his mind, gave the highest weight to the decisions of that tribunal over which he presided.

Forestus (for by his Latin name he is best known), was one of the most expert physicians of his time: he was extremely industrious, and his principal views were directed to the observation of diseases, in which he manifested, in numerous instances, a considerable degree of penetration and judgment. Mailer, indeed, has thrown out some suspicions against the histories of djsease which he has detailed; and apprehends that he was occasionally more anxious to prove the justness of his“prognostics, and the felicity of his cures, than to relate a true account of the symptoms: but Boerhaave has praised him highly for the care and attention which he has evinced in the collection of so large a number of histories of disease. The following are the titles of his works: 1.” Observationum et Curationum Medicinalium sive Medicinae Theories et Practicae, libri 28,“Francofurti, 1602, 2 vols. folio. 2. A third volume of the same work in 1604; and 3. A fourth volume, consisting of the 30th, 31st, and 32d books in 1607. 4. In 1610 a fifth volume was printed under the title of” Observationum et Curationum Chirurgicarum, libri quinque. Accesserunt de incerto ac fallaci Urinarum judicio adversus Uromentas et Uroscopos, libri tres“in which the fallacy and absurdity of the pretensions of the uroscopists are clearly pointed out. 5. A sixth and last volume of these treatises was published at Francfort in 1611, with the title of” Observationum et Curationum Chirurgicarum libri quatuor posterius," folio. All these books of observations were printed separately at Leyden, between 1589 and 1610, in 8vo. The three books relative to the urine, in 1583. Complete collections of the works of Forestus have been subsequently published at various times and places.

, a Prussian writer of various talents, originally of a French refugee family, was born at Berlin in 17 1L He was educated at the royal French college for the church, and being ordained in his twentieth year, he was chosen one of the officiating ministers of the French congregation in Berlin. In 1737 he was appointed professor of eloquence in the French college, and in 1739 succeeded to the philosophical chair of the same college. On the restoration of the royal academy of sciences and belles lettres at Berlin in 1744, M. Formey was made secretary to the philosophical class, and four years afterwards sole and perpetual secretary of -the academy. His talents and fame procured him admission into many foreign learned bodies, as those of London, Petersburg, Haarlem, Mantua, Bologna, and many others in Germany, and he was personally acquainted with several of the most eminent and illustrious characters throughout Europe. Besides his academical employments, he rttas agent or secretary to the dowager princess of Wirtemberg: he filled several offices in the French colony at Berlin, and at length became a privy counsellor in its superior directory. He was twice married, and by his second wife had many children, seven of whom survived him. He died in the month of March 1797, at the great age of eighty-five years and eight months. In Thiebault’s “Anecdotes of Frederic II.” there are some of Formey, by which it would appear that he was apt to be very unguarded, and almost licentious in conversation, but often procured his pardon by the ingenuity of his excuses. His publications were extremely numerous, but we have nowhere seen a complete list. The following, however, probably includes the principal: 1. “Articles des Pacte Conventa, dresses et conclus entre les etats de Pologne et le roi Frederic-Auguste,” 1733, 4to, translated from the Latin. About this time he was concerned in the publication of several political pieces on the affairs of Poland. 2. “Le fidele fortifie par la grace,” a sermon, Berlin, 1736. 3. “Ducatianaj ou remarques de feu M. leDuchat, &c.” Amst. 2 vols. 8vo. 4. “Bibliotheque Germanique;” in this journal he wrote from vol. XXVII. The lives of Duchat, Beausobre, Baratier, &c. are from his pen. 5. “Mercure et Minerve% ou choix de nouvelles, &c.” another periodical work, begun in Dec. 1737, and concluded in March 1738. C. “Amusemens litteraires, moraux, et politiques,” a continuation of the preceding, as far as July of the last mentioned year. 7. “Correspondence entre deux amis sur la succession de Juliers et de Bergues,” Hague, 1738. 8. “Sermons sur le mystere de la naissance de Jesus Christ,” from the German of lleinbeck, Berlin, 1738. 9. “Sermons sur divers textes de Tecriture sainte,” ibid. 1739, 8vo. 10. “Remarques historiques sur les medaille* et monnoies,” ibid. 1740, 4to, from the German of Koehler. II.“Journal de Berlin,” 1740, of which he edited the last six months of that year. 12. “La Belle Wolfienne,” 1741, 8vo. Formey had adopted the philosophy of Leibnitz, as explained by Wolf, and in this publication endeavoured, but without success, to render their principles familiar to the ladies. 13. “Memoires pour servir a Tbistoire de Pologae,” Hague, 1741, 8vo, from the Latin of Lengnich. 14. “La yie de Jean-Philippe Baratier,” Berlin, ifo. 15. ‘ Le iriomphe de i’evidence, ou refnta.­tion du Pyrrhonisme ancien et moderne,“2 vols. 8vo, an abridgment from Crousaz. 16.” Traite sur la reformation de la justice en Rrusse,“to which is added a treatise on dreams. 17.” Eloges des academicians de Berlin et de divers autres savans,“Berlin, 1757, 2 vols. 12mo. 18.” Principes du droit naturel et des gens,“Amst. 3 vols. 12mo, from Wolff’s Latin work. 19.” Conseils pour former une bibliotheque,“Francfort, 1746, of which the sixth edition appeared in 1775, 8vo. 20.” Le systeme du vrai bonheur,“1761. 21.” Melanges philosophiques,“Leyden, 1754, 2 vols. 12mo, translated afterwards into English. 22.” La comtesse Suedoise,“Berlin, 1754, 8vo, from the German of Gellert. 23.” Examen philosophique de la liaison reelle entre les sciences et les mceurs,“1755, 8vo. 24.” L'Abeille du Parnasse,“1750 1754, 10 vois. 8vo. 25.” Le Philosophe Paien, ou pensees de Pline, avec un commentaire literal et moral,“Leyden, 3 vols. 12mo. 26.” Principes elementaires des Belles Lettres,“Berlin, 1759. 27.” Diversite’s historiques,“1764, 8vo f from ^lian, with notes. 28.” Abrege de toutes les sciences a Tusage des adolescens,“Berlin, 1764—1778, 8 vols. 12mo. 9-9.” Introduction generate aux sciences, avec des conseils pour former un bibliotheque choisie,“Amst. 1764. 30.” Discours de Gellert sur la morale,“Berlin, 1766. 31.” Traduction Franchise de l'Histoire des Protestans,“by Hansen, Halle, 1767. Some of these have been published in English, particularly his small work on the belles lettres, and another not noticed above,” Histoire abrege*e de la Philosophic," which we can remember a very popular book in this country. Formey, indeed, if not one of the most profound, was one of the most pleasing of writers, and all his works were calculated by clearness and precision of style for popular reading. He deserves credit also as one of the defenders of revelation against Diderot and Rousseau; and for this reason Voltaire endeavoured to prejudice the king of Prussia against him. Besides the extensive labours we have enumerated, and the list is by no means complete, Formey wrote many articles in the French Encyclopaedia, and in that of Yverdun. His correspondence with literary men was most extensive, and almost all the booksellers on the continent occasionally engaged his services as an editor.

, a Flemish painter of the 17th century, born at Antwerp in 1580, was one of the most learned and celebrated of landscape painters. Some have placed him so near Titian, as to make the difference of their pictures consist, rather in the countries represented, that) in the goodness of the pieces. The principles they went upon are the same, and their colouring alike good and regular. He painted for Rubens, of whom he learned the essentials of his art The elector palatine employed him at Heidelberg, and from thence he went to Paris, where, though he worked a long time, and was well paid, yet he grew poor for want of conduct, and died 1659, in the house of an ordinary painter called Silvain, who lived in the suburbs of St. Jaques.

The effect of Fox’s work, in promoting, or rather confirming the principles of the reformation, to which we owe all that distinguishes us as a nation, is acknowledged with universal conviction. It is proved even by the antipathy of his enemies, who would not have taken such pains to expose his errors, and inveigh against the work 2t large, if they had not felt that it created in the public mind an abhorrence of the persecuting spirit of popery, which has suffered little diminution, even to the present day. All the endeavours of the popish writers, however, from Harpsfield to Milner, “have not proved, and it never will be proved, that John Fox is not one of the most faithful and authentic of all historians.” And in the words of the writer from whom we borrow this assertion, we add, although with some reluctance from respect to the gentleman’s name, “We know too much of the strength of Fox’s book, and of the weakness of those of his adversaries, to be farther moved by Dr. John Milner’s censures, than to charge them with falsehood. All the many researches and discoveries of later times, in regard to historical documents, have only contributed to place the general fidelity and truth of Fox’s’ melancholy narrative on a rock which cannot be shaken.”

, one of the most illustrious statesmen of modern times, the second son of the preceding lord Holland, was born Jan. 13, O. S. 1748. We have already noticed that lord Holland was an indulgent father, and it has been said that his partiality to this son was carried to an unwarrantable length. That his father might have been incited by parental affection, a feeling of which few men can judge but for themselves, by the early discovery he made of his son’s talents, to indulge him in the caprices of youth, is not improbable; but that this indulgence was not excessive, may with equal probability be inferred from the future conduct of Mr. Fox, which retained no traces of the “spoiled child,” and none of the haughty insolence of one to whom inferiors and servants have been ordered to pay obsequious obedience. Nor was his education neglected. At Eton, where he had Dr. Barnard for his master, he distinguished himself by some elegant exercises, which are to be found in the *' Musce Etonenses,“and at Hertford college, Oxford, where he studied under the tutorage of Dr. Newcome, afterwards primate of Ireland, his proficiency in classical and polite literature must have been equal to that of any of his contemporaries. The fund indeed of classical learning which he accumulated both at Eton and Oxford was such as to remain inexhausted during the whole of his busy and eventful political career; and while it proved to the last a source of elegant amusement in his leisure hours, it enabled him to rank with some of the most eminent scholars of his time. This we may affirm on the authority of Dr. Warton, with whom he frequently and keenly contested at the literary club, and on that of a recent publication of his letters to Gilbert Wakefield, with whom he corresponded on subjects of classical taste and criticism. From Oxford, where, as was the custom with young men intended for public life, he did not remain long enough to accumulate degrees, he repaired to the continent. In his travels it is said that he acquired more of the polish of foreign intercourse than those who knew him only in his latter days could have believed, and returned a fashionable young man, noted for a foppish gaiety of dress and manner, from which he soon passed into the opposite extreme. As his father intended him to rise in the political world, he procured him a seat for the borough of Midhurst, in 1768, before he had attained the legal age; a circumstance which, if known, appears to have been then overlooked. Two years afterwards, his father’s interest procured him the office of one of the lords commissioners of the admiralty; but in May 1772, he resigned that situation, and in January 1773, was nominated a commissioner of the treasury. At this time it cannot be denied that his political opinions were in unison with those of his father, who was accounted a tory, and were adverse to the turbulent proceedings of the city of London, which at this time was deluded by the specious pretences to patriotism displayed by the celebrated Wilkes. It was in particular Mr. Fox’s opinion, in allusion to the public meetings held by the supporters of” Wilkes and liberty,“that” the voice of the people was only to be heard in the house of commons." That he held, however, some of the opinions by which his future life was guided, appears from his speech in favour of religious liberty, when sir William Meredith introduced a bill to give relief from subscription to the thirty-nine articles; and perhaps other instances may be found in which his natural ingenuousness of mind, and openness of character, burst through the trammels of party; and although it must be allowed that the cause he now supported was not that which he afterwards espoused, it may be doubted whether he was not even at this time, when a mere subaltern in the ministerial ranks, more unresirained in his sentiments than at some memorable periods of his subsequent life.

, or Sebastianus Foxius Morzillus, a learned Spaniard, originally of the family of Foix, in Aquitaine, was born at Seville in 1528, and passed the whole of his short life in the study of philosophy and the belles lettres, acquiring such reputation from his works as made his untimely death a subject of unfeigned regret with his countrymen. After being educated in grammar learning at Seville, he studied at Lou vain e and other universities, and acquired the esteem of some of the most eminent professors of his time. Before he was twenty years of age he had published his “Paraphrasis in Ciceronis topica,” and in his twenty-fourth year his Commentary on the Timaeus of Plato. About this time the reputation he had acquired induced Philip II. king of Spain, to invite him home, and place his son the infant Carlos under his care; but returning by sea, he unhappily perished by shipwreck in the flower of his age, leaving the following works as a proof that his short space of life had been employed in arduous and useful study: 1. “De Studii philosnphici ratione,” of which there is an edition joined to Nunnesius’s “De recte conficiendo curriculo Philosophico,” Leyden, 1621, 8vo. 2. “De usu et exercitatione Dialectica,” and “De Demonstratione,” Basil, 1556, 8vo. 3. “In Topica Ciceronis paraphrasis et scholia,” Antwerp, 1550, 8vo. 4. “De naturae philosophise seu de Platonis et Aristotelis consensione, libri quinque,” Louvaine, 1554, 8vo, often reprinted. 5. “De Juventute atqtie de Honore,” Basil. 6. “Compendium Ethices, &c.” Basil, 1554, 8vo. 7. “In Platonis Timaeum seu de universo commentarius,” ibid. 1554, fol. 8. “In Phaedonem; et in ejusdem decem libros de republica commentarii,” Basil. 9. “De Imitatione,” Antwerp, 1S54, 8vo. 10. “De conscribenda historia,” Antwerp and Paris, 1557, 8vo, and Antwerp again, 1564. Mirseus, Gerard Vossius, Gabriel Naudeus, and others, speak of this author as one of the most learned men of his time.

, was born at the castle of Sales, in the diocese of Geneva, August 21, 1567. He descended from one of the most ancient and noble families of Savoy. Having taken a doctor of law’s degree at Padua, he was first advocate at Chambery, then provost of the church of Geneva at Annecy. Claudius de Granier, his bishop, sent him as missionary into the valleys of his diocese to. convert the Zuinglians, and Calvinists, which he is said to have performed in great numbers, and his sermons were attended with wonderful success. The bishop of Geneva chose him afterwards for his coadjutor, but was obliged to use authority before he could be persuaded to accept the office. Religious aftairs called him afterwards into France, where he was universally esteemed; and cardinal du Perron said, “There were no heretics whom he could not convince, but M. de Geneva must be employed to convert them.” Henry IV. being informed of his merit, made him considerable offers, in hopes of detaining hioi in France; but he chose rather to return to Savoy, where he arrived in 1602, and found bishop Grimier had died a few days before. St. Francis then undertook the reformation of his diocese, where piety and virtue soon flourished through his zeal; he restored regularity in the monasteries, and instituted the order of the Visitation in. 1610, which was confirmed by Paul V. 1618, and of whicli the baroness de Chantal, whom he converted by his preaching at Dijon, was the foundress. He also established a congregation of hermits in Chablais, restored ecclesiastical discipline to its ancient vigour, and converted nnmerous heretics to the faith. At the latter end of 1618 St. Francis was obliged to go again to Paris, with the cardinal de Savoy, to conclude a marriage between the prince of Piedmont and Christina of France, second daughter of Henry IV. This princess, herself, chose de Sales for her chief almoner; but he -would accept the place only on two conditions; one, that it should not preclude his residing in his diocese; the other, that whenever he did not execute his office, he should not receive the profits of it. These xinusual terms the princess was obliged to consent to, and immediately, as if by way of investing him with his office, presented him with a very valuable diamond, saying, “On condition that you will keep it for my sake.” To which he replied, “I promise to do so, madam, unless the poor stand in need of it.” Returning to Annecy, he continued to visit the sick, relieve those in want, instruct the people, and discharge all the duties of a pious bishop, till 1622, when he died of an apoplexy at Lyons, December 28, aged fifty-six, leaving several religious works, collected in 2 vols. fol. The most known are, “The Introduction to a devout Life;” and “Philo,” or a treatise on the love of God. MarsoHier has written his life, 2 yols. 12mo, which was translated into English by Mr. Crathornc. He was canonized in 16 65.

Besides his periodical publications, Freron left several works, l. “Miscellanies,” in 3 vols. comprising several poems, to which it has only been objected that they are gather over-polished. 2. “Les VraisPlaisirs,” or the loves of Venus and Adonis; elegantly translated from Marino. 3. Part of a translation of Lucretius. He also superintended and retouched Beaumelle’s critical commentary on the Henriade, and assisted in several literary works. His son, Stanislaus Freron, was one of the most active accomplices in the atrocities which disgraced the French revolution, and appears to have had no higher ambition than to rival Marat and Robespierre in cruelty. He died at St. Domingo in 1802.

, a learned dissenting clergyman, was born at Totness in Devonshire in Dec. 1726, and was educated in the free-school of that town at the same time with Dr. Kennicott, who was a few years his senior, and between them a friendship commenced which continued through life. From Totness Dr. Furneaux came to London for academical studies among the dissenters, which he completed in 1749. He was soon after ordained, and chosen assistant to the rev. Henry Read, at the meetinghouse in St. Thomas’s, Southwark, and joint Sunday evening lecturer at Salters’-hall meeting. In 1753 he succeeded the rev, Moses Lowman, as pastor of the congregation at Clapham, which he raised to one of the most opulent and considerable among the protestant dissenters. He remained their favourite preacher, and highly esteemed by all classes, for upwards of twenty-three years, bat was deprived of his usefulness in 1777, by the loss of his mental powers, under which deplorable malady (which was hereditary) he continued to the day of his death, Nov. 23, 1783. His flock and friends raised a liberal subscription to support him during his illness, to which, from sentiments of personal respect, as well as from the principle of benevolence, the late lord Mansfield, chief justice of the king’s bench, generously contributed. Dr. Furneaux (which title he had received from some northern university) united to strong judgment a very tenacious iriemory; of which he gave a remarkable proof, when the cause of the dissenters against the corporation of London, on the exemption they claimed from serving the office of sheriff, was heard in the' house of lords. He was then present, and carried away, and committed to paper, by the strength of his memory, without notes, the very able speech of lord Mansfield, with so much accuracy, that his lordship, when the copy was submitted to his examination, could discover but two or three trivial errors in it. This circumstance introduced him to the acquaintance of that great man, who conceived a high regard for him. Dr. Furneaux published but little, except a few- occasional sermons the most considerable of his works was that entitled “Letters to the hon. Mr. Justice Blackstone, concerning his exposition of the act of toleration, and some positions relative to religious liberty, in his Commentaries on the Laws of England,” 1770, 8vo. This is said to have induced the learned commentator to alter some positions in the subsequent edition of his valu^­able work. To the second edition of Dr. Furneaux’s “Letters” was added the before-mentioned speech of lord Mansfield. In 1773 he published also “An Essay on Toleration,” with a view to an application made by dissenting ministers to parliament for relief in the matter of subscription, which, although unsuccessful then, was afterwards granted.

