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

, a very learned man, was born of a noble family at Nortwick in Holland, 1545. He lost his parents when very young, and was sent to several schools; and to one at Paris among the rest, where he made a great progress in Greek and Latin. When he had finished his education, he returned to his own country, and married; and though he was scarcely grown up, he applied himself to affairs of state, and was soon made a curator of the banks and ditches, which post he held above twenty years, and then resigned it. But Dousa was not only a scholar and a statesman, but likewise a soldier; and he behaved himself so well in that capacity at the siege of Leyden in 1574, that the prince of Orange thought he could commit the government of the town to none so properly as to him. In 1575 the university was founded there, and Dousa made first curator of it; for which place he was well fitted, as well on account of his learning as by his other deserts. His learning was indeed prodigious and he had such a memory, that he could at once give an answer to any thing that was asked him, relating to ancient or modern history, or, in short, to any branch of literature. He was, says Melchior Adam, and, after him, Thuanus, a kind of living library; the Varro of Holland, and the oracle of the university of Leyden. His genius lay principally towards poetry, and his various productions in verse were numerous: he even composed the annals of his own country, which he had collected from the public archives, in verse, which was published at Leyden 1601, 4to, and reprinted in 1617 with a commentary by Grotius. He wrote also critical notes upon Horace, Sallust, Plautus, Petronius, Catullus, Tibullus, &c. His moral qualities are said to have been no less meritorious than his intellectual and literary; for he was modest, humane, benevolentj and affable. He was admitted into the supreme assembly of the nation, where he kept his seat, and discharged his office worthily, for the last thirteen years of his life. He died Oct. 12, 1604, and his funeral oration was made by Daniel Heinsius. Of his works, we have seen, 1. “Couiin. in Catullum, Tibullum, et Horatium,” Antwerp, 1580, 12mo. 2. “Libri tres Prascidaneorum in Petronium Arbitrmn,” Leyden, 1583, 8vo. 3. “Epodon ex puris lambis,” Ant. 1514, 8vo. 4. “Plautinae Explicationes,” Leyden, 1587, 16mo. 5. “Poemata,” ibid. 1607, 12mo. 6. “Odarum Britannicarum liber, ad Elizabetham reginam, et Jani Dousae filii Britannicorum carminum silva,” Leyden, 1586, 4to; and 7. lt Elegiarum libri duo, et Epigrammatum liber unus; cum Justi Lipsii aliorumque ad eundem carminibus," ibid. 1586, 4to. In some catalogues, however, the works of the father and son seem be confounded.

He left four sons behind him; the eldest of whom, Janus Dousa, would, if he had lived, have been a more extraordinary man than his father. Joseph Scaliger calls him the ornament of the world; and says, that in the flower of his age he had reached the same maturity of wisdom and erudition, as others might expect to attain after a life spent in study. Grotius also assures us, that his poems exceeded those of his father; whom he assisted in composing the Annals of Holland. He was born in 1572; and, before he was well out of infancy, became, through the great care of his father, not only a good linguist and poet, but also a good philosopher and mathematician. To all this he afterwards added an exquisite knowledge of the civil law and of history. Besides a great many poems, which he composed in a very tender age, we have his notes and observations upon several Latin poets. Those upon Plautus were the product of his sixteenth year; and he was not above nineteen when he published his book “De Rebus Ccelestibus,” and his “Echo, sive Lusus imaginis jocose.” His commentaries upon Catullus, Tibullus, and Propertius, were published the same year. His extraordinary fame and merit caused him to be made preceptor to the prince of Orange, and afterwards first librarian of the university of Leyden. He died at the Hague, in his return from Germany in 1597, when he had not quite completed his 26th year.

When he was upwards of fifty years of age, he commenced prophet. He had his first vision in the night of Feb. 23, 1638, and the second in the night of Jan. 23, 1643. The first vision promised him in general great armies from the north and east, which should crush the house of Austria; the second declared particularly, that Ragotski, prince of Transylvania, should command the army from the east, and ordered Drabicins to inform his brethren, that < was about to restore them to their own country, and to revenge the injuries done to his people and that they should prepare themselves for this deliverance by fasting and prayer. He received orders to write down what been revealed to him and to begin in the manner of the ancient prophets, “The word of the Lord came unto me.” His visions, however, were not much regarded at first. These two were followed by many others in the same year, 1643; and there was one, which ordered, that he should open the whole affair to Comenius, who was then at Elbing, in Prussia. One of his visions, in 1644, assured him that the imperial troops should not destroy the refugees. They committed great ravages upon the territories of Kagotski, plundered the town of Leidnitz, and besieged the castle. Drabicius shut himself up there, and did not depend so entirely upon the divine assurances as to think human means unnecessary. He even set his hand to the works: “he would not only be present,” says Comenius, who blames him for it, “but also fire one of the cannon himself; whereas, it would have been more proper for him to have been in a corner, and to have applied himself to prayer. But the imprudent zeal of this new Peter, presuming to defend the Lord with the material sword, was chastised by the Lord himself, who permitted part of the flame to recoil upon his face, and to hurt one of his eyes.” The imperialists raised the siege; but soon after besieged the place again, and took it. The refugees were plundered, and Drabicius fell into the hands of the imperialists. This did not prevent him from going to Ragotski, and telling him, Aug. 1645, that God commanded him to destroy the house of Austria and the pope; and that, “if he refused to attack that nest of vipers, he would draw down upon his family a general ruin.” The prince already knew that Drabicius had assumed the character of a prophet for Drabicius, according to the repeated orders which he had received in his ecstacies, had sent him a copy of his revelations, which Ragotski threw into the fire. The death of that prince, in Oct. 16 7, plunged Drabicius into extreme sorrow; who was in the utmost fear lest his revelation should vanish into smoke, and himself be exposed to ridicule. But he had one ecstatic consolation, which re-animated him; and that was, that God would send him Comenius, to whom he should communicate his writings. Comenius having business in Hungary, in 1650, saw Drabicius there, and his prophecies; and made such reflections as he thought proper, upon the vision’s having for three years before promised Drabicius that he should have Comenius for a coadjutor. Sigismond Ragotski, being urged by Drabicius to make war against the emperor, and by his mother to continue in peace with him, was somewhat perplexed. Drabicius denounced against him the judgments of the Almighty, in case of peace; and his mother threatened him with her curse in case of war. In this dilemma he recommended himself to the prayers of Drabicius and Comenius, and kept himself quiet till his death. In 1654 Drabicius was restored to his ministry, and his visions p esemed themselves more frequently than ever; ordering from lime to time that they should be communicated to his coadjutqr Comenius, that be might publish them to all nations and languages, and particularly to the Turks and Tartars. Comenius found himself embarrassed between the fear of God, and that of men; he was apprehensive that by not printing the revelations of Drabicins he should disobey God, and that by printing them he should expose himself to the ridicule and censure of men. He took a middle way; he resolved to print them, and not to distribute the copies; and upon this account he entitled the book “Lux in Tenebris.” But his resolution did not continue long; it gave way to two remarkable events, which were taken for a grand crisis, and the unravelling of the mystery. One of these events was the irruption of George Ragotski into Poland; the other, the death of the emperor Ferdinand III., but both events far from answering the predictions, served only to confound them. Ragotski perished in his descent upon Poland; and Leopold, king of Hungary, was elected emperor in the room of his father Ferdinand III. by which election the house of Austria was almost restored to its former grandeur, and the protestants in Hungary absolutely ruined. Drabicius was the greatest sufferer by this; for the court of Vienna, being informed that he was the person who sounded the trumpet against the house of Austria, sought means to punish him, and, as it is said, succeeded in it. What became of him, we cannot learn; some say that he was burnt for an impostor and false prophet; others, that he died in Turkey, whither he had fled for refuge; but neither of these accounts is certain.