, esq. F. R. and A. Ss. eldest son of the preceding, was born in 1672, and was educated under his father at St. Paul’s school, whence he was admitted of Trinity-college, Cambridge, 1691, made scholar of 'that house 1693, and afterwards fellow (being then B. A.) in 1697. He was possessed of a considerable estate at Scruten, in Yorkshire, now in the possession of his grandson Henry Gale, esq. and represented North Allerton, in that county, in 1705, 1707, 1706, and 1710. His name was added to the commissioners of stamp duties, Dec. 20, 1714, and was continued in a subsequent commission, May 4, 1715-, and he was appointed a commissioner of excise Dec. 24 of the same year. In this he continued uutii 1735, when he was wantonly displaced by sir Robert Waipole, for which no other reason was assigned than that sir Robert wanted to provide for one of his friends, an act of arbitrary tyranny which cannot be too severely condemned. Mr. Gale was the first vice-president of the society of antiquaries; and when that learned body, in 1721, proposed to collect accounts of all the ancient coins relative to Great Britain and its dominions, Mr. Gale undertook the Reman series, and his brother Samuel the Danish. Though he was considered as one of the most learned men of his fege, he only published the following books:

, a brave officer of the army, and not less celebrated for his piety, was born at Carriden, in Linlithgow shire, in Scotland, Jan. 10, 1687-8. He was the son of captain Patrick Gardiner, of the family of Torwoodhead, by Mrs. Mary Hodge, of the family of GladsKiitir. His family was military, his father, his uncle by the mother’s side, and his elder brother, all fell in battle. He was educated at the school of Linlithgow, but was soon removed from it, owing to his early zeal to follow his father’s profession. At the age of fourteen he had an ensign’s commission in the Dutch service, in which he continued until 1702; when he received the same from queen Anne, and being present at the battle of Ramillies, in his nineteenth year, was severely wounded and taken prisoner by the French. He was carried to a convent, where he resided until his wound was cured; and soon after was exchanged. In 1706 he obtained the rank of lieutenant, and after several intermediate promotions, was appointed major of a regiment commanded by the earl of Stair, in whose family he resided for several years. In January 1730, he was advanced to the rank of lieutenant-colonel in the same regiment, in which he continued until April 1743, when he received a colonel’s commission over a regiment of dragoons. During the rebellion in Scotland, in 1745, his regiment being in that country, and the rebel army advancing to Edinburgh, he was ordered to march with the utmost expedition to D unbar, which he didj and that hasty retreat, with the news soon afterwards received of the surrender of Edinburgh to the rebels, struck a visible panic into the forces he commanded. This affected his gallant mind so much, that on the Thursday before the battle of Preston-pans, he intimated to an officer of considerable rank, that he expected the event would be as it proved; and to a person who visited him, he said, “I cannot influence the conduct of others as I could wish; but I have one life to sacrifice to my country’s safety, and I shall not spare it.” On Friday Sept. 20th, the day before the fatal battle, when the whole army was drawn up, about noon, the colonel rode through the ranks of his regiment, and addressed them in an animated manner, to exert themselves with courage in defence of their country. They seemed much affected by his address, and expressed a very ardent desire of attacking the enemy immediately, a desire in which he, and another gallant officer of distinguished rank, would have gratified them, had it been in their power, but their ardour and their advice were overruled by the strange conduct of the commander-in-chief, sir John Cope, and therefore all that colonel Gardiner could do, was to spend the remainder of the day in making as good a disposition as the circumstances would allow. He continued all night under arms, wrapped Mp in his cloak, and sheltered under a rick of barley which happened to be in the field. By break of day the army was roused by the noise of the approach of the rebels; and the attack was made before sun -rise. As soon as the enemy came within gun-shot, they commenced a furious fire; and the dragoons which constituted the left wing immediately fled. The colonel at the beginning of the attack, which lasted but a few minutes, received a ball in his left breast, which made him give a sudden spring in his saddle; upon which his servant, who had led the horse, would have persuaded him to, retreat; but he said it was only a flesh-wound, and fought on, though he presently after received a shot in his right thigh. The colonel was for a few moments supported by his men, and particularly by about fifteen dragoons, who stood by him to 'the last; but after a faint fire, the regiment in general was seized with a panic; and though their colonel and some other brave officers did what they could to rally them, they at lust took to a precipitate flight. Just in the moment when colonel Gardiner seemed to be making a pause to deliberate what duty required him to do in such a circumstance, he saw a party of the foot fighting bravely near him, without an officer to lead them, on which he rode up to them immediately, and cried out aloud, “Fire on, my lads, and fear nothing.” As he had uttered these words, a Highlander advanced towards him with a scythe fastened to a long pole, with which he gave him such a deep wound in his right arm, that his sword dropped from his band, and several others coming about him at the same time, while he was thus dreadfully entangled with that savage weapon, he was dragged from his horse. The moment he fell, another Highlander gave him a stroke either with a broad -sword, or a Lochaber axe, on the hinder part of the head, which was the mortal blow. All that his faithful servant, John Forster, who furnished this account, saw further at this time, was, that as his hat was falling olf, he took it in his left hand, waved it as a signal for him to retreat, and added, which were the last words he ever heard him speak, “Take care of yourself.” The servant immediately fled to a mill, about two miles distant, where he changed his dress, and disguised like a miller’s servant, returned with a cart about two hours after the engagement. He found his master not dnly plundered of his watch and other things of value, but even stripped of his upper garments and boots. He was, however, still breathing, and from appearances, not altogether insensible. In this condition he was conveyed to the church of Tranent, and from that to the clergyman’s house, where he expired about eleven o'clock in the forenoon, Saturday Sept. 21, 1745. The rebels entered his house before he was carried off from the field, and plundered it. His remains were interred on the Tuesday following, Sept. 24, at the parish church of Tranent. Even his enemies spoke honourably of him, and seemed to join in lamenting the fall of so brave and so worthy a man. Nor was it for bravery only that colonel Gardiner was distinguished. He was perhaps one of the most pious men of his age and country. He was, says his biographer, in the most amazing manner, without any religious opportunity, or peculiar advantage, deliverance, or affliction, reclaimed on a sudden, in the vigour of life and health, from a life of licentiousness, not only to a steady course of regularity and virtue, but to high devotion, and strict, though unaffected sanctity of manners. All this is amply illustrated in Dr. Doddridge’s well-known life of this gallant hero, whose death was as much a loss, as the cause of it, the battle of Preston-pans, was a disgrace to his country.

Gebelin was one of the most learned men of his time, and not only familiar with the ancient and modern languages, but with natural history, mathematics, mythology, ancient monuments, statues, gems, inscriptions, and every species of knowledge and research which goes to form the accomplished antiquary. Besides the “Monde primitif,” he published, 1. “Le Patriote Fran$ais et impartiale,” 1753, 2 vols. 12 mo. 2. “Histoire de la guerre des Cevennes, ou de la guerre des Camisards,” 1760, 3 vols. 12mo. 3. “L'Histoire Naturelle de la Parole, ou precis de la Grammaire Universelle,” 1776, 8vo. This forms a part of his “Monde primitif.” 4. “Dictionnaire etymologique et raisotme des racines Latines, a l'usage des jteunes gens,” 1780, 8vo. 5. “Lettre sur le Magnetisme Animal,” 4to; his defence of this quackery, which for a time was too much encouraged even in this country. 6. “Devoirs du prince et du citoyen,” a posthumous publication which appeared in 1789, 8vo.

, an eminent German poet and moral writer, was born at Haynichen, in Saxony, July 4, 1715. His father was a clergyman of a small income, who had thirteen children. Gellert was educated at home, where his poetical powers first appeared in a poem on the birth-day of his father, which was succeeded by many others, but all these in his maturer years he committed to the flames. He was afterwards sent to school at Meissen r where he learned Greek and Latin, and in 1734 he went to Leipsic, whence, after studying four years, his father’s narrow income obliged him to recall him. Gellert wished much to continue at the university, but he submitted to necessity, and at home had an opportunity of again turning his attention to those poetical pursuits for which he had early displayed a predilection; and perhaps it is to his recall from the university that we owe the beauty and simplicity of his fables. At this time he occasion-ally composed sermons, which are in general distinguished both for spirit and sound reasoning, but they contain several indications of a taste not very correct, and a judgment not arrived at maturity. In 1741 he again returned to the university of Leipsic, with a nephew of his own, of whose education he had the charge. Here he met with some friends, from whose conversation and directions he confesses that he derived very considerable advantage. About this time he published several tales and fables in a periodical publication. In 1745 he acquired the right of giving public lessons in the university, particularly on- morals. He had early received an impression of the importance of Christian morality, and thought that he could not pass over the subject in silence, without neglecting one of the most essential duties of his Situation. Soon after the commencement of his academical labours, he published his “Tales and Fables.” Amongst these, the manner in which the character of a devotee was drawn, was much admired. This suggested to Gellert the idea of his comedy of the “Devotee,” which was first published in the Bremen Magazine, but afterwards caused him much vexation. Many condemned it because it appeared to them to have a mischievous tendency, by exposing piety and seriousness to ridicule. But Gellert was not a man who could attempt to sap the foundations of real religion and morality, though he wished to expose hypocrisy and affectation to merited contempt. Among the many flattering instances of public approbation which the “Tales and Fables” produced, Gellert was particularly pleased with that of a Saxon peasant. One day, about the beginning of winter, he saw the man drive up to his door a cart loaded with fire-wood. Having observed Gellert, he asked him whether he was the gentleman who wrote such fine tales? Being answered in the affirmative, he begged pardon for the liberty which he took, and left the contents of his cart, being the most valuable present he could make. At this time the Germans had no original romances of any merit. In order to give some celebrity to this species of composition in his own country, he published the “Swedish Countess,” a work of a melancholy cast, and containing many indications of that depression of spirits which embittered the latter days of Gellert. In 1747 he published a book entitled “Consolations for Valetudinarians,” which was received with as much eagerness as his other works, and translated into various languages. It contains a melancholy representation of the sufferings which he himself endured. Nothing, however, could overcome his activity, and in 1748 the continuation of hisf “Tales and Fables” was published. About this time he was deprived of the society of several friends who had often dispersed the gloom that resulted from his disorder. The only intimate friend that remained was Havener, who persuaded Gellert to give to the public some of his letters. In 1754 he published his “Didactic Poems,” whicu were not so well received as his Tales and Fables, and he himself seems to have been sensible that they were not so agreeable, although useful and instructive. He bestowed particular care on some sacred songs, which were received with great enthusiasm all over Germany, both in the Roman catholic and protestant states. About this time he was appointed professor extraordinary in philosophy, and gave lectures on the Belles Lettres. From this period Gellert suffered extremely from an hypochondriac affection. His days were spent in melancholy reflections, and his rights in frightful dreams. But he made prodigious efforts to resist this malady, and to continue to perform his academical duties; and these efforts were often successful. The constant testimonies of the approbation with which his works were received, and the sympathy of his friends, were never-failing sources of consolation, and served to spread many cheerful moments over the general languor of his life. The calamities of war which desolated Germany after 1757, induced Gellert for some time to quit Leipsic. While in the country, he was attacked by a severe illness, from which, however, contrary to all expectation, he recovered. In 1761 the chair of a professor in ordinary was offered him, but he refused to accept it, from a persuasion that the state of his health was such as to render him incapable of discharging the duties of the situation with that regularity and attention which he thought necessary. In 1763-4, Gellert went to Carlsbad by the advice of his physicians to drink the waters, which, however, seem to have given him little relief. After a few years more of almost constant suffering, GeHett died at Leipsic, on the 13th of December. 1769. Some time before his death he revised and corrected his moral lessons, which he published at the request of the elector of Saxony. He was a man of the easiest and most conciliating manners; pleasing even to strangers; and of a disposition to form and preserve the most valuable friendships. He was open and enthusiastic in his attachments, ready at all times to givtt his counsel, labour, and money, to serve his friends. In himself, of a timid and hypochondriac habit, and disposed to criticise both his own character and works with a severity of which his friends could not acknowledge the justice. He had a constitutional fear of death, which, notwithstanding, receded as the hour of trial approached; so that he died with calmness and fortitude. In this he is thought to have resembled our Dr.Johnson, but in other respects his character and habit seem to approach nearer to those of Cowper. His works were published in ten vols. 8vo, in 1766; and after his death a more complete edition at Leipsic, in eight rolumes, with engravings. Kutner has celebrated his various excellencies; he says, “a century will perhaps elapse, before we have another poet capable of exciting the love and admiration of his contemporaries, in so eminent a degree as Gellert, and of exercising so powerful an influence on the taste and way of thinking of all ranks.” Though not deserving all this, he was an agreeable and fertile writer; the poet of religion and virtue; an able reformer of public morals. His “Moral Lessons” were translated into English, and published by Mrs. Douglas of Eduam house, 1805, 3 vols. 8vo, with an excellent life of the author, to which this article is chiefly indebted.

Mr. Gibbon was a man of so much candour, or so incapable of disguise, that his real character may be justly appreciated from the Memoirs he left behind him. He discloses his sentiments there without the reserve he has put on in his more laboured compositions, and has detailed his mental failings with an ingenuous minuteness which is seldom met with. He candidly confesses to the vanity of an author, and the pride of a gentleman; and we may allow that it is the vanity of one of the most successful authors of modern times, and the pride of a gentleman of amiable manners and high accomplishments. At the same time, it cannot be denied that his anxiety of fame sometimes obscured the lustre of his social qualities, parted him too widely from his brethren in literature, and led him to speak of his opponents with an arrogance which, although uniformly characteristic of the cause he supported, was yet unworthy of his general cast of character. His conversation is said to have been rich in various information, communicated in a calm and pleasant manner, yet his warmest admirers do not give him the praise of excelling in conversation. He seldom brought his knowledge forwards, and was more ambitious in company to be thought a man of the world than a scholar. In parliament he never ventured to speak, and this probably lessened his value in the eyes of an administration that required the frequent and ready support of eloquence.

When in order to enlighten the nation in true learning and religion, public schools began to be recommended, Mr. Gilpin endeavoured to promote the good work with the utmost of his ability. As his manner of living was most affluent and generous, and his hospitality and charities made daily a larger demand upon him, it was thought extraordinary, that, amidst such great expences, he should entertain the design of building and endowing a grammar school; yet his exact ceconomy soon enabled him to accomplish this, and the effects of his endowment were very quickly seen: his school was no sooner opened than it began to flourish, and to afford the agreeable prospect of a succeeding generation rising above the ignorance and errors of their forefathers. He not only placed able masters in his school, whom he procured from Oxford, but himself constantly inspected it, and took an active part in the education of the scholars. Such was his benevolence that whenever he met with a poor boy upon the road, he would make trial of his capacity l)y a few questions; and if he found it such as pleased him, he would provide for his education. From the school also he sent several to the universities, where he maintained them wholly at his own expence. Nor was this munificent and uncommon care unrewarded. Many of his scholars became great ornaments to the church, and exemplary instances of piety, among whom have been particularly mentioned, Henry Ayray, afterwards provost of Queen’s college; George Carleton, bishop of Chichester; and Hugh Broughton. It was also at Mr. Gilpin’s suggestion that his friend bishop Pilkington founded a school at the place of his nativity in Lancashire, the statutes of which he revised and corrected at the bishop’s request. Mr. Gilpin’s general reputation for learning and piety, made it the desire of persons of all religious persuasions to have their cause credited by his authority; and among others, the first dissenters, or puritans, who had contracted prejudices against certain church ceremonies, habits, &c. made early applications to Mr. Gilpin, but without effect. The reformation, he said, was just; essentials were there concerned; hut at present he saw no ground for disaffection. " The church of England, he thought, gave no reasonable offence. Some things there might be in it, which had been perhaps as well avoided (probably meaning the use of the vestments), but to disturb the peace of a nation for such trifles, he thought, was quite unchristian. And what indeed appeared to him chiefly blameable in the dissenters, was, that heat of temper with which they propagated their opinions, and treated those who differed from them. Such was not his practice, for he confined all his dislike to their sentiments, urged with intemperate warmth, but bore not the least ill-will to their persons. One of the most intimate friends he ever had was Mr. Lever, a minister of their persuasion, and a sufferer in their cause. It is almost needless to add, that he found it equally or more easy to resist the solicitations of the papists, who lamented, as they well might, that so good a man had forsaken their communion, and consequently they left no methods untried to bring him back.

For many interesting and honourable anecdotes of the conduct of this extraordinary man we must refer to his life by his descendant the late rev. William Gilpin. The present article has reached its utmost length, but will not be useless it' it direct the attention of the reader to one of the most exemplary pieces of biography in our language. It remains only to notice, that after a life devoted to every virtue that can dignify the character of an ecclesiastic, he found himself in February 1583 so weak, from a fall, and the infirmities of age, as to be sensible that his end wag drawing near. He told his friends of his apprehensions, and spoke of his death with great composure. He was soon confined to his chamber; but retained his senses to the last. A few days before his death, he desired his friends, acquaintance, and dependents, &c. might be called into his chamber; and being raised in his bed, addressed himself to them on matters of eternal concern. He also sent for several persons, who had hitherto made no good use of his advice, and upon whom he imagined his dying words might have a better eftect, but his speech began to faulter before he had finished his exhortations. The remaining hours of his life he spent in prayer, and broken conversation with some select friends, mentioning often the consolations of the gospel, declaring they were the only true ones, and that nothing else could bring a man peace at the last. He died March 4, 15S3, in the sixtysixth year of his age.

His “Athenaid” was published in 1787, exactly as it was found among his papers. It consists of the unusual number of thirty books, but evidently was left without the corrections which he would probably have bestowed had he revised it (or the press. It is intended as a continuation, or second part to “Leonidas,” in which the Greeks are conducted through the vicissitudes of the war with Xerxes to the final emancipation of their country from his invasions. As an epic it seems defective in many respects. Here is no hero in whose fate the mind is exclusively engaged, but a race of heroes who demand our admiration by turns; the events of history, too, are so closely followed, as to give the whole the air of a poetical chronicle. Of his smaller poems, that on sir Isaac Newton is certainly an extraordinary production from a youth of sixteen, but the theme was probably given to him. Such an acquaintance with the state of philosophy and the improvements of our immortal philosopher, could not have been acquired at his age. “Hosier’s Ghost” was long one of the most popular English ballads; but his “London,” if intended for popular influence, was probably read and understood by few. In poetical merit, however, it is not unworthy of the author of “Leonidas.” Fielding wrote a very long encomium on it in his “Champion,” and predicted rather too rashly, that it would ever continue to be the delight of all that can feel the exquisite touch of poetry, or be roused with the divine enthusiasm of public spirit.

, of the same family, although what relation to the preceding is not mentioned, was oorn at Tubingen in 1748. He was the author of several performances on vegetable physiology, and the classification of plants; and likewise published numerous works on the materia medica, and chemistry, mineralogy, and every part of natural history. One of the most celebrated is his edition of the “System of Nature of Linnæus.” He, however, is said to have introduced great disorder into the science, by multiplying the species. He was also the author of a “History of Chemistry,” forming a part of the history of arts and sciences undertaken by the professors of Gottingen. The world is indebted to him for the discovery of several excellent dyes, extracted from vegetable and mineral substances. He died in 1805.

, an eminent lawyer, and one of the most learned men of his age, was born October 17, 1549, at Paris. He was the son of Leon Godefroi, counsellor to the Chatelet. He had acquired a great reputation in the parliament, but embracing the reformed religion, was obliged to retire to Geneva, and taught law both there and in some German universities. In 1618 he was sent by the elector palatine to Louis XIII. who, among other marks of favour, presented him with his picture, and a gold medal. But being again obliged to quit the palatinate, during war, he went to Strasburgh, where he died September 7, 1622, leaving a great number of valuable works; the principal of which are, 1. “Notae in quatuor Libros institutionum.” 2. “Opuscula varia juris.” 3. “Corpus juris civilis, cum notis.” These notes are excellent: the best editions are those by Vitré, 1628, and by Elzevir, 1683, 2 vols. fol. 4. “Praxis civilis, ex antiquis et recentioribus scriptoribus.” 5. “Index Chronologicus legum et novellarum a Justiniano imperatore compositarum.” 6. “Consuetudines Civitatum et Provinciarum Galliae, cum notis,” fol. 7. “Quaestiones politico ex jure communi in Historia desumptae.” 8. “Dissertatio de nobilitate.” 9. “Statuta regni Gallise cum jure communi collata,” fol. 10. “Synopsis statutorum municipalium,” an edition, Greek and Latin, of the “Promptuarium juris” of Harmenopules. “Conjectures,” and several “Lectures upon Seneca,” with a defence of these Conjectures, which had been attacked by Gruter. “A Collection of the ancient Latin Grammarians,” &c. The following works are also ascribed to Denis Godefroi “Avis pour reduire les Monnoies a leur juste Prix et Valeur,” 8vo. “Maintenue et Defense des Empereurs, Rois, Princes, Etats, et Republiques; centre les Censures Monitoires, et Excommunications des Papes,” 4to. “Fragmenta duodecim Tabularum suis nunc primum Tabulis restituta,” 1616, 4to. His “Opuscula” have been collected and printed in Holland, fol.

Having now acquired considerable fame as a critic, a novelist, and a descriptive poet, he was induced to court the dramatic Muse. His first attempt was the comedy of the “Good-natured Man,” which Garrick, after much delay, declined, and it was produced at jCovent-garden theatre, in 1768, and kept possession of the stage for nine nights, but did not obtain the applause which his friends thought it merited. Between this period and the appearance of his next celebrated poem, he compiled “The Roman History,” in 2 vols. 8vo, and afterwards an abridgement of it, and “The History of England,” in 4 vols. 8vo, both elegantly written, and hi My calculated to attract and interest young readers, although it must be owned, he is frequently superficial and inaccurate. His pen was also occasionally employed on introductions and prefaces to books compiled by other persons; as “Guthrie’s History of the World,” and Dr. Brooks’s “System of Natural History.” In this last preface, he so far excelled his author in the graces of a captivating style, that the booksellers engaged him to write a “History of the Earth and Animated Nature,” which he executed with much elegance, but with no very deep knowledge of the subject He also drew up a “Life of Dr. Parnell,” prefixed to an edition of his poems, which afforded Dr. Johnson an opportunity of paying an affectionate tribute to his memory, when he came to write the life of Parnell for the English Poets. He wrote also a “Life of Bolingbroke,” originally prefixed to the “Dissertation on Parties,” and afterwards to Bolingbroke’s works. In one of his compilations he was peculiarly unfortunate. Being desired by Griffin, the bookseller, to make a selection of elegant poems from our best English classics, for the use of boarding-schools, he carelessly marked for the printer one of the most indecent tales of Prior. His biographer adds “without reading it,” but this was not the case, as he introduces it with a criticism. These various publications have not been noticed in their regular order, but their dates are not connected with any particulars in our author’s history.

, Sieurde, an ingenious French writer, was born at Chevreuse, in the diocese of Paris, or as some say in Paris itself, in 1599. He was early distinguished by some successful publications which had given him a literary reputation, and made him be enrolled among the number assembled by cardinal Richelieu for the purpose of founding the French academy in 1635. His first publications were romances and works of a light nature, but at the age of forty-five he formed the resolution of consecrating his pen to religion, and adopted a penitentiary course of life, which some think was more strict at the commencement than at the termination of it. He died June 14, 1674. One of the most curious of his works, “La doctrine des Mceurs, tiree de la philosophic des Stoiques, representee en cent tableaux,” 1646, fol. is perhaps now more admired for the plates than for the letterpress. They are engraved by Peter Daret from designs by Otho V emius. In this work Gornberville assumes the disguised name of Thalassius Basilides (Marin le Roi) His romances were il Cariti'e,“” Polexandre,“” Cytherea,“and” La jeune Alcidiane,“published in 1733 by madame Gomez, who says that Gomberville left merely an outline of it. His other works were, 1.” Relation de la riviere des Amazones,“1632, 2 vols. 12mo. 2.” Memoires de Louis de Gonzague, due de Nevers,“1665, 2 vols. fol. 3.” Discours des vertus et des vices de Phistoire," 1620, 4to, and various pieces of sacred poetry, &c.

, one of the most violent of the republican sectaries in the time of Charles I. but whom no sect seems to own, was born in 1593, and educated at Queen’s college, Cambridge. In 1633 he was presented to the living of St. Stephen’s, Coleman-street, from which he was turned out by what was called the “committee for plundered ministers,” because he refused to baptise the children of his parish promiscuously, and refused to administer the sacrament to his whole parish. He was an independent, and carried on many warm disputes with the presbyterian party. What was more singular in these days, was his embracing the Arminian doctrines, which he defended with great vigour both by the pulpit and press; and such was the general turbulence of his temper, and conceit in his own opinions, that he is said to have been against every man, and every man against him. Being a decided republican, he peculiarly gratified the savage spirit of the times by promoting the condemnation of the king, which he afterwards endeavoured to justify in a pamphlet called “The Obstructors of Justice,” the wickedness, absurdity, and impiety of which Mr. Neal has very candidly exposed. At the restoration it was thought he would have been excepted from the act of indemnity, but, although he afterwards was permitted to live, a proclamation was issued in 1660 against the above pamphlet, and in that he is stated to have been “late of Coleman-street, clerk,” and-to have fled. His pamphlet was burnt by the hands of the hangman. Returning afterwards, he kept a private conventicle in Coleman-street, where he died in 1665. His works, now in very little repute, are chiefly theological, among which the following may be mentioned: 11 Redemption Redeemed,“in folio.” The divine Authority of the Scriptures,“4to;” An Exposition of the Ninth Chapter of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans," 4to.

, the Camden of the eighteenth century, and one of the most illustrious antiquaries England has produced, was the only son of Harry Gough, esq. of Perry-hall. This gentleman, for whom his son ever preserved a reverential affection, was born April 2, 1681, and in his eleventh year, went with his uncle sir Richard Gough, to China, where he kept his accounts. In 1707, he commanded the ship Streatham, of which his younger brother Richard was purser in 1709. He continued to command this ship till 1715, when he retired with a decent competency, and was elected a director of the East India company about 1731. In this situation, his knowledge of the company’s affairs, the result of his many voyages in their service, and his zeal for their interests, joined to habitual activity and integrity, gave him great weight. He became also a representative in parliament in 1734, for the borough of Bramber, for which he sat until his death. His political career was marked by independence of spirit. Although attached to, and in the confidence of, sir Robert Walpole, he refused several offices from that minister, and yet supported him to the last. He died in 1751, and was buried in the rector’s vault in St. Andrew’s church, Holborn. In 1717, he purchased of the lady of sir Richard Shelley, one moiety of the Middlemore estate in Warwickshire (the other moiety of which he before possessed), which afterwards descended to his son and heir Richard, together with the property at Enfield, which he purchased in 1723. In 1719 he married Elizabeth, daughter of Morgan Hynde, esq. of London, an eminent brewer.

, a protestant divine, and voluminous writer, was born at Senlis, Oct. 20, 1543, and studied divinity at Geneva, where he was ordained in October 1566, and was appointed one of the ministers of that city, a situation which he filled for the long space of sixtytwo years. His residence at Geneva was never discontinued but on account of three journies he took to France, on matters relating to the protestant churches, the one in 1576, when he went to Forez; the second in 1582, to Champagne, and the third in 1600, to Grenoble. The rest of his life he devoted to his pastoral duties, and to his numerous works, which prove him one of the most indefatigable writers of his time. He died Feb. 3, 1628, in his eighty-fifth year, and in full possession of his faculties. He preached but seven days before his death. Scaliger, who had a great esteem for him, says he was an ingenious man, who learnt all he knew without the assistance of a master.

, lord Cullen, an eminent lawyer ind judge in Scotland, was descended from a younger >ranch of the ancient family of the Grants, of Grant, in iat kingdom; his ancestor in a direct line, being sir John Grant, of Grant, who married lady Margaret Stuart, daughter of the earl of Athol. He was born about 1660, and received the first part of his education at Aberdeen; but, being intended for the profession of the law, was sent to finish his studies at Leyden, under the celebrated Voet, with whom he became so great a favourite by his singular application, that many years afterwards the professor mentioned him to his pupils, as one that had done honour to the university, and recommended his example to them. On his return to Scotland, he passed through the examination requisite to his being admitted advocate, with such abilities as to attract the particular notice of sir George Mackenzie, then king’s advocate, one of the most ingenious men, as well as one of the ablest and most eminent lawyers, of that age. Being-thus 'qualified for practice, he soon got into full employ, by the distinguishing figure which he made at the Revolution in 1688. He was then only twenty-eight years of age; but, as the measures of the preceding reign had led him to study the constitutional points of law, he discovered a masterly knowledge, when the convention of estates met to debate that important affair concerning the vacancy of the throne, upon the departure of king James to France. Some of the old lawyers, in pursuance of the principles in which they had been bred, argued warmly against those upon which the Revolution, which had taken place in England, was founded; and particularly insisted on the inability of the convention of estates to make any disposition of the crown. Grant opposed these notions with great strength and spirit, and about that time published a treatise, in which he undertook, by the principles of law, to prove that a king might forfeit his crown for himself and his descendants -, and that in such a case the states had a power to dispose of it, and to establish and limit a legal succession, concluding with the warmest recommendations of the prince of Orange to the regal dignity.

Mr. Graves’s publications were very numerous. His first was The Festoon; or, a collection of Epigrams, with an Essay on that species of composition.“In 1772 he produced” The Spiritual Quixote,“in 3 vpls. intended as a satire on the itinerant and illiterate preachers among the methodists, and which might have been pronounced one of the most amusing and interesting novels of his time, had he not, in pursuit of his main object, incautiously introduced the language of scripture, which, whether used by methodists, or others, can never be a legitimate subject of ridicule. He next published” A Translation from the Italian of Galates; or, a treatise on Politeness, by De la Casa, archbishop of Benevento.“He soon after published” Columelia, or the distressed Anchoret,“in 2 vols. to show the consequence of a person of education and talents retiring to solitude and indolence in the vigour of youth: in this it is thought he alluded to his friend Shenstone. He also published two volumes of poems under the title o” Euphrosyne,“which have gone through several editions, but he is rather entitled to the merit of an agreeable versifier, than that of a genuine poet. Then appeared his” Eugenius; or, Anecdotes of the Golden Vale,“in 2 vols. In 1778 appeared” Recollections of some particulars in the life of William Shenstone, esq. in a series of letters to W. Seward, esq. F. R. S.“This was published to vindicate the character of his friend from the criticisms and censure of Dr. Johnson, Mr. Gray, and Mr. Mason. The following is a list of his subsequent publications, although probably not in chronological order.” Plexippus; or, the aspiring Plebeian,“in 2 vols.” Hiero on the condition of Royalty,“from the Greek of Xenophon” Fleurettes,“a translation of Fenelon’s Ode on Solitude, and other French authors” The Life of Commodus,“from the Greek of Herodian” The Rout,“from a young man in town to his friend in the country” The Meditations of Antoninus, translated from the Greek;“” The Reveries of Solitude,“consisting of pieces of prose and verse” The Coalition or, Opera rehearsed,“a comedy in three acts” The Farmer’s Son,“a moral tale, in the ballad metre” Sermons on various subjects,“in 1 vol.” Senilities,“consisting of pieces in prose and verse. His last publication was” The Invalid, with the obvious means of enjoying Life, by a Nonagenarian.“The above, we believe, is a tolerably correct list of the publications of Mr. Graves; whose works, although the” Spiritual Quixote" only will be much called for hereafter, will always be read with pleasure, there being a sprightliness and epigram* matic turn in his writings which was peculiar to himself, and which he retained to the last. In Mr. Graves ended the bright associates of their time, composed of Shenstone, Whistler, and Jago.

In the year 599, he wrote a letter to Serenus bishop of Marseilles, commending his zeal in breaking some images which the people had been observed to worship, and throwing them out of the church; and the same year a circular letter to the principal bishops of Gaul, condemning simoniacal ordinations, and the promotions of laymen to bishoprics he likewise forbad clerks in holy orders to live with women, except such as are allowed by the canons and recommended the frequent holding assemblies to regulate the affairs of the church. The same year he re-r fused, on account of some foreseen opposition, to take cognizance of a crime alleged against the primate of Byzacena, a province in Africa. About the same time he wrote an important letter to the bishop of Syracuse, concerning ceremonies, in which he says, “That the church of Rome followed that of Constantinople, in the use of ceremonies; and declares that see to be undoubtedly subject to Rome, as was constantly testified by the emperor and the bishop of that city.” He had already this year reformed the office of the church, which is one of the most remarkable actions of his pontificate. In this reform, as it is called, he introduced several new customs and superstitions; amongst the rest, purgatory. He ordered pagan temples to be consecrated by sprinkling holy water, and an annual feast to be kept, since called wakes in England, on that day; with the view of gaining the pagans in England to the church-service. Besides other less important ceremonies, added to the public forms of prayer, he made it his chief care to reform the psalmody, of which he was excessively fond. Of this kind he composed the “Ainiphone ,” andnch tiines as hest suited the psalms, the hymns, the prayers, the verses, the canticles, the lessons, the epistles and gospels, the prefaces, and the Lor-i’s prayer. He likewise instituted an academy of chanters for all the clerks, as far as the deacons exclusively: he gave them lessons himself, and the bed, in which he continued to chant amidst his last illness, was preserved with great Generation in the palace of St. John Lateran for a long time, together with the whip with which he used to threaten the young clerks and singing hoys, when they sang out of tune. He was so rigid in regard to the chastity of ecclesiastics, that he was unwilling to admit a man into the priesthood who was not strictly free from defilement by any commerce with women. The candidates for orders were according to his commands questioned particularly on that subject. Widowers were excepted, if they had observed a state of continency for some considerable tiifie.

, a man eminently learned in his day> and one of the revivers of literature, was born at Bristol in 1442, and educated at Winchester-school. He was elected thence to New college, Oxford, in 1467; and in 1479, presented by the warden and fellows to the rectory of Newton-Longville, in Buckinghamshire. But his residence being mostly at Oxford, the society of Magdalen college made him their divinity reader, about the beginning of Richard the Illd’s reign; and that king corning soon after to Oxford, he had the honour to hold a disputation before him, with which his majesty was so pleased, that he rewarded him graciously. In 1485 he was made a prebendary of Lincoln, and in 1488 he quitted his reader’s place at Magdalen college, in order to travel into foreign countries; for though he might be reckoned a great master of the Greek and Lati languages in England, where the former especially was then scarcely understood at all, yet he well knew that a more perfect knowledge of it might be attained; and accordingly he went into Italy, and studied there some time under Demetrius Chalcondyles and Politian. He returned to England, and fixed himself in Exeter college, at Oxford, in 1491, where he took the degree of B. D. Here too he publicly taught the Greek language, and was the first who introduced a better pronunciation of it than had been known in this island before. But the introduction of this language alarming many, as a most dangerous innovation, the university divided itself into two factions/distinguished by the appellation of Greeks and Trojans, who bore each other a violent animosity, and proceeded to open hostilities. Anthony Wood says, “I cannot but wonder when I think upon it, to what a strange ignorance were the scholars arrived, when, as they would by no means receive it, but rather scoff and laugh at it; some against the new pronunciation of it, which was endeavoured to be settled; others at the language itself, having not at all read any thing thereof. It is said that there were lately a company of good fellows (Cambridge men as 'tis reported) who, either out of hatred to the Greek tongue, or good letters, or merely to laugh and sport, joined together and called themselves Trojans: one, who was the senior, and wiser than the rest, called himself Priam, another Hector, a third Parys, and the rest by some ancient Trojan names who, after a jocular way, did oppose aa Grecians, the students of the Greek tongue.” In this situation Grocyn was, when Erasmus came ta Oxford; and if he was not this great man’s tutor, yet he certainly assisted him in attaining a more perfect knowledge of the Greek. He was, however, very friendly toErasmus, and did him many kind offices, as introducing him to archbishop Warham, &c. He also boarded him gratis in his house, although he was by no means in affluent circumstances. We cannot be surprized therefore that Erasmus speaks of him often in a strain which shews that he entertained the most sincere regard for him, as well as the highest opinion of his abilities, learning, and integrity. About 1590 he resigned his living, being then made master of Allhallows college, at Maidstone,in Kent, though he continued still to live mostly at Oxford. Grocyn had no esteem for Plato, but applied himself intensely to Aristotle, whose whole works he had formed a design of translating, in conjunction with William Latimer, Linacre, and More, but did not pursue it. While his friend Cotet was dean of St. Paul’s, Grocyn gave a remarkable evidence of the candour and ingenuousness of his temper. He read in St. Paul’s cathedral a public lecture upon the book of Dionysius Areopagita, commonly called “Hierarchia Ecclesiastica;” it being customary at that time for the public lecturers, both in the universities, and in the cathedral thurches, to read upon any book, rather than upon the scriptures, till dean Colet reformed that practice. Grocyn, in the preface to his lecture, declaimed with great warmth against those who either denied or doubted of the authority of the book on which he was reading. But after he had continued to read a few weeks, and had more thoroughly examined the matter, he entirely changed hi sentiments; and openly and candidly declared that he had been in an error; and that the said book, in his judgment, was spurious, and never written by him who, in the Acts of the Apostles, is called Dionysius the Areopagite. But when dean Colet had introduced the custom of reading lectures upon some part of the scriptures at his cathedral, he engaged Grocyn, according to Dr. Knight, as one of the most learned and able men he could meet with, in that useful employment.

, or Hugo de Groot, one of the most eminent names in literary history, was descended from a family of the greatest distinction in the Low Countries: his father^ John de Groot, was burgomaster of Delft, and curator of the university of Leyden, and in 1582, married Alida Averschie, a lady of one of the first families in the country, by whom he had three sons and a daughter. His son Hugo, the subject of this article, was born at Delft on Easter-day, April I0j 1583, and came into the world with the most happy dispositions; a profound genius, a solid judgment, and a wonderful memory. These extraordinary natural endowments had all the advantages that education could give them, and he found in his own father a pious and an able tutor, who formed his mind and his morals. He was scarce past his childhood, when he was sent to the Hague, and boarded with Mr. Utengobard, a celebrated clergyman among the Arrninians, who took great care of his trust; and, before he had completed his twelfth year, was removed to Leyden, under the learned Francis Jimiiis. He continued three years at this university, where Joseph Scaliger was so struck with his prodigious capacity, that he condescended to direct his studies; and in 1597, Grotius maintained public theses in the mathematics, philosophy, and law, with the highest applause.