, one of our most distinguished naval heroes, who flourished in the reign of Elizabeth, was the son of Edmund Drake, a sailor, and born near Tavistock, in Devonshire, in 1545, but some have said that he was the son of a clergyman. He was, however, brought up at the expence, and under the care, of sir John Hawkins, who was his kinsman; and at the age of eighteen was purser of a ship trading to Biscay. At twenty he made a voyage to Guinea; and at twenty-two had the honour to be made captain of the Judith. In that capacity he was in the harbour of St. John de Ulloa, in the gulph of Mexico, where he behaved most gallantly in the glorious actions under sir John Hawkins, and returned with him to England with great reputation, though as poor as he set out. Upon this he projected a design against the Spaniards in the West Indies, which he no sooner announced, than he had volunteers enough ready to accorapany him. In 1570 he made his first expedition with two ships; and the next year with one only, in which he returned safe, if not with such advantages as he expected. He made another expedition in 1572, did the Spaniards some mischief, and gained considerable booties. In these expeditions he was much assisted by a nation of Indians, who then were, and have been ever since, engaged in perpetual wars with the Spaniards. The prince of these people was named Pedro, to whom Drake presented a fine cutlass from his side, which he saw the Indian greatly admired. Pedro, in return, gave him four large wedges of gold, which Drake threw into the common stock, with this remarkable expression, that“he thought it but just, that such as bore the charge of so uncertain a voyage on his credit, should share the utmost advantages that voyage produced.” Then embarking his men with all the wealth he had obtained, which was very considerable, he bore away for England, where he arrived in August, 1573.

, the third son of the preceding, was born at Paris in 1633, and after studying some years at Saumur, he went to Montpellier, where he completed his medical course, and took his doctor’s degree. He afterwards attended the marshal Turenne in his campaigns, and was by him appointed physician to the army. The skill and ability he had shewn in this situation, occasioned his being nominated to succeed Vander Linden, in 168S, as professor of medicine at Leyden, whither he obtained permission to go, though he had been made, several years before, one of the physicians to Lewis the Fourteenth. Two years after, he was advanced to the chair of anatomy in the same university. He was also made physician to William, prince of Orange, and to his princess, Mary. As rector of the university of Leyden, he spoke the congratulatory oration to the prince and princess, on their accession to the throne of England. He continued to hold his professorships, the offices of which he filled so as to give universal satisfaction, to the time of his death, which happened on the last day of May, 1697. He was a voluminous and learned writer; his works, which were much read in his time, and passed through several editions, were collected and published together in 1671, and again in 1680, in 4 vols. 12mo. But the most complete edition of them is that published at the Hague, in 1727, in 4to. In one of his orations he has been careful to exculpate professors of medicine from the charge of impiety, so frequently thrown upon them. “Oratio Doctoralis Monspessula, qufi Medicos Dei operum consideratione atque contemplatione permotos, caeteris hominibus Religioni astrictiores esse demons tratur: atque adeo impietatis crimen in ipsos jactatum diluitur.” He also, in his “Apologia Medica,” refutes the idea of physicians having been banished from, and not allowed to settle in Rome for the space of six hundred years. He was a lover of Greek literature, and like his countryman, Guy Patin, an enemy to the introduction of chemical preparations into medicine, which were much used in his time. He was also a strong opponent to his colleague Sylvius Bayle has given him a high character. As a man he describes him benevolent, friendly, pious, and charitable; as a scholar, versed in the Greek and Latin tongues, and in all polite literature in as high a degree as if he had never applied himself to any thing else; as a professor of physic, clear and exact in his method of reading lectures, and of a skill in anatomy universally admired; as an author, one whose writings are of an original and inimitable characier.