This employ suited his genius, and soon after he published the most useful of his works, his large collection of inscriptions, whjch is dedicated to the emperor Rodolphus II. who bestowed great encomiums upon it, and gave Gruterus the choice of his own reward. He answered that he would leave it to the emperor’s pleasure, only begged it might not be pecuniary. In the same temper, upon hearing there was a design to give him a coat of arms, in order to raise the dignity of his extraction, he declared, that, so far from deserving a new coat of arms, he was too much burthened with those which had devolved to him from his ancestors. The emperor was then desired to grant him a general licence for all the books of his own publishing, which he not only consented to, but also granted him a privilege of licensing others. His majesty also intended to create him a count of the sacred palace; and the patent was actually drawn, and brought to be ratified by his sign manual; but this monarch happening to die in the interim, it was left without the signature, which it never afterwards received. Yet Gruterus bestowed the same encomiums on the good emperor as if it had been completed; and his privilege of licensing books continued to be of great advantage to him, being one of the most voluminous writers of his age. This task he was the better enabled to execute by the help of his library, which was large and curious, having cost him no less than twelve thousand crowns in gold; but the whole was destroyed or plundered, together with the city of Heidelberg, in 1622. Oswald Smendius, his son-in-law, endeavoured in vain to save it, by writing to one of the great officers of the duke of Bavaria’s troops; but the licentiousness of the soldiers could not be restrained. Afterwards he went to Heidelberg, and having witnessed the havock that had been made at his father’s house, he tried to save at least what Gruterus’s amanuensis had lodged in the elector’s libra^, and brought the Pope’s commission to give him leave to remove them. He received for answer, that as to the Mss. the pope had ordered them all to be sought for carefully, and carried to Home; but as to the printed books, leave would be given to restore them to Gruterus, provided it was approved by Tilly under his hand: but this pretended favour prove4 of no effect, as no access could be had to Tilly,

He died in 1556, in his sixty-third year, and his trade was carried on honourably in the same city by his son, Anthony Gryphius. One of the most beautiful books of Sebastian Gryphius is a “Latin Bible,” printed 1550, with the largest types that had then been seen, in 2 vols. fol.

, surnamed Veronese, the first branch of a family celebrated in the republic of letters, and one of the revivers of literature, was born at Verona in 1370. After being taught Latin by John of Ravenna, he went to Constantinople, with the sole view of learning Greek in the school of Emanuel Chrysoloras, who had not then come to Italy. Pontico Virunio, in his life of Chrysoloras, says that Guarino was of an advanced age when he set out for Constantinople, and that he returned to Italy with a large collection of Greek manuscripts, the loss of which by shipwreck so affected him, that his hair turned white in one night; but Maffei and Apostolo Zeno have justly considered this as a fable. It appears, on the other hand, on comparing various circumstances, that Guarino was very young when he went into Greece, and was only twenty years of age when he returned. After this return he first kept school at Florence, and afterwards successively at Verona, Padua, Bologna, Venice, and Ferrara, in which last city he resided longest. Nicolas III. of Este had invited him thither in 1429 to superintend the education of his son Lionel. Six or seven years after, he was appointed professor of Greek and Latin in the university of Ferrara. This office he filled until the assembling of the grand council, to which the emperor John Paleologus came, accompanied with several Greeks, who found Guarino. sufficient employment, as he mentions in his letters, and on the council being removed to Florence, he accompanied them thither as interpreter between the Latins and Greeks. He returned again to Ferrara, where he held his professorship until his death in 1460. His principal works consist of Latin translations from Greek authors; particularly of many of Plutarch’s lives, part of Plutarch’s morals, and Strabo’s geography. Of this author he at first translated only ten books, by order of pope Nicholas V.; the other seven were translated by Gregory of Typhernuin, and in this state the work was first printed at Rome in 1470, folio. But, at the request of the Venetian senator Marcello, Guarino made a translation of these seven books, of which there are manuscript copies at Venice, Modena, &c. Maffei, in his “Verona Illustrata,” mentions also a translation of the whole seventeen in the hand-writing of Guarino, which was at one time in the library of the senator Soranzo at Venice. To his translation of Plutarch’s lives, he added those of Aristotle and Plato. He also compiled a Greek grammar, “Em. Chrysolorae erotemata lingusc Graecse, in compendium redacta, a Guarino Veronesi,” Ferrar. 1509, 8vo and a Latin grammar, “Grammatical institutiones,” without date or place, but printed at Verona, 1487, and reprinted in 1540, the model, says Maffei, from which all others have been taken. Annexed are some lesser treatises, “Carmina ditiferentialia,” “Liber de Diphtongis,” &c. Guarino also wrote commentaries or notes on various authors, both Greek and Latin, among the latter on Cicero’s orations and Persius’s satires, and was the author of various Latin orations delivered at Verona, Ferrara, and other places, and of some Latin poems, and a great number of letters which have not been printed. He was the first who recovered the poems of Catullus, a manuscript which was mouldering in a garret, and almost destroyed, and rendered the whole legible, with the exception of a very few verses. If it be thought that even all this is insufficient to justify the high reputation which Guarino enjoyed in his lifetime, and for ages afterwards, we must add that, independently of rendering these services to the cause of learning, which were of great importance at its revival, Guarino derived no small share of fame from the vast number of scholars whom he formed, with a like taste for classical literature, which they dispersed throughout all Europe. Guarino, likewise, was one of the most indefatigable student* of his time. Even in old age his memory was extraordinary, and his application incessant. He took little nourishment and little sleep, and rarely went abroad, yet he preserved his strength and faculties to the last. By his wife he had at least twelve children, two of whom followed his steps Jerome became secretary to Alphonso, king of Naples and Baptist, or Battista, rather better known, was professor of Greek and Latin at Ferrara, like his fathev, and like him educated some eminent scholars, among whom were Giraldi and Aldus Manutius. He left a collection of Latin poetry, “Baptists Guarini Veronensis poemata Latina,” Modena, 1496; a treatise on study, “De ordine docendi ac studendi,” without place or date; but there is a subsequent edition of Heidelberg, 1489. He wrote also other treatises, translations from the Greek, discourses, and letters, which latter remain in manuscript. It is to him we owe the first edition of the Commentaries of Servius on Virgil; and he assisted his father in recovering and making legible the manuscript of Catullus above mentioned.

The French government having determined to send troops to assist the Americans, the author was ordered on that service; but on the eve of embarking, he received counter orders; a disappointment which he attributed to the malice of his enemies, and which preyed on him very deeply. As soon as he had recovered from this mortification, he began a work entitled “Histoire de la Milice Francaise,” which, from the profound manner in which he treats his subject, might be called the history of the art of war, and of the military system of the nations of Europe, from the time of the Romans. He had brought it to the eleventh century, when he was drawn from his retirement by having obtained for his venerable father the appointment of governor of the invalids. While he was assisting in reforming the abuses of that noble institution, he wa admitted a member of the French academy; where his introductory address is said to have been much admired for its truly classical spirit. Two years afterward, his health obliged him to retire to the country: but he was soon recalled by the death of his father, to comfort his aged mother. It appears that one of the most estimable traits in Guibert’s character, was his filial piety.

Many of Guido’s latter performances are not to be placed in competitionwith those which he painted before he unhappily fell into distressed circumstances, by an insatiable appetite to gaming, when his necessities compelled him to work for immediate subsistence, and he contracted a habit of painting in a more slight and negligent manner, without any attention to his honour or his fame. In the church of St. Philip Neri, at Fano, there is a grand altar-piece by Guido, representing Christ delivering the keys to St. Peter. The head of our Saviour is exceedingly fine, that of St. John admirable and the other apostles are in a grand style, full of elegance, with a strong expression and it is well preserved. In the archiepiscopal gallery at Milan, is a St. John, wonderfully tender in the colouring, and the graces diffused through the design excite the admiration of every beholder. At Bologna, in the Palazzo Tanaro, is a most beautiful picture of the Virgin, the infant Jesus, and St. John; Jn which the heads are exquisitely graceful, and the draperies in a grand style. But in the Palazzo Zampieri is preserved one of the most capital paintings of Guido: the subject is, the Penitence of St. Peter after denying Christ, with one of the apostles seeming to comfort him. The figures are as large as life, and the whole is of an astonishing beauty; the painter having shewn, in that single performance, the art of painting carried to its highest perfection. The heads are nobly designed, the colouring clear and precious, and the expression inimitably just and natural.

, one of the most celebrated surgeons of the sixteenth century, was a native of Orleans, and the pupil of the famous Ambrose Paré, and attained very high professional reputation in the army as well as at home. He received the honourable appointment of surgeon to the sovereigns Charles IX. and Henry IV. by both of whom he was highly esteemed. He died at Paris March 13, 1609. His first publication was a translation of Ambrose Paré's Treatise on Surgery into Latin, printed at Paris in 1582, folio. His next work was a small treatise, entitled “Apologie pour les Chirurgiens,” 1593. The remainder of his writings is contained in a collection of his “Œuvres de Chirurgie,” printed at Paris in 1598, and in 1612; and at Rouen in 1649, some of which were published separately. These are, “Tables Anutomiques,” with figures from Vesalius; “Histoire de tous les Muscles du corps humain,” &c.; “Traité de la Generation de l'homme;” “L'heureux Accouchement des femmes;” “Traité sur les abus qui se commettent sur les procédures de l'Impuissance des hommes et des femmes;” “La Chirurgie Françoise, recueillies des anciens Médecins et Chirurgiens, &c.;” “Traité des plaies recueillies des Leçons de M. Courtin;” “Operations de Chirurgie recueillies ides anciens Medecins et Chirurgiens;” “Traité des maladies de l'iŒil;” and lastly, “Traité de la parfaite methode d'Embaumer les corps;” which contains a report of that operation, as performed upon the bodies of Charles IX. and Henry III. and IV.

, a French antiquary, and counsellor of the presidial court of Nismes, was born in that city in 1600, of protestant parents, and early acquired a reputation for learning and probity. The court frequently employed him in affairs of importance, in all which he acquitted himself with ability. Henry Frederic of Nassau, prince of Orange, having appointed him counsellor of the parliament of that city, Louis XIV. permitted him to retain with it his office in the presidial of Nismes, one of the most considerable of the kind in that kingdom. He died at Nismes, in 1680. His antiquarian pursuits produced a dissertation entitled, 1. “Explicatio duorum vetustorum numismatum Nemausensium ex sere,” 1655, 4to, twice reprinted, and inserted in Sallengre’s “Thesaurus.” 2. “Recherches historiques et chronologiques, concernant l'etablissement et la suite de seuechaux de Beaucaire et de Nimes,” 1660, 4to. He left also in manuscript three folio volumes of the antiquities of Nismes, with drawings, which were sold by his heirs to baron HohendorfF, and are said to be now in the imperial library at Vienna. Guiran had a fine collection of medals and other antiques, which were dispersed after his death.

All the royal mandates, indeed, for his several preferments, were grounded upon his sufferings and other deserts for he was reckoned one of the most learned and best-beloved sons of the church of England and as such was chosen proctor both for the chapter of the church of Canterbury, and for the clergy of the diocese of Peterborough, in the convocation held in 1661; one of the committee upon the review of the liturgy, when it was brought into that state of sufficiency where it has rested ever since; and was principally concerned in the conference with the dissenters at the Savoy the same year. In 1670, he was promoted to the bishopric of Chichester, which he held with his regius professorship of divinity till 1674, when he was translated to Ely; where, after nearly ten years enjoying it, he died a bachelor, in his seventy-tirst year, July 6, 1684. His corpse was interred in the cathedral of Ely, under an elegant monument of white marble, the inscription upon which has been often printed.

He was reckoned one of the most learned prelates of his time, and was of a very charitable disposition, and a liberal benefactor to all places with which he was connected. Besides his constant acts of charity and generosity in his life-time, in relieving the poor, supporting many scholars at the university, and adding to the maintenance of poor vicars in the sees of Chichester and Ely he gave 500l. towards building St. Paul’s, London '2001. to the rebuilding Clare-hall, where he had been fellow, and by his will left them 300l. towards a new chapel; to St. John’s college, where he had been master, he bequeathed his library, valued at 500l., and 600l. in money.

, the Ovid of Wales, and one of the most famous Welsh bards, was born in 1340 at Brogydin, in the county of Cardigan. He was brought up in the family of Llewelyn ap Guilym Fychan, styled lord of Cardigan, at Emlyn, until he was fifteen years of age; at which period he removed, after a short stay with his parents, and settled as steward and private tutor in the family of Ivor Hael. Like other itinerant bards of that age, he often visited different parts of the principality, and was so universally admired, that he has been claimed by the men of Anglesea as their countryman; and was generally known by the name of David of Glamorgan, and the nightingale of Teivi vale, in Cardiganshire. He died about 1400. Excepting music and a few Latin words, which he might pick up at mass, it cannot be ascertained from his works, that he had any acquaintance with the sciences or learned languages; for his poems consist chiefly of lively descriptions of nature, written in pure unadulterated Welsh. His “Poems” were published in 1792, 8vo, by Mr. Owen Jones and Mr. William Owen, who think that in invention, harmony, perspicuity, and elegance of language, Gwilym has not been excelled by any of his successors. A translation, however, is yet wanting to enable the English reader to appreciate his merits.

, an eminent scholar, and one of the revivers of the learned languages in England, was descended from a good family in Buckinghamshire, and born in 1516. He was educated at Eton school, under Dr. Richard Cox, afterwards bishop of Ely, and was thence elected to King’s college, in Cambridge; where he greatly distinguished himself by his parts and learning, and particularly by writing Latin in an elegant, but, as Mr. Warton thinks, not a very pure style. He studied also the civil law, of which he became doctor; and read public lectures in it in 1547, and the two years following, and was so much approved, that upon a vacancy in the professor’s chair in 1550, the university employed the celebrated Ascham to write to king Edward VI. in his favour. He was accordingly appointed professor, and was also for some time professor of rhetoric and orator of the university. During king Edward’s reign, he was one of the most illustrious promoters of the reformation; and therefore, upon the deprivation of Gardiner, was thought a proper person to succeed him in the mastership of Trinity-hall. In September 1552, through the earnest recommendation of the court, though not qualified according to the statutes, he was chosen president of Magdalen college in Oxford; but, in October 1553, upon the accession of queen Mary, he quitted the president’s place for fear of being expelled, or perhaps worse used, at Gardiner’s visitation of the said college. He is supposed to have lain concealed in England all this reign; but, on the accession of Elizabeth, was ordered by the privy council to repair to her majesty at Hatfield in Hertfordshire, and soon after was constituted by her one of the masters of the court of requests. Archbishop Parker also made him judge of his prerogative-­court. In the royal visitation of the university of Cambridge, performed in the beginning of Elizabeth’s reign, he was one of her majesty’s commissioners, as appears by the speech he then made, printed among his works. In 1566 he was one of the three agents sent to Bruges to restore commerce between England and the Netherlands upon the ancient terms. He died Jan. 21, 1571-2, and was buried in Christ Church, London, where a monument was erected to his memory, but was destroyed in the great fire of London. He was engaged, with sir John Cheke, in turning into Latin and drawing up that useful code of ecclesiastical law, published in 1571, by the learned John Fox, under this title, “Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum,” in 4to. He published, in 1563, a letter, or answer to an epistle, directed to queen Elizabeth, by Jerom Osorio, bishop of Silva in Portugal, and entitled “Admonitio ad Elizabetham reginam Angliæ,” in which the English nation, and the reformation of the church, were treated in a scurrilous manner. His other works were collected and published in 1567, 4to, under the title of “Lucubrationes.” This collection contains ten Latin orations, fourteen letters, besides the above-mentioned to Osorio; and also poems. Several of his original letters are in the Harleian collection; and his poems, “Poemata,” containing a great number of metrical epitaphs, were separately published with his life in 1576. Many of our writers speak in high terms of Haddon, and not without reason; for, through, every part of his writings, his piety appears equal to his learning. When queen Elizabeth was asked whether she preferred him or Buchanan? she replied, “Buchananum omnibus antepono, Haddonum nemini postpono.”

, a most learned lawyer, an$ upright judge, was born at Alderley, in Gloucestershire, November J, 1609. His father was a barrister of Lincoln’s Inn, a man of such tenderness of conscience, as to withdraw from his profession because unwilling to tamper with truth in giving that colour to pleadings which barristers call doing their best for their client;" and this, with some other practices, customary in those days, appearing unworthy of his character, he retired to his estate in the country, where he died in 1614, at which time his son was but five years old. His wife having died two years before, their son was committed to the guardianship of Anthony Kingscot, esq. to whom he was related, and by whom, for grammatical learning, he was placed under the care of Mr. Staunton, vicar of Wotton-under-Edge, a noted puritan. In 1626 he was admitted of Magdalen-hall, Oxford, under the* tuition of Obadiah Sedgwick, another puritan, where he laid the foundation of that learning and knowledge, on which he afterwards raised so vast a superstructure. Here, however, he fell into many levitres and exr travagances, and was preparing to go along with his tutor, who went chaplain to lord Vere into the Low Countries, with a resolution of entering himself into the prince of Orange’s army, when he was diverted from this design by being engaged in a law-suit with sir William Whitmore, who laid claim to part of his estate. Afterwards, by the persuasions of Serjeant Glanville, who happened to be his counsel in this case, and had an opportunity of observing his capacity, he resolved upon the study of the law, and was admitted of Lincoln’s Inn, November 8, 1629. Sensible of the time he had lost in frivolous pursuits, he nowstudied at the rate of sixteen hours a day, and threw aside all appearance of vanity in his apparel. He is said, indeed, to have neglected his dress so much, that, being a strong and well-built man, he was once taken by a pressgang, as a person very fit for sea-service; which pleasant mistake made him regard more decency in his cloaths for the future, though never to any degree of extravagant finery. What confirmed him still more in a serious and regular way of life, was an accident, which is related to have befallen one of his companions. Hale, with other young students of the inn, being invited out of town, one of the company called for so much wine, that, notwithstanding all Hale could do to prevent it, he went on in his excess till he fell down in a fit, seemingly dead, and was with some difficulty recovered. This particularly affected Hale, in whom the principles of religion had been early implanted, and therefore retiring into another room, and, falling down upon his knees, he prayed earnestly to God, both for his friend, that he might be restored to life again, and for himself, that he might be forgiven for being present and countenancing so much excess: and he vowed to God, that he would never again keep company in that manner, nor drink a health while he lived. His friend recovered; and from this time Mr. Hale forsook all his gay acquaintance, and divided his whole time between the duties of religion and the studies of his profession. Noy, the attorney-general, who was one of the most eminent men of his profession, took early notice of him, directed him in his studies, and discovered so much friendship for him, that Mr. Hale was sometimes called Young Noy.

Dr. Hales, having been elected a fellow of the royal society in 1717, communicated to that learned body his first essay in Vegetable Physiology, containing an account of some experiments concerning the effect of the sun’s heat in raising the sap. In 1727 appeared the first edition of his “Vegetable Staticks,” in 8vo, illustrated by plates, of which a second edition was published in 1731, followed afterwards by several others. This work was translated into French by Buffon in 1735, and into Italian by a Neapolitan lady named Ardinghelli, in 1756. There are also German and Dutch editions. The original book was, in fact, the first volume of a work entitled “Statical Essays,” of which the second, relating to the circulation of the blood in animals, was called “Hemastaticks,” and came out in 1733. In this the subject of the urinary calculus also is treated chemically and medically. With a laudable view of preventing as well as curing, the sufferings and crimes of his fellow-creatures, this good man published anonymously “a friendly admonition to the drinkers of gin, brandy, and other spirituous liquors,” which has often been reprinted and distributed gratis, by those who consider the temporal and eternal interests of their fellow subjects rather than the increase of the revenue. His invention of a ventilator for mines, prisons, hospitals, and the holds of ships, laid before the royal society in 1741, and applied also to the ventilation and consequent preservation of corn in granaries, has proved one of the most extensively useful contrivances for the preservation of health and human life. His philosophy was not a barren accumulation for the ignorant to wonder at, or for its professor to repose on in sottish self-sufficiency and uselessness; but an inexhaustible bank, on which his piety and his benevolence were continually drawing. Such philosophy and such learning alone entitle their possessors to authority or respect, and such are the best fruits of religion. In this instance at least they were duly honoured, both at home and abroad. The fame of Hales was widely diffused throughout the learned world, of which he received a most distinguished testimony, in being elected one of the eight foreign members of the French academy of sciences, in 1753, in the place of sir Hans Sloane, who died that same year. In 1732 he had been appointed, by the British government, a trustee for settling a colony in Georgia. He was well acquainted with Mr. Ellis, and other naturalists of his day, with whose views and pursuits of all kinds he ardently concurred; but it does not appear that his foreign correspondence was extensive. His name does not occur among the correspondents of Haller, who nevertheless held him in the highest estimation, as a philosopher and a man. As a vegetable physiologist, Dr. Hales is entitled to the highest honour. His experiments and remarks led the way to those of Du Hamel, Bonnet, and all that have followed. His accuracy of observation, and fidelity of relation, have never been impeached, and his ideas in physics, in many instances, went before the knowledge of his day, and anticipated future discoveries: such are his observations relative to airs, and to vegetable secretions. One of his more able successors in the study of vegetable physiology has doubted the accuracy of one of his plates only, tab. 11, in which three trees, having been united by engrafting their branches, the intermediate one, by the earth being removed from its roots, is left hanging in the air, but an experiment of the late Dr. Hope’s at Edinburgh, upon three willows, of which Dr. Smith was an eye-witness, and which was conducted with success in imitation of this of Hales, puts his account beyond all doubt whatever.

, one of the most eminent physicians and philosophers of the eighteenth century, was born at Berne, Oct. 16, 1708. He was the son of Nicholas de Haller, an advocate of considerable distinction in his profession, who had a numerous family. Albert was the youngest of five sons. From the commencement of his education, he discovered a great capacity for literature of every kind; to forward the progress of his studies, his father took into his family a private tutor, named Abraham Billodz; but such was the discipline employed by this pedagogue, that the accidental sight of him at any subsequent period of life, excited in Haller those painful recollections, of which all may have some idea who have been tutored with rigid severity. The progress of Haller’s studies, however, at the earliest periods of life, was rapid almost beyond belief. When other children were beginning only to read, he was studying Bayle and Moreri, and at nine years of age he was able to translate Greek, and was beginning to learn Hebrew. Not long after this, however, the course of his education was somewhat interrupted by the death of his father, which happened when he was in the thirteenth year of his age. After this he was sent to the public school at Berne, where he exhibited many specimens of early and uncommon genius. He was distinguished for his knowledge in the Greek and Latin languages, but principally for his poetical genius; and his essays of this kind, which were published in the German language, were read and admired throughout the whole empire.

It appears from Hamilton’s letters, that he communicated his poems to his friends for their critical remarks, and was easily induced to alter or amend them by their advice. He had sent the piece entitled “Contemplation*” one of the most laboured of his productions, to Mr. Home, who suggested some alterations. In a letter from Hamilton, in July 1739, he says, “I have made the corrections on the moral part of Contemplation, and in a post will send it to Will. Crawford, who has the rest, and will transmit it to you. I shall write to him fully on the subject.” It is pleasing ^to remark, that the Will. Crawford here mentioned, was the author of the beautiful pastoral ballad of Tweed-side, which, with the aid of its charming melody, will probably live as long as the language is understood. Hamilton may be reckoned among the earliest of the Scotch poets who wrote English verse with propriety and taste, and with any considerable portion of the poetic spirit. Thomson, Mallet, and he, were contemporaries. “The poems of Hamilton,” says professor Richardson, “display regular design, just sentiments, fanciful invention, pleasing sensibility, elegant diction, and smooth versification, His genius was aided by taste, and his taste was improved by knowledge. He was not only well acquainted with the most elegant modern writers, but with those of antiquity. Of these remarks, his poem entitled c Contemplation, or the Triumph of Love,' affords sufficient illustration.”

In the beginning of the national troubles he continued undisturbed at his living till the middle of July 1643; but, joining in the fruitless attempt then made atTunbridge in favour of the king, and a reward of 100l. being soon after promised to the person that should produce him, he was forced to retire privily and in disguise to Oxford. Having procured an apartment in his own college, he sought that peace in retirement and study which was no where else to be found. Among the few friends he conversed with was Dr. Christopher Potter, provost of Queen’s college; by whose persuasion it was, that he published his “Practical Catechism,” in 1644. This was one of the most valuable books published at that time; but great objections were raised against it by fifty-two ministers within the provincQ, of London; and especially by the famous Francis Cheynell, on account of its containing Arminian tenets. Hammond, however, defended his book, and the same year and the following, published several useful pieces, adapted to the times. In December of the same year he attended as chaplain the duke of Richmond and earl of Southampton; who were sent to London by Charles I. with terms of peace and accommodation to the parliament; and when a treaty was appointed at Uxbridge, he appeared there as one of the divines on the king’s side, where he managed, greatly to his honour, a dispute with Richard Vines, one of the presbyterian ministers sent by the parliament.

, of Hamden, in Buckinghamshire, a celebrated political character in the reign of Charles I. was born at London in 1594. He was of as ancient (Whitlocke says the ancientest) extraction as any gentleman in his county; and cousin-german to Oliver Cromwell, his father having married the protector’s aunt. In 1609 he was sent to Magdalen college in Oxford whence, without taking any degree, be removed to the inns of court, and made a considerable progress in the study of the law. Sir Philip Warwick observes, that “he had great knowledge both in scholarship and the law.” In his entrance into the world, he is said to have indulged himself in all the licence of sports, and exercises, and company, such as were used by men of the most jovial conversation; but afterwards to have retired to a more reserved and austere society, preserving, however, his natural cheerfulness and vivacity. In the second parliament of king Charles, which met at Westminster, February 1625-6, he obtained a seat in the house of commons, as he also did in two succeeding parliaments; but made no figure till 1636, when he became universally known, by a solemn trial at the king’s bench, on his refusing to pay the ship-money. He carried himself, as Clarendon tells us, through this whole suit with such singular temper and modesty, that he obtained more credit and advantage by losing it, than the king did service by gaining it. From this time he soon grew to be one of the most popular men in the nation, and a leading member in the long parliament. “The eyes of all men,” says the same writer, “were fixed upon him as their pater patrite, and the pilot that must steer the vessel through the tempests and rocks which threatened it.” After he had held the chief direction of his party in the house of commons against the king, he took up arms in the same cause, and was one of the first who opened the war by an action at a place called Brill, a garrison of the king’s, on the edge of Buckinghamshire, about five miles from Oxford. He took the command of a regiment of foot under the earl of Essex, and shewed such skill and bravery, that, had he lived, he would; probably, soon have been raised to the post of a general. But he was cut off early by a mortal wound, which he received in a skirmish with prince Rupert, at Chalgrove-field, in Oxfordshire, where, it is generally reported, he was shot in the shoulder with a brace of bullets, which broke the bone, June 18, 1643; and, after suffering much pain and misery, he died the 24th, an event which affected his party nearly as much as if their whole army had been defeated . “Many men observed,” says Clarendon, “that the field in which this skirmish was, and upon which Hampden received his deathwound, namely, Chalgrove-field, was the same place in which he had first executed the ordinance of the militia, and engaged that county, in which his reputation was very great, in this rebellion: and it was confessed by the prisoners that were taken that day, and acknowledged by all, that upon the alarm that morning, after their quarters were beaten up, he was exceeding solicitous to draw forces together to pursue the enemy; and, being a colonel of foot, put himself amongst those horse as a volunteer, who were first ready, and that, when the prince made a stand, all the officers were of opinion to stay till their body came up, and he alone persuaded and prevailed with them to advance: so violently did his fate carry him to pay the mulct in the place where he had committed the transgression about a year before. This was an observation made at that time;” but lord Clarendon does not adopt it as an opinion of his own.

Hampden, if we form our judgment of him only from the account of those who were engaged in the opposite party to him, was, perhaps, one of the most extraordinary men that ever lived; and is thus delineated by the noble historian already quoted. “He was a man of much greater cunning, and it may be of the most discerning spirit, and of the greatest address and insinuation to bring any thing to pass which he desired, of any man of that time, and who laid the design deepest. He was not a man of many words, and rarely began the discourse, or made the first entrance upon any business that was assumed, but a very weighty speaker; and after he had heard a full debate, and observed how the house was like to be inclined, took up the argument, and shortly, and clearly, and craftily, so stated it, that he commonly conducted it to the conclusion he desired. He was of that rare affability and temper in debate, and of thatseeming humility and submission of judgment, as if he brought no opinion of his own with him, but a desire of information and instruction; yet he had so subtle a way, and under the notion of doubts insinuating his objections, that he infused his own opinions into those from whom he pretended to learn and receive them. And even with them who were able to preserve themselves from his infusions, and discerned those opinions to be fixed in him with which they could not comply, he always left the character of an ingenuous and conscientious person. He was, indeed, a very wise man, and of great parts, and possessed with the most absolute spirit of popularity, and the most absolute faculties to govern the people, of any man I ever knew. For the first year of the parliament he seemed rather to moderate and soften the violent and distempered humours than to inflame them. But wise and dispassionate men plainly discerned, that that moderation proceeded from prudence, and observation that the season was not ripe, rather than that he approved of the moderation and that he begot many opinions and notions, the education whereof he committed to other men so far disguising his own designs, that he seemed seldom to wish more than was concluded. And in many gross conclusions, which would hereafter contribute to designs not yet set on foot, when he found them sufficiently backed by a majority of voices, he would withdraw himself before the question, that he might seem not to consent to so much visible unreasonableness; which produced as great a doubt in some as it did approbation in others of his integrity. After he was among those members accused by the king of high treason, he was much altered; his nature and carriage seeming much fiercer than it did before: and without question, when he first drew his sword, he threw away the scabbard. He was very temperate in diet, and a supreme governor over all his passions and affections; and had thereby a great power over other men’s. He was of an industry and vigilance not to be tired out or wearied by the most laborious and of parts not to be imposed upon by the most subtle and sharp and of a personal courage equal to his best parts so that he was an enemy not to be wished wherever he might have been made a friend and as much to be apprehended where he was so, as any man could deserve to be. And therefore his death was no less pleasing to the one party than it was condoled in the other. In a word, what was said of Cinna might well be applied to him: he had ahead to contrive, a tongue to persuade, and a hand to execute, any mischief, or,‘-’ as the historian says elsewhere,” any good." Thus is Hampden described by Clarendon, agreeably to the notions usually formed of his character after the restoration; which was that of a great, rather than a good man. But as the characters of statesmen, commanders, or men acting in a public capacity, always vary with the times and fashions of politics, at the revolution, and since, he has been esteemed a good man as well as a great.

, one of our old English historians, descended from a reputable northern family, was born in 1373, and at the age of twelve was admitted into the family of sir Henry Percy, eldest son to the earl of Northumberland, familiarly known by the name of Harry Hotspur, on account of his impatient spirit. He was one of the most esteemed warriors of his time, active and enterprising, had a large vassalry, numerous partizans, and unlimited authority. His household, as lord of the east march of England, was constantly held at Berwick^ upon-Tweed. Harding, it appears, was with his patron, as a volunteer, in the battles of Homildon and Cokelawe. After the death of Percy, he enlisted under the banners of sir Robert Umfravile, with whom he had fought at Horoildon, and who was connected with the Percies by the ties of affinity as well as those of arms. In 1405, when king Henry IV. reduced the fortresses of lord Bardolph and the earl of Northumberland, sir Robert Umfravile’s services in the expedition were rewarded with the castle of Warkworth, under whom Harding became the constable. How long he remained at Warkworth does not appear, but his knowledge of Scottish geography seems soon to have engaged him in the secret service of his country, In 1415 we find him attendant on the king at Harfleur, and his journal of the march which preceded the memorable battle of Agincourt forms one of the most curious passages among the additions to the late reprint of his Chronicle. In 1416 he appears to have accompanied the duke of Bedford to the sea-fight at the mouth of the Seine. In 1424 he was at Rome, and employed partly in inspecting “the great Chronicle of Trogus Pompeius;” but soon after he was again employed in collecting documents for ascertaining the fealty due from the Scottish kings, which seems to have been attended with some personal danger. He has even been accused of forging deeds to answer his royal master’s purpose; but the truth of this charge cannot now be ascertained.

But, notwithstanding these declarations of the chancellor, it is certain, that this plot was never proved, and was probahly imaginary. It is at least easy to account upon political principles, for Harrington’s confinement, and the severe usage he met with, when we consider not only his notions of government, which he every where enforced with the greatest zeal; but also how obnoxious he made himself to the powers then in being, by his treatment of the Stuart family. Nothing can be viler than the picture he has drawn of Mary queen of Scotland; he has also painted her son James I. in the most odious colours, suggesting at the same time, that he was not born of the queen, but was a supposititious impostor, and of course had no right to the crown he inherited. His portrait of Charles I. is an abominable figure t “never was man,” says he, “so resolute and obstinate in tyranny. He was one of the most consummate in the arts of tyranny that ever was; and it could be no other than God’s hand, that arrested him in the height of his designs and greatness, and cut off him and his family.” Such a character very ill accorded with what he had himself observed of that unhappy monarch, and with the grief he felt at his death; but Harrington seems in the latter end of his life to have grown fanatic in politics, and his keeping within no bounds might make it the more expedient to put him under confinement. From the Tower he was conveyed very privately to St. Nicholas’s island opposite to Plymouth; and thence, upon petition, to Plymouth, some relations-obliging themselves in a bond of 5000l. for his safe imprisonment. At this place he became acquainted with one Dr. Dunstan, who advised him to take a preparation of guiacum in coffee, as a certain cure for the scurvy, with whi<& he was then troubled. He drank of this liquor in great quantities, which had probably a very pernicious effect, for he soon grew delirious; upon which a rumour prevailed at Plymouth, that he had taken some drink which would make any man mad in a month; and other circumstances made his relations suspect, that he had foul play shewn him, lest he should write any more “Oceanas.” It was near a month before he was able to bear the journey to London, whither, as nothing appeared against him, he had leave from the king to go. Here he was put under the care of physicians, who could afford little help to the weakness of his body, and none at all to the disorders of his mind. He would discourse of other things rationally enough; but, when his own distemper was touched upon, he would fancy and utter strange things about the operation of his animal spirits, which transpired from him, he said, in the shape of birds, flies, bees, or the like. He talked so much of good and evil spirits, that he even terrified those about him; and to those who objected to him that these chimeras were the fruits of a disordered imagination, he would reply, that 11 he was like Democritus, who, for his admirable discoveries in anatomy, was reckoned distracted by his fellowcitizens." In this crazy condition he married the daughter of sir Marmaduke Dprrel, in Buckinghamshire, a lady to whom he was formerly suitor, and with whom he spent the remainder of his life. Towards his latter end, he was subject to the gout, and enjoyed little ease; but, after drooping and languishing for some time, he was at last seized with a palsy, and died at Westminster, September 11, 1677, and lies buried there in St. Margaret’s church, on the south side of the altar, next the grave of sir Walter Raleigh.

, a caustic wit of the Elizabethan period, and the butt of the wits of his time, was born about 1545. His father, although a rope-maker by trade, was of a good family, and nearly related to sir Thomas Smith, the celebrated statesman. He was educated at Christ’s college, Cambridge, and for some time at Pembroke hall, and took both his degrees in arts. He afterwards obtained a fellowship in Trinity-hall, and served the office of proctor in the university. Having studied civil law, he obtained his grace for a degree in that faculty, and in 1585 was admitted doctor of laws at Oxford, which he completed in the following year, and practised as an advocate in the prerogative court of Canterbury at London. As a poet and a scholar, he had great merit. His beautiful poem, signed Hobbinol, prefixed to the “Faerie Queene,” bespeaks an elegant and well-turned mind; and among his works are several productions of great ingenuity and profound research. But he had too much propensity to vulgar abuse; and having once involved himself with his envious and railing contemporaries Nash and Greene, came their equal in this species of literary warfare. He afforded the ai, howe?er, sufficient advantage, by having turned almanack-maker and a prophetic dealer in earthqu ikes and prodigies, things which must not be altogether reierred to the credulity of the times, since they were as aptly ridiculed then by his opponents, as they would be now, did any man of real knowledge and abilities become so absurd as to propagate the belief in them. His highest honour was in having Spenser for his intimate friend; nor was he less esteemed by sir Philip Sidney, as appears by the interesting account Mr. Todd has given of Harvey’s correspondence in his excellent Life of Spenser. For an equally curious account of Harvey’s literary quarrels with Nash, &c. the reader may be referred with confidence to one of the most entertaining chapters in Mr. DTsraeli’s “Calamities of Authors.” He is supposed to have died in 1630, aged about eighty-five. Among his works which provoked, or were written in answer to, the attacks of his contemporaries, we may enumerate, 1. “Three proper and wittie letters touching the Earthquake, and our English reformed versifying,” Lond. 1.080, 4to. 2. “Two other very commendable Letters touching artificial versifying,” ibid. 15SO, 4to. Harvey boasted his being the inventor of English hexameters, which very jnstly exposed him to ridicule. 3. “Foure Letters, and certain Sonnets, touching Robert Greene and others,” ibid. 1592. His uniiKinlv treatment of Greene has been noticed with proper indignation by sir E. Brydges in his reprint of Greene’s *' Groatsworth of Wit,“and by Mr. Haselwood in his life of that poet in the” Censura Literaria.“5.” Pierce’s Supererogation, or a new prayse of the old Asse, with an advertisement for Pap. Hatchet and Martin Marprelate,“ibid. 1593, &c. This war ol scurrility was at length terminated by an order of the archbishop of Canterbury,” that all Nashe’s books and Dr. Harvey’s bookes be taken wheresoever they be found, and that none of the said bookes be ever printed hereafter.“Among his more creditable performances, Tanner has enumerated, 1.” Rhetor, sive dtiorutn dterum oratio de natura, arte et exercitatione rbetorica,“Lond. 1577, 4to. 2.” Ciceronianus, vel oratio post reditum habita Cantabrigise ad suos auditores,“ibid. 1577, <Ko. 3.” Gratulatio Vatdenensium, lib. IV. ad Elizabetham reginam,“ibid. 1578. 4.” Smithus, vel musarum lachrymze pro obitu honoratiss. viri Thorn se Smith," ibid. 1578, 4to.