, a learned protestant and eminent critic, was born at Oudenard, in Elandcrs, June 28, 1550. He was designed for the study of divinity, and sent very early to Ghent, to learn the languages there, and afterwards to Louvain, to pass through a course of philosophy; but his father having been outlawed for his religion in 1567, and deprived of his estate, retired to England, and Drusius soon followed him, though his mother, who continued a bigoted catholic, endeavoured to prevent him. Masters were provided to superintend his studies; and he had soon an opportunity of learning Hebrew under Anthony Cevellier, or rather Chevalier, who was come over to England, and taught that language publicly in the university of Cambridge. Drusius lodged at his house, and had a great share in his friendship. He did not return to London till 1571; and, while he was preparing to go to France, the news of the massacre of St. Bartholomew made him change his resolution. Soon after this, he was invited to Cambridge by Cartwright, the professor of divinity; and also to Oxford, by Dr. Lawrence Humphrey, whither he went, and became professor of the oriental languages there at the age of twenty-two. He taught at Oxford four years with great success*; after which, being desirous of returning to his own country, he went to Louvain, where he studied the civil law. The troubles on account of religion obliged him to come back to his father at London; but, upon the pacification of Ghent, in 1576, they both returned to their own country. The son tried his fortune in Holland, and was appointed professor of the oriental tongues there, in 1577. While he continued in this station at Leyden, he married in 1580 a young gentlewoman of Ghent, who was more than half a convert, and became a thorough protestant after her marriage. The stipend allowed to Drusius, in Holland, not being sufficient to support himself and family, he gave intimations that if better terms should be offered him elsewhere, he would accept of them. The prince of Orange wrote to the magistrates of Leyden, to take care not to lose a man of his merit; yet they suffered him to remove to Friesland, whither he had been invited to be professor of Hebrew in the university of Franeker. He was admitted into that professorship in 1585, and discharged the functions of it with great honour till his death, which happened in 1616.

As he had many leisure hours, he passed much time in literary employments, though many were very cheeriully given to society. Among his published productions maybe mentioned, the “Feminead,” 1754, which passed through two editions, and has been reprinted both in tlu Poetical Calendar, and in Pearch’s Collection. Four Odes appeared in 1753, viz. “The Prophecy of Neptune;” “On the Death of the Prince of Wales;” “*Ode presented to the Duke of Newcastle” and one “*To the hon. James Yorke,” first bishop of St. David’s, and afterwards bishop of Ely. Between 1753 and 1756 came out separatelv, “*An Evening Contemplation in a College,” being a parody on Gray’s Elegy“reprinted in” The Repository.“Other detached poems of Mr. Duncombe’s are,” *Verses to the Author of Clarissa,“published in that work;” *Verses on the Campaign, 1759,“(addressed to Sylvanus Urban, and originally printed in the volume for that year);” *To Colonel Clive, on his arrival in England;“” *On the Loss of the Ramilies, Captain Taylor, 1760;“” Surrey Triumphant, or the Kentish Men’s Defeat, 1773,“4to; a parody on Chevy ­Chace; which, for its genuine strokes of humour, elegant poetry, and happy imitation, acquired the author much applause. This has been translated into” Nichols’s Select Collection of Poems, 1782,“where may be found, also, a poem of his on Stocks House; a translation of an elegant epitaph, by bishop Lowth; and an elegiac *' Epitaph at the Grave of Mr. Highmore.” Those pieces marked with a starare in the Poetical Calendar, vol. VII. together with a Prologue spoken at the Charter-house, 1752 a Poem on Mr. Garrick and translations from Voltaire. And in vol. X. “The Middlesex Garden” “Kensington Gardens” “Farevvel to Hope” “On a Lady’s sending the Author a Ribbon for his Watch” “On Captain Cornwallis’s Monument” “Prologue to Amalasont” “Epigrams.” He published three Sermons; one “On the Thanksgiving, Nov. 29, 1759,” preached at St. Anne’s, Westminster, and published at the request of the pa- 4 rishioners another, “preached at the Consecration of the parish-church of St. Andrew, Canterbury,” July 4, 1774; and one, “On a General Fast, Feb. 27, 1778,” also preached at St. Andrew’s, Canterbury; and so well approved, that by the particular desire of the parish, it appeared in print under the title of “The Civil War between the Israelites and Benjamites illustrated and applied.” He published with his father, in 1766, a translation of Horace, in 8vo; and in 1767, another edition, with many enlargements and corrections, in 4 vols. 12mo. He trans* lated the “Huetiana,” in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1771. In 1774, he translated Batteley’s “Antiquitates Rutupinte.” He wrote “The Historical Account of Dr. Dodd’s Life,” 1777*, 8vo; and was the translator of“Sherlock’s Letters of an English Traveller,” 1st edition, 4to. The 2d edition, 8vo, was translated by Mr. Sherlock himself. In 1778 he published *' An Elegy written in Canterbury Cathedral;“and in 1784,” Select Works of the Emperor Julian,“2 vols. 8vo. In 1784 he was principally the author of” The History and Antiquities of Keculver and Heme,“which forms the eighteenth number of the Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica to which work he also contributed in 1785, the thirtieth number, containing,” The History and Antiquities of the Three Archiepiscopal Hospitals in and near Canterbury,“which he dedicated to archbishop Moore. He was the editor of several other works; all of which were elucidated by his critical knowledge and explanatory notes; viz. 1.” Letters from several eminent persons, deceased, including the correspondence of John Hughes, esq. and several of his friends; published from the originals, with notes. Of these there have been two editions; the last in 3 vols. 2. “Letters from Italy; by the late right-hon. John earl of Corke and Orrery, with notes,” 1773. These have gone through two editions. 3. “Letters from the late archbishop Herring, to William Buncombe, esq. deceased; from 1728 to 1757, with notes, and an appendix,” 1777. He was also the author of a Letter signed “Rusncus,” in “The World,” vol. I. No. 36 of several Letters in “The Connoisseur,” being the “Gentleman of Cambridge, A. B.” mentioned in the last number. And in the Gentleman’s Magazine, his communications in biography, poetry, and criticism, during the last twenty years of his life, were frequent and valuable. Many of them are without a name; but his miscellaneous contributions were usually distinguished by the signature of Crito.