In one of his botanical lectures in 1747, Linnæus happening to speak of Palestine, one of the most important and interesting countries to the philosopher as well as the divine, but of whose productions we had less knowledge than of those of India, the zeal of young Hasselquist became instantly excited. In vain did his preceptor, secretly delighted with his enthusiasm, represent to him the difficulties of the undertaking, the distance, the dangers, the expence, and above all the weak state of his own health, particularly of his lungs. Hasselquist’s first step was to solicit assistance to defray the expences of his journey, but the whole he obtained is represented as far inadequate to his undertaking. He began, however, to learn the oriental tongues, at the same time that he was completing his academical studies, reading lectures, and obtaining the degree of licentiate in physic. The faculty, considering his merit and circumstances, Would not aliow him to he at any expence on this occasion, any more than for his attendance on the lectures of the professors. The degree of doctor of physic was afterwards conferred on him during his absence at Cairo, March 8th, 75!, with the same honourable and delicate attention to his peculiar situation. In the spring of 1749 he went to Stockholm, read lectures on botany there during the summer, and so far recommended himself to public notice, that the company of merchants trailing to the Levant, offered him a free passage to Smyrna in one of their ships, in which he set sail August 7th, arriving at Smyrna on the 27th of November, 1749. He kept a regular journal f his voyage. Touching at Gottenburgh, he there met Toreen, just returned from China with abundance of treasures for his master Linnæus, in whose works they have at various times been communicated to the public.

The first appearance of Hawkwood in Italy-was in the 1*isan service in 1364; after which period he was every where considered as a most accomplished soldier, and fought, as different occasions presented themselves, in the service of many of the Italian states. In 1387 we find him engaged in a hazardous service in defence of the state of Florence. The earl of Armagnac, the Florentine general, having been lately defeated by Venni, the governor of the Siannese, the victors marched to surprize Hawkwood, and encamped within a mile and a half of him. But this cautious general retreated into the Cremonese, and when by several skirmishes he had amused the enemy, who kept within a mile of him, and thought to force his camp, he sallied out and repulsed them with loss. This success a little discouraged them. Venni is said to have sent Hawkwood a fox in a cage, alluding to his situation; to which Hawkwood returned for answer, “the fox knew how to find his way out.” This he did by retreating to the river Oglio, placing his best horse in the rear till the enemy had crossed the river, on whose opposite bank he placed 400 English archers on horseback. The rear by their assistance crossed the river and followed the rest, who, after fording the Mincio, encamped within ten miles of the Adige. The greatest danger remained here. The enemy had broken down the banks of the river, and let out its waters, swoln by the melting of the snow and mountains to overflow the plains. Hawkwood’s troops, surprized at midnight by the increasing floods, had no resource but immediately to mount their horses, and, leaving all their baggage behind them, marched in the morning slowly through the water, which came up to their horses bellies. By evening, with great difficulty, they gained Baldo, a town in the Paduan. Some of the weaker horses sunk under the fatigue. Many of the foot perished with cold, and struggling against the water; many supported themselves by laying hold on the tails of the stronger horses. Notwithstanding every precaution, many of the cavalry were lost as well as their horses. The pursuers, seeing the country under water, and concluding the whole army had perished, returned back. The historian observes, that it was universally agreed no other general could have got over so many difficulties and dangers, and led back his small army out of the heart of the enemy’s country, with no other loss than that occasioned by the floods, which no precaution could have prevented. One of the most celebrated actions of Hawkwood’s life, says Muratori, was this treat, performed with so much prudence and art, that ! deserves to be paralleled with the most illustrious Roman generals; having, to the disgrace of an enemy infinitely superior in number, and in spite of all obstructions from the rivers, given them the slip, and brought off his army safe to Castel Baldo, on the borders of the Paduan. Sir John Hawkwood, as soon as he found himself among his allies, employed himself in refreshing his troop and watching the enemy’s motions.

On the death of lord James Beauclerc, who held the rectory of Hodnet in commendam with the bishopric of Hereford, Mr. Heber was instituted to that living, of which he was patron, holding it with Malpas, from which it is distant about fourteen miles. In March 1303, he succeeded to the family estate in Yorkshire by the death of his brothers widow, Mrs. Heber of Weston, Northamptonshire, who held it in jointure. In the summer of that year, retaining still the vigour and faculties of younger days, he was present at a very interesting sight, when his second son, Mr. Reginald Heber, who two years before obtained the chancellor’s prize at Oxford for Latin verse, by his very spirited and classical “Carmen Sceculare,” spoke, with unbounded applause, a second prize poem, the admirable verses on-“Palestine,” since published, Mr. Heber died Jan. 10, 1804. In April 1773, he married Mary, third daughter and co-heiress of Martin Baylie, M. A. rector of Kelsall and Wrentbam in Suffolk. She died Jan. 30, 1774, leaving an infant son, Richard Heber, esq. afterwards M. A. of Brazen-nose college, 1797, a gentleman well known in the literary world, as the judicious collector of one of the most extensive private libraries in the kingdom, and whose liberality in assisting men of literature with its valuable contents, has been often publicly acknowledged, and cannot be too highly commended. InJuly 1782, Mr. Reginald Heber married Mary, eldest daughter of Cuthbert Allanson, D. D. of Brazen-nose, rector of Wath in Yorkshire, who was for some years before his death chaplain to the house of commons. By this lady he left a daughter Mary, and two sons, Reginald and Thomas Cuthbert, commoners of Brazen-nose college. Mr. Heber, the father, although a man of taste and learning, published little. He has, however, some elegant English verses addressed to the king, on his accession to the throne, among the Oxford poems on that occasion, in 1761. The following year he published, but without his name, tf An Elegy written among the Tombs in Westminster Abbey," printed for Dodsley which was afterwards inserted, without his knowledge, in Pearch’s continuation of Dodsley’s Poems. The lines are moral, plaintive, and religious.

, a native of Groningen, was one of the most elegant Latin poets that part of Europe has produced for a century past. Of his early life we have no memorials. In 1760 he went to Italy, and became acquainted with the most eminent scholars of that period, and seems to have joined the cultivation of the modern Italian, with that of the ancient classical taste, which he had before imbibed, and of which be gave an excellent specimen in his work “De Valetudine Literatorum,” Leyden, 1749, 8vo, and again more decidedly in his “Satyra de moribus Parhisiorumet FrUiae,” 1750, 4to; “De Oflicio mectici poema, dedicated to cardinal Quirini,” Groningen, 1752, 8vo; “Iter Veiietum,” which he published at Venice, when on his tour in 1760, and which displays the feeling, tajte, and sentiment of a refined scholar. At Rome he was elected a member of the Arcadi, and under the name which he assumed in compliance with the usual practice of that society, he published in the above-mentioned year “Marii Curulli Groningensia satyræ,” 8vo. In this his satire is free and poignant, yet without merciless severity, and his Latin uncommonly pure. In 1764, after his return home, he published his “Notabilia,” 2 books, and two more under the same title in 1770, containing many anecdotes of the Italian literati, and notices of his own history and opinions. His other publications are, “Anni rustici Januarius,” Groningen, 1767; and “Aves Frisicse,” Rotterdam, 1787, in which he describes in Ovidian style, and with a happy imitation of that poet, ten different birds; the lark, the crossbill, the inagpy, &c. The notes to this poem evince a great knowledge of natural history, and many facts respecting these birds which are not generally known. Heerkens was a physician, but of his character or practice in that profession we have no information. The Diet. Hist, mentions is death as having taken place in 1780, which must be wrong, as in the last-mentioned publication he promises a continuation. It does not appear that he was dead in 1803, when Saxius published his last volume.

, a regular canon of Gisborough-abbey, near Cleveland in Yorkshire, flourished in the fourteenth century, in the reign of Edward III. He had much learning, and much industry. History was his particular study; and he compiled a history which begins from the Norman conquest, and continues to the reign of king Edward the lid. from 1066 to 1308. The work is written with great care and exactness, and in a style good enough considering the time. Gale, who has published it in his “Veteres Scriptores,” with an account of the author, enumerates five copies of his history, two at Trinity college, Cambridge, one at the Heralds’ office, one in the Cotton lilrary, and one which he had himself. This author died at Gisborough in 1347. Hearne published an edition in 2 vols. 8vo, Oxford, 1731, now one of the most rare and valuable of his works.

, or Hemsterhusius, one of the most famous critics of his country, the son of Francis Hemsterhuis, a physician, was born at Groningen, Feb. 1, 1635. After obtaining the rudiments of literature from proper masters, and from his father, he became a member of his native university in his fourteenth year, 1698. He there studied for some years, and then removed to Leyden, for the sake of attending the lectures of the famous James Perizonius on ancient history. He was here so much noticed by the governors of the university, that it was expected he would succeed James Gronovius as professor of Greek. Havercamp, however, on the vacancy, was appointed, through the intrigues, as Ruhnkenius asserts, of some who feared they might be eclipsed by young Hemsterhuis; who in 1705, at the age of nineteen, was called to Amsterdam, and appointed professor of mathematics and philosophy. In the former of these branches he had been a favourite scholar of the famous John Bernouilli. In 1717, he removed to Franeker, on being chosen to succeed Lambert Bos as professor of Greek; to which place, in 1738, was added the professorship of history. In 1740 he removed to Leyden to accept the same two professorships in that university. It appears that he was married, because his father-in-law, J. Wild, is mentioned; he died April 7, 1766, having enjoyed to the last the use of all his faculties. He published, 1. “The three last books of Julius Pollux’s Onomasticon,” to complete the edition of which, seven books had been finished by Lederlin. This was published at Amsterdam in 1706. On the appearance of this work, he received a letter from Bentley, highly praising him for the service he had there rendered to his author. But this very letter was nearly the cause of driving him entirely from the study of Greek criticism: for in it Bentley transmitted his own conjectures on the true readings of the passages cited by Pollux from comic writers, with particular view to the restoration of the metre. Hemsterhuis had himself attempted the same, but, when he read the criticisms of Bentley, and saw their astonishing justness and acuteness, he was so hurt at the inferiority of his own, that he resolved, for the time, never again to open a Greek book. In a month or two this timidity went off, and he returned to these studies with redoubled vigour, determined to take Bentley for his model, and to' qualify himself, if possible, to rival one whom he so greatly admired. 2. “Select Colloquies of Lucian, and his Timon,” Amst. 1708. 3. “The Plutus of Aristophanes, with the Scholia,” various readings and notes, Harlingen, 1744, 8vo. 4. “Part of an edition of Lucian,” as far as the 521st page of the first volume; it appeared in 1743 in four volumes quarto, the remaining parts being edited by J. M. Gesner and Reitzius. The extreme slowness of his proceeding is much complained of by Gesner and others, and was the reason why he made no further progress. 5. % “Notes and emendations on Xenophon Ephesius,” inserted in the 36 volumes of the te Miscellanea Critica“of Amsterdam, with the signature T. S. H. S. 6.” Some observations upon Chrysostom’s Homily on the Epistle to Philemon,“subjoined to Raphelius’s Annotations on the New Testament. 7.” Inaugural Speeches on various occasions.“8. There are also letters from him to J. Matth. Gesner and others; and he gave considerable aid to J. St. Bernard, in publishing the ' Eclogae Thomae Magistri,” at Leyden, in 1757. His “Philosophical Works” were published at Paris in 1792, 2 vols. 8vo, but he was a better critic -than philosopher. Ruhnkenius holds up Hemsterhusius as a model of a perfect critic, and indeed, according to his account, the extent and variety of his knowledge, and the acuteness of his judgment, were very extraordinary.

, a voluminous Spanish author, and accounted one of the most learned men of his country in the seventeenth century, was born in 1611. He entered, when he was ahout fifteen years of age, into the order of the Jesuits at Salamanca, and spent the greatest part of his life in that university, where afterwards he was admitted to the degree of doctor of divinity, and appointed rector. He obtained a very high reputation by the solutions which he gave to persons who came from all parts to consult him in cases of conscience. He died in 1704, at the great age of ninety-three, and continued to perform the duties of professor till within three years of that time. His works consist of eleven folio volumes, in Latin. Nine of them are composed of treatises on philosophical, theological, and controversial subjects; the others are devoted to an account of the antiquities of Biscay, and furnish the reader with much curious and interesting matter; they are entitled “Biscaya Illustrata.” The part “de Cantabrias antiquitatibus” is a work of merit. He was author of many smaller pieces not inserted in. this collection.

All the ages and events of the French monarchy being present to his mind, and his imagination and memory being a vast theatre on which he beheld the different movements and parts of the actors in the several revolutions, he determined to give a specimen of what passed in his own mind, and to reduce into the form of a regular drama, one of the periods of French history, the reign of Francis II. which, though happy only by being short, appeared to him one of the most important by its consequences, and most easy to be confined within a dramatic compass. His friend the chancellor highly approved the plan, and wished it to be printed. It accordingly went through five editions; the harmony of dates and facts is exactly observed in it, and the passions interested without offence to historic truth.

Upon the whole, his character seems to have been highly exemplary and praiseworthy; and it may be asked, as Dr. Busby asked him, “What made him a nonconformist” The reason which he principally insisted on was, that he could *not submit to be re-ordained, which was required of those who had been ordained only according to the presbyterian form. When named in the commission of the peace, it was as Philip Henry, esq. He was, however, so well satisfied with his call to the ministry, and solemn ordination to it, by the laying on the hands of the presbytery, that he durst not do that which looked like a renunciation of it as null and sinful, and would at least be a tacit invalidating and condemning of all his administrations. Despairing to see an accommodation, he kept a meeting at Broad-oak, and preached to a congregation in a barn. He died June 24, 1696. His “Life” was written by his son, the subject of our next article, and published in 1699. The piety, Christian moderation, and good sense, which pervade the whole, render it one of the most interesting pieces of biography of the seventeenth century, and induced Dr. Wordsworth to reprint the whole in his “Ecclesiastical Biography,” with some useful notes

Henry was naturally fond of society, and few men enjoyed it more perfectly, or were capable of contributing so much to its pleasures. Though his literary pursuits might have been supposed to have given him sufficient employment, he always found time for social conversation, for the offices of friendship, and for objects of public utility. Of the public societies in Edinburgh he was always one of the most useful and indefatigable members; and he conversed with the ardour, and even the gaiety of youth, long after his bodily strength had yielded to the infirmities of age. His library he left to the magistrates of Linlithgow, &c. under such regulations as he conceived would tend to form a library calculated to diffuse knowledge and literature in the country. Both as a man, and as an author, he has left a character which will, and ought to be esteemed. A history of England, “from the death of Henry VIII. to the accession of James VI.” was published by James Pettit Andrews, as a “continuation” of Dr. Henry’s, and professedly on the same plan. But although this work, proceeding from a well-known lover of anecdotes, is not unamusing, a continuation upon Henry’s more serious plan is yet wanting to complete what would be a truly valuable series of English history.

, lord Herbert, of Cherbury in Shropshire, an eminent English writer, was descended from a very ancient family, and born 1581, at Montgomery-­castle in Wales. At the age of fourteen he was entered as a gentleman-commoner at University college, in Oxford, where he laid, says Wood, the foundation of that admirable learning, of which he was afterwards a complete master. In 1600 he came to London, and shortly after the accession of James I. was created knight of the hath. He served the office of high sheriff for the county of Montgomery, and divided his time between the country and the court. In 1608, feeling wearied with the sameness of domestic scenes, he visited the continent, carrying with him some romantic notions on the point of honour, which, in. such an age, were likely to involve him in perpetual quarrels. His advantageous person and manners, and the reputation for courage which he acquired, gained him many friends, among whom was the constable Montmorenci. As a seat of this nobleman he passed several months practising horsemanship, and other manly exercises, in which he became singularly expert. He returned to England in 1609, and in the following, year he quitted it again, in. order that he might have the opportunity of serving with the English forces sent to assist the prince of Orange at the siege of Juliers. Here he signalised himself by his valour, which, in some instances, was carried to the extreme of rashness. After the siege he visited Antwerp and Brussels, and returned to London, where he was looked now upon as one of the most conspicuous characters of the time. An attempt was made to assassinate him, in revenge for some liberties which he took, or was supposed to have taken, with a married lady. In 1614 he went into the Low. Countries to serve under the prince of Orange; after this he engaged with the duke of Savoy, to conduct from France a body of protestants to Piedmont for his service. In 1616 he was sent ambassador to Louis XIII. of France, to mediate for the relief of the protestants of that realm, but was recalled in July 1621, on account of a dispute between him and the constable de Luines. Camden says that he had treated the constable irreverently; but Walton tells us that “he could not subject himself to a compliance with the humours of the duke de Luines, who was then the great and powerful favourite at court: so that, upon a complaint to our king, he was called back into England in some displeasure; but at his return gave such an honourable account of his employment, and so justified his comportment to the duke and all the court, that he was suddenly sent back upon the same embassy.”

The character of this noble person is not only one of the most amiable in lord Clarendon’s history, but is one of the best drawn. We can, however, give only a few particulars. “He was,” says the great historian, “the most universally beloved and esteemed of any man of that age; and having a great office in the court, he made the court atself better esteemed, and more reverenced in the country: and as he had a great number of friends of the best men, so no man had ever the confidence to avow himself to be his enemy. He was a man very well bred, and of excellent parts, and a graceful speaker upon any subject, having a good proportion of learning, and a ready wit to apply it, and enlarge upon it: of a pleasant and facetious humour, and a disposition affable, generous, and magnificent. He lived many years about the court before in it, and never by it; being rather regarded and esteemed by lung James, than loved and favoured. As he spent and lived upon his own fortune, so he stood upon his own feet, without any other support than of his proper virtue and merit. He was exceedingly beloved in the court, because he never desired to get that for himself which others laboured for, but was still ready to promote the pretences of worthy men: and he was equally celebrated in the country, for having received no obligations from the court, which might corrupt or sway his affections and judgment. He was a great lover of his country, and of the religion and justice which he believed could only support it: and his friendships were only with men of those principles. Sure never man was planted in a court who was fitter for that soil, or brought better qualities with him to purify that air. Yet his memory must not be flattered, that his virtues and good inclinations may be believed he was not without some alloy of vice he indulged to himself the pleasures of all kinds, almost in all excesses,” &c. It ought not to be forgot that this earl of Pembroke vras a munificent contributor to the Bodleian library, of two hundred and forty-two Greek Mss. purchased by him in Italy, and formerly belonging to Francis Barroccio. This gift is commemorated by an inscription over the collection in the library, where also are a painting and a statue of his lordship. Pembroke-college was so named in honour of him.

, an English divine of exemplary piety and virtue, was born at Hardingstonc, a village about a mile from Northampton, on Feb. 26, 1713-14. His father was minister of the parish of Collingtree, within two miles of Hardingstone. He received his early education at the free grammar-school of Northampton, where he attended for nearly ten years, learning the Latin and Greek languages; and would have made a much greater progress if he had not been impeded by the caprice of his master, who, it is said, would not suffer any of his boys to learn faster than his own son. At the age of seventeen he was entered of Lincoln-college, Oxford, and resided in the university about seven years, but without proceeding farther than his bachelor’s degree. His time, however, was not mispent. Besides a very considerable stock of learning which he accumulated here, he imbibed those habits of regularity and principles of piety which gave a colour to his future life and writings, and made him one of the most useful and popular preachers of his time.

, an actor, and a writer of plays, in the reigns of queen Elizabeth, James I. and Charles I. has not had the time of his birth and death recorded. Winstanley says, he was one of the most voluminous writers ef his age: and, in a preface to one of his plays, he tells us, that it was one preserved out of 220; of which number only 24 now remain. He displayed much learning in his “Actor’s Vindication;” but what rank he held on the stage none of his biographers have informed us. Langbaine observes of him, that he was a general scholar and tolerable linguist, as his translations from Lucian, Erasmus, and from other Latin as well as Italian authors, sufficiently shew: the wits and poets, however, have always held him cheap. Besides his “Actor’s Vindication,” he wrote “A Life of Merlin” The Hierarchy of Angels“Life of queen Elizabeth” “The Lives of nine Worthies” “The Lives of nine Women Worthies;” “A general History of Women,” &c. &c. Notices of some of these may be found in our authorities.

, a celebrated archbishop of Rheims, and one of the most learned men of his time, was originally a monk of St. Denys in France. He was elected archbishop in the year 845, and shewed great zeal for the rights of the Gallican church. He also acquired much influence at court,. and among the clergy, but made a tyrannical use of it to accomplish his de&igiis. He condemned Gotescalc, and deposed Hincmar bishop of Laon his nephew. He died in 882, at Epernay, to which place he had escaped from the Normans in a litter. Several of his works remain, the best edition of which is by Sirmond, 1645, 2 vols. foL useful as to ecclesiastical history, and learned in theology and jurisprudence, but the style is harsh and barbarous. What Hincmar wrote concerning St. Remi of Rheims, and St. Dionysius of Paris, is not in thi* edition, but may be found in Surius. There is also something more of his in Labbe’s Councils, and in the Council of Douzi, 1658, 4to.

After this account of Hobbes, which, though undoubtedly true in the main, may be thought too strongly coloured, it will be but justice to subjoin what lord Clarendon has said of him. This noble person, during his banishment, wrote a book in 1670, which was printed six years after at Oxford with this title, “A brief View of the dangerous and pernicious Errors to Church and State in Mr. Hobbes’s book entitled Leviathan.” In the introduction the earl observes, that Mr. Hobbes’s *' Leviathan“” cohtains in it good learning of all kinds, politely extracted, and very wittily and cunningly digested in a very commendable, and in a vigorous and pleasant style: and that Mr. Hobbes himself was a man of excellent parts, of great wit, some reading, and somewhat more thinking; one who has spent many years in foreign parts and observations; understands the learned as well as the modern languages; hath long had the reputation of a great philosopher and mathematician; and in his age hath had conversation with very many worthy and extraordinary men: to which it may be, if he had been more indulgent in the more vigorous part of his life, it might have had greater influence upon the temper of his mind; whereas age seldom submits to those questions, inquiries, and contradictions, which the laws and liberty of conversation require. And it hath been always a lamentation among Mr. Hobbes’s friends, that he spent too much time in thinking, and too little in exercising those thoughts in the company of other men of the same, or of as good faculties; for want whereof his natural constitution, with age, contracted such a morosity, that doubting-and contradicting men were never grateful to him. In a word, Mr. Hobbes is one of the most ancient acquaintance I have in the world; and of whom I have always had a great esteem, as a man, who, besides his eminent parts, learning, and knowledge, hath been always looked upon as a man of probity, and of a life free from scandal.“There have been few persons, whose writings have had a more pernicious influence in spreading irreligion and infidelity than those of Hobbes; and yet none of his treatises are directly levelled against revealed religion. He sometimes affects to speak with veneration of the sacred writings, and expressly declares, that though the laws of nature are not laws as they proceed from nature, yet” as they are given by God in Holy Scripture, they are properly called laws; for the Holy Scripture is the voice of God, ruling all things by the greatest right.“But though ha, seems here to make the laws of Scripture the Jaws of God, and to derive their force from his supreme authority, yet elsewhere he supposes them to have no authority, but what they derive from the prince or civil power. He sometimes seems to acknowledge inspiration to be a supernatural gift, and the immediate hand of God: at other times he treats the pretence to it as a sign of madness, and represents God’s speaking to the prophets in a dream, to be no more than the prophets dreaming that God spake unto them. He asserts, that we have no assurance of the certainty of Scripture but the authority of the church f, and this he resolves into the authority of the commonwealth; and declares, that till the sovereign ruler had prescribed them,” the precepts of Scripture were not obligatory laws, but only counsel or advice, which he that was counselled might without injustice refuse to observe, and being contrary to the laws could not without injustice observe;“that the word of the interpreter of Scripture is the word of God, and that the sovereign magistrate is the interpreter of Scripture, and of all doctrines, to whose authority we must stand. Nay, he carries it so far as to pronounce that Christians are bound in conscience to obey the laws of an infidel king in matters of religion; that” thought is free, but when it comes to confession of faith, the private reason must submit to the public, that is to say, to God’s lieutenant.“Accordingly he allows the subject, being commanded by the sovereign, to deny Christ in words, holding the faith of him firmly in his heart; it being in this” not he, that denieth Christ before men, but his governor and the laws of his country.“In the mean time he acknowledges the existence of God, and that we must of necessity ascribe the effects we behold to the eternal power of all powers, and cause of all causes; and he reproaches those as absurd, who call the world, or the soul of the world, God. But then he denies that we know any thing more of him than, that he exists, and seems plainly to make him corporeal; for he affirms, that whatever is not body is nothing at all. And though he sometimes seems to acknowledge religion and its obligations, and that there is an honour and worship due to God; prayer, thanksgivings, oblations, &c. yet he advances principles, which evidently tend to subvert all religion. The account he gives of it is this, that” from the fear of power invisible, feigned by the mind, or imagined from tales, publicly allowed, ariseth religion; not allowed, superstition:“and he resolves religion into things which he himself derides, namely,” opinions of ghosts, ignorance of second causes, devotion to what men fear, and taking of things casual for prognostics.“He takes pains in many places to prove man a necessary agent, and openly derides the doctrine of a future state: for he says, that the belief of a future state after death,” is a belief grounded upon other men’s saying, that they knew it supernaturally; or, that they knew those, that knew them, that knew others that knew it supernaturally.“But it is not revealed religion only, of which Hobbes makes light; he goes farther, as will appear by running over a few more of his maxims. He asserts,” that, by the law of nature, every man hath a right to all things, and over all persons; and that the natural condition of man is a state of war, a war of all men against all men: that there is no way so reasonable for any man, as by force or wiles to gain a mastery over all other persons that he can, till he sees no other power strong enough to endanger him: that the civtt laws are the only rules of good and evil, just and unjust, honest and dishonest; and that, antecedently to such laws, every action is in its own nature indifferent; that there is nothing good or evil in itself, nor any common laws constituting what is naturally just and unjust: that all things are measured by what every man judgeth fit, where there is no civil government, and by the laws of society, where there is: that the power of the sovereign is absolute, and that he is not bound by any compacts with his subjects: that nothing the sovereign can do to the subject, can properly be called injurious or wrong; and that the, king’s word is sufficient to take any thing from the subject if need be, and that the king is judge of that need." This scheme evidently strikes at the foundation of all religion, natural and revealed. It tends not only to subvert the authority of Scripture, but to destroy God’s moral government of the world. It confounds the natural differences of good and evil, virtue and vice. It destroys the best principles of the human nature; and instead of that innate benevolence and social disposition which should unite men together, supposes all men to be naturally in a state of war with one another. It erects an absolute tyranny in the state and church, which it confounds, and maKes the will of the prince or governing power the sole standard of right and wrong.

During his apprenticeship, he set out one Sunday, with two or three companions, on an excursion to Highgate. The weather being hot, they went into a public house, where they had not been long before a quarrel arose between some persons in the same room. One of the disputants struck the other on the head with a quart pot, and cut him very much. The blood running down the man’s face, together with the agony of the wound, which had distorted his features into a most hideous grin, presented Hogarth, who shewed himself thus early “apprised of the mode Nature intended he should pursue,” with too laughable a subject to be overlooked. He drew out his pencil, and produced on the spot one of the most ludicrous figures that ever was seen. What rendered this piece the more valuable was, that it exhibited an exact likeness of the man, with the portrait of his antagonist, and the figures in caricature of the principal persons gathered round him.

After lord Arundel had finished his negotiations in Germany, he returned to England, and brought Hollar with him: where, however, he was not so entirely confined to his lordship’s service, but tnat he had the liberty to accept of employment from others. Accordingly, we soon find him to have been engaged by the printsellers; and Peter Stent, one of the most eminent among them, prevailed lipon him to make an ample view or prospect of and from the town of Greenwich, which he finished in two plates, 1637; the earliest dates of his works in this kingdom. In 1638, appeared his elegant prospect about Richmond; at which time he finished also several curious plates from the fine paintings in the Arundelian collection. In the midst of this employment, arrived Mary de Medicis, the queenmother of France, to visit her daughter Henrietta Maria queen of England; and with her an historian, who recorded the particulars of her journey and entry into this kingdom. His work, written in French, was printed at London in

In 1774 he published, in 2 vols. 4to, his “Sketches of the History of Man,” which of all his works, if we except the “Elements of Criticism,” has been the most generally read. It is greatly to his honour that when many of his opinions were controverted, he not only received the hints and remarks with candour, but sought out and behaved with great liberality to the authors. In pursuance of his patriotic wish to improve the agriculture of his country, he published, in 1776, when he had attained the age of eighty, the “Gentleman Farmer, being an attempt to improve agriculture by subjecting it to the test of rational principles.” None of his works is more characteristic of his genius and disposition in all their principal features than this, which was one of the most useful books that had appeared at the time of its publication.

, an eminent English mathematician, and one of the most inventive geniuses that the world has ever seen, was son of Mr. John Hooke, rector of Freshwater in the Isle of Wight, and born there July 18, 1635. He was designed for the church; but being of a weakly constitution, and very subject to the head-ache, he was left to follow the bent of his genius, which led him to mechanics, and first appeared in his making little toys, which he did with wonderful art and dexterity. Seeing, on one occasion, an old brass clock taken to pieces, he made a wooden one that would go: he made likewise a small ship about a yard long, fitly shaped, masted, and rigged, with a contrivance to make it fire small guns, as it was sailing across a haven of some breadth. These indications led his friends to think of some trade for him in which such talents might be useful; and after his father’s death in 1648, as he had also a turn for drawing, he was placed with sir Peter Lely, but the smell of the oil-colours increased his headaches, and he quitted painting in a very short time. Afterwards he was kindly taken by Dr. Busby into his house, and supported there while he attended Westminster-school. Here he not only acquired Greek and Latin, together with some knowledge of Hebrew and other oriental languages, but also made himself master of a good part of Euclid’s Elements; and Wood adds, that while he lived with Dr. Busby he “learned of his own accord to play twenty lessons on the organ, and invented thirty several ways of flying as himself and Dr. Wilkins of Wadham- college have reported.” About 1653 he went to Christ-church, Oxford, and in 1655 was introduced to the philosophical society there; where, discovering his mechanic genius, he was first employed to assist Dr. Willis in his operations of chemistry, and afterwards recommended to Mr. Boyle, whom he served many years in the same capacity. He was also instructed about this time by Dr. Seth Ward, Savilian professor of astronomy, in that science; and from henceforward distinguished himself by a greater number of important inventions and improvements of the mechanic kind, than any one man had ever discovered. Among these were several astronomical instruments for making observations both at sea and land; and he was particularly serviceable to Boyle, in completing the air-pump. Wood tells us, that he also explained “Euclid’s Elements,” and “Des Cartes’s Philosophy,” to Boyle. In Nov. 1662, sir Robert Moray, then president, having proposed him for curator of experiments to the Royal Society, he was unanimously accepted, and it was ordered that Boyle should have the thanks of the society for dispensing with him for their use; and that he should come and sit among them, and both exhibit every day three or four of his own experiments, and take care of such others as should be mentioned to him by the society. He executed this office so much to their satisfaction, that when that body was established by the royal charter, his name was in the list of those who were first nominated by the council, May 20, 1663; and he was admitted accordingly, June 3, with a peculiar exemption from all payments. Sept. 28 of the same year, he was nominated by Clarendon, chancellor of Oxford, for the degree of M.A.; and Oct. 19, it was ordered that the repository of the Royal Society should be committed to his care, the white gallery in Gresham-college being appointed for that use. In May 1664, he began to read the astronomical lecture at Gresham for the professor, Dr. Pope, theri in Italy; and the same year was made professor of mechanics to the Royal Society by Sir John Cutler, with a salary of 50l. per annum, which that gentleman, the founder, v settled upon him for life. On Jan. 11, 1664-5, he was elected by that society curator of experiments for life, with an additional salary of“30l. per annum to sir John Cutler’s annuity, settled on him” pro tempore:“and, March folJowing, was elected professor of geometry in Greshamcollege. In 1665, he published in folio his” Micrographia, or some philosophical descriptions of minute bodies, made by magnifying glasses, with observations and enquiries thereupon:" and the same year, during the recess of the Royal Society on account of the plague, attended Dr. Wilkins and other ingenious gentlemen into Surrey, where they made several experiments. In Sept. 1666, he produced his plan for rebuilding the city of London, then destroyed by the great fire; which was approved by the lord -may or and court of aldermen. According to it, all the chief streets were to have been built in regular lines; all the other cross streets to have turned out of them at right angles; and all the churches, public buildings, marketplacesj &c. to have beetl fixed in proper and convenient places; but the nature of the property, and the impossibility of raising funds to indemnify the landholders who would be injured by this scheme, prevented its being carried into execution. The rebuilding of the city, however, according to the act of parliament, requiring an able person to set out the ground to the several proprietors, Hooke was appointed one of the city surveyors, and Oliver, a glass-painter, the other. In this employment he acquired the greatest part of that estate of which he died possessed; as appeared sufficiently evident from a large iron chest of money found after his death, locked down with a key in it, and a date of the time, which shewed that the contents had been so shut up for above thirty years, and seldom disturbed, for he almost starved himself and all in his house.

, an eminent English divine, and author of an excellent work, entitled “The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, in eight books,” was born at Heavytree near Exeter, about the end of March 1554. His parents, not being rich, intended him for a trade; but his schoolmaster at Exeter prevailed with them to continue him at school, assuring them, that his natural endowments and learning were both so remarkable, that he must of necessity be taken notice of, and that God would provide him some patron who would free them from any future care or charge about him. Accordingly his uncle John Hooker, the subject of the preceding article, who was then chamberlain of the town, began to notice him; and being known to Jewell, made a visit to that prelate at Salisbury soon after, and “besought him for charity’s sake to look favourably upon a poor nephew of his, whom nature had fitted for a scholar; bill the estate of his parents was so narrow, that they were unable to give him the advantage of learning; and that the bishop therefore would become his patron, and prevent him from being a tradesman, for he was a boy of remarkable hopes.” The bishop examining into his merits, found him to be what the uncle had represented him, and took him immediately under his protection. He got him admitted, in 1567, one of the clerks of Corpus-Christi college in Oxford, and settled a pension on him; which, with the contributions of his uncle, afforded him a very comfortable subsistence. In 1571, Hooker had the misfortune to lose his patron, together with his pension. Providence, however, raised him up two other patrons, in Dr. Cole, then president of the college, and Dr. Edwyn Sandys, bishop of London, and afterwards archbishop of York. To the latter of these Jewell had recommended him so effectually before his death, that though of Cambridge himself, he immediately resolved to send his son Edwyn to Oxford, to be pupil to Hooker, who yet was not much older; for, said he, “I will have a tutor for my son, that shall teach him learning by instruction, and virtue by example.” Hooker had also another considerable pupil, namely, George Cranmer, grand nephew to Cranmer the archbishop and martyr; with whom, as well as with Sandys, he cultivated a strict and lasting friendship. In 1573, he was chosen scholar of Corpus, and in 1577, having taken his master’s degree, was elected fellow of his college; and about two years after, being well skilled in the Oriental languages, was appointed deputy-professor of Hebrew, in the room of Kingsmill, who was disordered in his senses. In 1581, he entered into orders; and soon after, being appointed to preach at St. Paul’s-cross in London, was so unhappy as to be drawn into a most unfortunate marriage; of which, as it is one of the most memorable circumstances of his life, we shall give the particulars as they are related by Walton. There was then belonging to the church of St. Paul’s, a house called the Shunamites house, set apart for the reception and entertainment of the preachers at St. Paul’s cross, two days before, and one day after the sermon. That house was then kept by Mr. John Churchman, formerly a substantial draper in Watluig-sti'eet, but now reduced to poverty. Walton says, that Churchman was a person of virtue, but that he cannot say quite so much of his wife. To this house Hooker came from Oxford so wet and weary, that he was afraid he should not be able to perform his duty the Sunday following: Mrs. Churchman, however, nursed him so well, mat he presently recovered from the ill effects of his journey. For this he was very thankful; so much indeed that, as Walton expresses it, be thought himself bound in conscience to believe all she said; so the good man came to be persuaded by her, “that he had a very tender constitution; and that it was best for him to have a wife, that might prove a nurse to him; such a one as might both prolong his life, and make it more comfortable; and such a one she could and would provide for him, if he thought fit to marry.” Hooker, not considering “that the children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light,” and fearing no guile, because he meant none, gave her a power to choose a wife for him; promising, upon a fair summons, to return to London, and accept of her choice, which he did in that or the year following. Now, says Walton, the wife provided for him was her daughter Joan, who brought him neither beauty nor portion; and for her conditions, they were too like that wife’s which Solomon compares to a dripping-house; that is, says Wood, she was “a clownish silly woman, and withal a mere Xantippe.”

, chancellor of France, and one of the most liberal-minded men of his time, was the son of a physician, and born at Aigneperse in Auvergne, in 1505. His father sent him to study in the most celebrated universities of France and Italy, where he distinguished himself at once by his genius for literature, and for business. Having diligently studied jurisprudence, he was quickly advanced to very honourable posts; being successively auditor of the congregation called the congregation of Rota at Rome, and counsellor in the parliament of Paris, which he held during twelve years. He has described in one of his poems his habits of life during this time. He rose at a very early hour, and in the autumnal, winter, and spring sessions, was often in the court of justice before day-break, and reluctantly rose from his seat, when the beadle, at ten o'clock (the hour of dinner) announced the breaking up of the court. He says, that he made it a rule to listen to all with patience, to interrupt no one, to express himself as concisely as possible, and to oppose unnecessary delays. He mentions, with evident satisfaction, the joy which he felt when the vacations allowed him to quit Paris, and breathe in the country. The cares of magistracy he then banished wholly from his thoughts, and endeavoured, by harmless relaxation, to enable himself, on his return to the discharge of his functions, to resume them with fresh vigour. “But,” says he, “there is nothing frivolous in my amusements; sometimes Xenophon is the companion of my walks; sometimes the divine Plato regales me with the discourses of Socrates. History and poetry have their turns; but my chief delight is in the sacred writings: what comfort, what holy calm, does the meditation of them confer!” L‘Hospital was then appointed by Henry II. to be his ambassador at the council of Trent, which was sitting at Bologna, By his own desire, he was soon recalled from that honourable employment, and on his return experienced, at first, some coldness from the court, but was soon restored to the royal favour, and appointed master of the requests. In the beginning of If 54- he was made superintendent of the royal finances in France. His merits in this post were of the most singular and exalted kind. By a severe ceconomy, he laboured to restore the royal treasure, exhausted by the prodigality of the king, Henry II. and the dishonest avarice of his favourites; he defied the enmity of those whose profits he destroyed, and was himself so rigidly disinterested, that after five or six years’ continuance in this place, he was unable to give a portion to his^daughter, and the deficiency was supplied by the liberality of the sovereign. On the death of Henry, in 1549, the cardinal of Lorraine,then at the head of affairs, introduced l’Hospital into the council of state. Hence he was removed by Margaret of Valois, who took him into Savoy, as her chancellor. But the confusions of France soon made it necessaryto recal a man of such firmness and undaunted integrity. In the midst of faction and fury, he was advanced to the high office of chancellor of that kingdom, where he maintained his, post, like a philosopher who was superior.‘to fear, or any species of weakness. At the breaking out of the conspiracy of Amboice, in 1560, and on all other occasions, he was the advocate for mercy and reconciliation; and by the edict of Romorantin, prevented the establishment of the inquisition in France. It was perhaps for reasons of this kind, and his general aversion to persecution for religion’s sake, that the violent Romanists ac>­cused him of being a concealed Protestant; forgetting that by such suspicions they paid the highest compliment to the spirit of Protestantism. The queen, Catherine of Medicis, who had contributed to the elevation of l’Hospital, being too violent to approve his pacific measures, ex-, eluded him from the council of war; on which he retired to his country- house at Vignay near Estampes. Some days after, when the seals were demanded of him, he resigned them without regret, saying, that “the affairs of the world were too corrupt for him to meddle with them.” In lettered ease, amusing himself with Latin poetry, and a select society of friends“, he truly enjoyed his retreat, till his happiness was interrupted by the atrocious day of St. Bartholomew, in 1572. Of this disgraceful massacre,- he thought as posterity has thought but, though his friends conceived it probable that he might be included in the proscription, ha disdained to seek his safety by flight. So firm was he, that when a party of horsemen actually advanced to his house, though without orders, for the horrid purpose of murdering him, he refused to close his gates” If the small one,“said he,” will not admit them, throw open the large“and he was preserved only by the arrival of another party, with express orders from the king to declare that he was not among the proscribed. The persons who made the lists, it was added, pardoned him the opposition he had always made to their projects.” I did not know,“said he coldly, without any change of countenance,” that I had done any thing to deserve either death or pardon." His motto is said to have been,

As an author, he was very prolific, and it is surprising, that a man, who had possessed so many academical employments, was interrupted with so many visits (for everybody came to see him, and consulted him as an oracle), and was engaged in a correspondence with all the literati of Europe, should have found time to write more than forty volumes, especially when it is considered, that he did not reach fifty years of age. The most considerable of his works are: 1. “Exercitationes Anti-Morinianse, de Pentateucho Samaritano, &c.” 1644, quarto. Moriti had asserted, in the strongest manner, the authenticity of the Samaritan Pentateuch; which he preferred to the Hebrew text, upon a pretence that this had been corrupted by the Jews and it was to combat this opinion, that Hottinger wrote these Exercitations. This work, though the first, is, in the judgment of father Simon, one of the best he wrote; and if he had never written any thing more, it is probable that he would have left higher notions of his abiJities for certainly it was no small enterprise for him, so early in life, to attack, on a very delicate and knotty subject, and with supposed success too, one of the most learned men in Europe at that time. 2. “Thesaurus Philologicus, seu clavis scripturic,” 1649, 4to. There was a second edition in 1649, in 4to, with additions. 3. “Historia Orientalis, ex variis Orientaliuin monumentis collecta,” 1651,4to. No man was better qualified to write on oriental affairs than Hottinger, as he was skilled in most of the languages which were anciently, as well as at present, spoken in the East: namely, the Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, Arabic, Turkish, Persian, and Coptic. 4. “Promptuarium, sive Bibliotheca. Orientalis, exhibens catalogum sive centurias aliquot tarn auctorum, quam librorum Hebraicorum, Syriacorum, Arabicorum, vEgyptiacorum: addita mantissa Bibliotheeurum aliquot Europaearum,” 16.58, 4to. Baillet does not speak very advantageously of this work of Hottinger, whom he accuses of not being very accurate in any of his compositions: and indeed his want of accuracy is a point agreed on by both papists and protestants. 5. “Etymologicon Orientale, sive Lexicon Harmonicum Heptaglotton,” &c. 1661, 4to. The seven languages contained in this Lexicon are, the Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, Samaritan, Ethiopic, and Rabbinical.

Mr. Howe, abating his attachment to the family of the Usurper, was a man of more moderation than most of his brethren, and as a divine laboured zealously to promote the interests of real practical religion, and to diffuse a spirit of candour, charity, and mutual forbearance, among his dissenting brethren. He was a man of distinguished piety and virtue, of eminent intellectual endowments, and of extensive learning. Granger says, “He was one of the most learned and polite writers among the dissenters. His reading in divinity was very extensive: he was a good Orientalist, and understood several of the modern languages.”

, younger brother of Dr. Hunter, one of the most profound anatomists, sagacious and expert surgeons, and acute observers of nature, that any age has produced, was born at Long Calderwood, before-mentioned, July 14, 1728. At the age of ten years he lost his father, and being the youngest of ten children, was suffered to employ himself in amusement rather than study, though sent occasionally to a grammar-school. He had reached the age of twenty before he felt a wish for more active employment; and hearing of the reputation his brother William had acquired in London as a teacher of anatomy, made a proposal to go up to him as an assistant. His proposal was kindly accepted, and in September 1748 he arrived in London. It was not long before his disposition to excel in anatomical pursuits was fully evinced, and his determination to proceed in that line confirmed and approved. In the summer of 1749 he attended Mr. Cheselden at Chelsea-hospital, and there acquired the rudiments of surgery. In the subsequent winter he was so far advanced in the knowledge of anatomy, as to instruct his brother’s pupils in dissection; and from the constant occupation of the doctor in business, this task in future devolved almost totally upon him. In the summer of 1756 he again attended at Chelsea, and in 1751 became a pupil at St. Bartholomew’s, where he constantly attended when any extraordinary operation was to be performed. After having paid a visit to Scotland, he entered as a gentleman commoner in Oxford, at St. Mary-hall, though with what particular view does not appear. His professional studies, however, were not interrupted, for in 1754 he became a pupil at St. George’s hospital, where in 1756 he was appointed house-surgeon. In the winter of 1755, Dr. Hunter admitted him to a partnership in his lectures.

“My attention was first turned to this great character by a conversation I had, very early in life, with Mr. Stuart, better known by the name of Athenian Stuart, an epithet richly merited by the essential advantages Mr. Stuart had rendered the public, by his establishing just ideas, and a true taste for the Grecian arts. The discourses of this truly intelligent and very candid artist, and what I saw of the works of Hussey, had altogether made such an impression on my mind, as may be conceived, hut cannot be expressed. With fervour I went abroad, eager to retrace all Hussey’s steps, through the Greeks, through Rafaelle, through dissected nature, and to add to what he had been cruelly torn away from, by a laborious, intense study and investigation of the Venetian school. In the hours of relaxation, I naturally endeavoured to recommend myself to the acquaintance of such of Mr. Hussey’s intimates as were still living: they always spoke of him with delight. And from the whole of what I could learn abroad, added to the information I received from my very amiable and venerable friend Mr. Moser since my return, Mr. Hussey must have been one of the most amiable, friendly, and companionable men, and the farthest removed from all spirit of strife and contention.”

In 1757, he published his “Free Inquiry into the Nature and Origin of Evil,” which brought him into notice as one of the most elegant writers of English prose that had appeared since ^he days of Addison. But the charms of style could not protect this singular work from objections of the most serious kind. It produced from Dr. Johnson, who was then editor of the “Literary Magazine,” a critical dissertation or review, which is perhaps the first of his compositions for strength of argument, keenness of reply, and brilliancy of wit. That Mr. Jenyns felt the force of this powerful refutation may be readily supposed, but it were to be wished he had not retained his resentment for so many years, and then given it vent in a paltry epitaph on Dr. Johnson, which his biographer thought worthy of a place in his works.

, an eminent German divine, was born at Osnaburgh, in 1709, and died in 1789. Of his life we have no farther account than that his talents raised him to the offices of vice-president of the consistory of Brunswick, abbot of Marienthal, court preacher, and director of the Caroline-college at Brunswick, of which, in 1745, he wrote an account. He was reckoned in his country one of the most original and most excellent defenders of religion that the eighteenth century had produced. His principal works were, 1. Two volumes of “Sermons,” Brunswick, 1756 69. 2. “Letters on the Mosaic Religion and Philosophy,” 1773. This work contains a demonstration that Moses really wrote the books attributed to him: and observations on his being the author of the book of Genesis, and of the style of that book, &c. 3. “Life of prince Albert-Henry of Brunswick Lunenburgh.” 4. “Thoughts on the principal Truths of Religion,” Brunswick, 1768, &c. in several volumes, reckoned a very capital performance. The abbot Jerusalem had'been tutor to the late duke of Brunswick, and his highness desired him to digest the instructions he had given him on the Christian religion in a regular form; and afterwards gave him leave to publish them. 5. “Character of prince William Adolphus of Brunswick,” Berlin, 1771. 6. “Thoughts on the Union of the Church;” and 7. a very elegant and judicious letter “concerning German literature,” addressed to her royal highness the duchess dowager of Brunswick- Wolfenbuttel, 1781.

, commonly called the Maid of Orleans, one of the most remarkable heroines in history, was the daughter of James d' re, and of Isabella Rome his wife, two persons of low rank, in the village of Domremi, near Vauconleurs, on the borders of Lorraine, where she was born in 1402. The instructions she received during her childhood and youth were suited to her humble condition. She quitted her parents at an early age, as they were ill able to maintain her, and engaged herself as a servant at a small inn. In this situation she employed herself in attending the horses of the guests, and in riding them to the watering-place, and by these exercises she acquired a robust and hardy frame. At this time the affairs of France were in a desperate condition, and the city of Orleans, the most important place in the kingdom, was besieged by the English regent, the duke of Bedford, as a step to prepare the way for the conquest of all France. The French king used every expedient to supply the city with a garrison and provisions; and the English left no method unemployed for reducing it. The eyes of all Europe were turned towards this scene of action, and after numberless feats of valour on both sides, the attack was so vigorously pushed by the English,' that the king (Charles VII.) gave up the city as lost, when relief was brought from a very unexpected quarter. Joan, influenced by the frequent accounts of the rencounters at this memorable siege, and affected with the distresses of her country and king, was seized with a wild desire of relieving him; and as her inexperienced mind worked day and night on this favourite object, she fancied she saw visions, and heard voices, exhorting her to re-establish the throne of France, and expel the English invaders. Enthusiastic in these notions, she went to Vaucouleurs, and informed Baudricourt, the governor, of her inspirations and intentions, who sent her to the French court, then at Chinon. Here, on being introduced to the king, she offered, in the name of the Supreme Being, to raise the siege of Orleans, and conduct his majesty to Rheims, to be there crowned and anointed; and she demanded, as the instrument of her future victories, a particular sword which was kept in the church of St. Catherine de Fierbois. The king and his ministers at first either hesitated or pretended to hesitate; but after an assembly of grave and learned divines had pronounced her mission to be real and supernatural, her request was granted, and she was exhibited to the whole people, on horseback in military habiliments. On this sight, her dexterity in managing her steed, though acquired in her former station, was regarded as a fresh proof of her mission her former occupation was even denied she was converted into a shepherdess, an employment more agreeable to the fancy. Some years were subtracted from her age, in order to excite still more admiration; and she was received with the loudest acclamations, by persons of all ranks.

, one of the most eminent and highly-distinguished writers of the eighteenth century, was born on the 18th of September, 1709, at Lichfield in Staffordshire, where his father, Michael Johnson, a native of Derbyshire, of obscure extraction, was at that time a bookseller and stationer. His mother, Sarah Ford, was a native of Warwickshire, and sister to Dr. Ford, physician, who was father to Cornelius Ford, a clergyman of loose character, whom Hogarth has satirized in the print of Modern Midnight Conversation. Our author was the eldest of two sons. Nathaniel, the youngest, died in 1737 in his twenty-fifth year. The father was a man of robust body and active mind, yet occasionally depressed by melancholy, which Samuel inherited, and, with the aid of a stronger mind, was not always able to shake off. He was also a steady high-churchman, and an adherent of the house of Stuart, a prejudice which his son outlived in the nation at large, without entirely conquering in himself. Mrs. Johnson was a woman of good natural understanding, unimproved by education; and our author acknowledged with gratitude, that she endeavoured to instil sentiments of piety as soon as his mind was capable of any instruction. There is little else in his family history worthy of notice, nor had he much pleasure in tracing his pedigree. He venerated others, however, who could produce a recorded ancestry, and used to say, that in him this was disinterested, for he could scarcely teil who was his grandfather. That he was remarkable in his early years has been supposed, but many proofs have not been advanced by his biographers. He had, indeed, a retentive memory, and soon discovered symptoms of an impetuous temper; but these circumstances are not enough to distinguish him from hundreds of children who never attain eminence. In his infancy he was afflicted with the scrophula, which injured his sight, and he was carried to London to receive the royal touch from the hand of queen Anne, the last of our sovereigns who encouraged that popular superstition. He was first taught to read English by a woman who kept a school for young children at Lichfield; and afterwards by one Brown. Latin he learned at Lichfield school, under Mr. Hunter, a man of severe discipline, but an attentive teacher. Johnson owned that he needed correction, and that his master did not spare him; but this, instead of being the cause of unpleasant recollections in his advanced life, served only to convince him that severity in school-education is necessary; and in all his conversations on the subject, he persisted in pleading for a liberal use of the rod. At this school his superiority was soon acknowledged by his companions, who could not refuse submission to the ascendancy which he acquired. His proficiency, however, as in every part of his life, exceeded his apparent diligence. He could learn more than others in the same allotted time: and he was learning when he seemed to be idle. He betrayed an early aversion to stated tasks, but, if roused, he could recover the time he appeared to have lost with great facility. Yet he seems afterwards to have been conscious that much depends on regularity of study, and we find him often prescribing to himself stated portions of reading, and recommending the same to others. No man perhaps was ever more sensible of his failings, or avowed them with more candour; nor, indeed, would many of them have been known, if he had not exhibited them as warnings. His memory was uncommonly tenacious, and to his last days he prided himself on it, considering a defect of memory as the prelude of total decay. Perhaps be carried this doctrine rather too far when he asserted, that the occasional failure of memory in a man of seventy must imply something radically wrong; but it may be in. general allowed, that the memory is a pretty accurate standard of mental strength. Although his weak sight prevented him from joining in the amusements of his schoolfellows, for which he was otherwise well qualified by personal courage and an ambition to excel, he found an equivalent pleasure in sauntering in the fields, or reading such books as came in his way, particularly old romances. For these he retained a fondness throughout life; but was wise and candid enough to attribute to them, in some degree, that unsettled turn of mind which prevented his fixing in any profession.

In the same year he received a diploma from Trinity college, Dublin, complimenting him with the title of doctor of laws; and after many delays, his edition of Shakspeare was published in eight volumes octavo. The preface is universally acknowledged to be one of the most elegant and acute of all his compositions. But as an illustrator of the obscurities of Shakspeare, it must be allowed he has not done much, nor was this a study for which he was eminently qualified. He was never happy when obliged to borrow from others, and he had none of that useful industry which indulges in research. Yet his criticisms have rarely been surpassed, and it is no small praise that he was the precursor of Steevens and Malone. The success of the Shakspeare was not great, although upon the whole it increased the respect with which the literary world viewed his talents. Kenrick made the principal attack on this work, which was answered by an Oxford student named Barclay. But neither the attack nor the answer attracted much notice. In 1766 he furnished the preface, and some of the pieces which compose a volume of poetical “Miscellanies” by Mrs. Anna Williams. This lady was still an inmate in his house, and was indeed absolute mistress. Although her temper was far from pleasant, and she had now gained an ascendancy over him which she often maintained in a fretful and peevish manner, he forgot every thing in her distresses, and was indeed in all his charities, which were numerous, the most remote that can be conceived from the hope of gratitude or reward. His house was filled by dependants whose perverse tempers frequently drove him out of it, yet nothing of this kind could induce him to relieve himself at their expence. His noble expression was, “If 1 dismiss them, who will receive them r” Abroad, his society was now very extensive, and included almost every man of the age distinguished for learning, and many persons of considerable rank, who delighted in his company and conversation.

In 1777, he was engaged by the London booksellers to write short lives or prefaces to an edition of the English Poets; and this “being one of the most important of his literary undertakings, some account of its origin is necessary, especially as the precise share which belongs to him has been frequently misrepresented. It is perhaps too late now to inquire into the propriety of the decision of the House of Lords respecting literary property. It had not, however, taken place many months before some of the predicted consequences appeared. Among other instances, an edition of the English Poets was published at Edinburgh, in direct violation of that honourable compact by which the booksellers- of London had agreed to respect each others’ property, notwithstanding their being deprived of the more effectual support of the law. This,. therefore, induced the latter to undertake an edition of the Poets in a more commodious form, and with suitable accuracy of text. A meeting was called of about forty of the most respectable booksellers of London, the proprietors, or the successors and descendants of the proprietors, of copyrights in these worlds; and it was agreed that an elegant and uniform edition of” The English Poets" should be printed, with a concise account of the life of each author, by Dr. Samuel Johnson, and that Messrs. Strahan, Cadell, and T. Davies, should wait upon him with their proposals.