, a learned English bishop, was born at Lewisham in Kent, of which place his father was then vicar. He was baptized there March 18, 1588-9, was educated at Westminster school, and thence elected student of Christ church, Oxford, in 1605. In 1612 he was chosen fellow of All Souls’ college; then went into orders, and travelled abroad; particularly into France and Spain. In July 1625 he took the degree of doctor in divinity; and by the interest and recommendation of the earl of Dorset, to whom he afterwards became chaplain, was appointed dean of Christ church, Oxford, in June 1629. In 1634 he was constituted chancellor of the church of Sarum, and soon after made chaplain to Charles I. He was appointed, in 1638, tutor to Charles prince of Wales, and afterwards to his brother the duke of York; and about the same time nominated to the bishopric of Chichester. In 1641 he was translated to the see of Salisbury, but received no benefit from it, on account of the suppression of episcopacy. On this event he repaired to the king at Oxford; and, after that city was surrendered, attended him in other places, particularly during his imprisonment in the Isle of Wight. He was a great favourite with his majesty; and is said by some to have assisted him in composing the “Eikon Basilike.”

The particular account which we find in Vasari of his engravings is curious; and it is no small compliment to him to have this Italian author own, that the prints of Durer, being brought to Italy, excited the painters there to perfect that part of the art, and served them for an excellent model. Vasari is profuse in his praises of Duivr’s delicacy, and the fertility of his imagination. As Durer could not hope to execute all his designs while he worked on copper, he bethought himself of working on wood. One of his best pieces in this style is a Saint Eustachius kneeling before a stag, which has a crucifix between its horns which cut, says Vasari, is wonderful, and particularly for the beauty of the dogs represented in various attitudes. John Valentine Andreas, a doctor in divinity in the duchy of Wirtemberg, sent this piece to a prince of the house of Brunswick; to whom the prince replied by letter, “You have extremely obliged me by your new present; a cut which merits a nobler metal than brass, done by the celebrated painter of Nuremberg, and which, I think, wants nothing, unless Zeuxis or Parrhasius, or some person equally favoured by Minerva, should add colours and the native form.” The praises which this same divine gave to Durer in his answer to the prince’s letter, are remarkable, and worth transcribing: “I could easily guess,” says he, “that the Eustachius of Durer would not prove an unacceptable present to you, from whatever hand a performance of that admirable artist came. It is very surprising in regard to that man, that, in a rude and barbarous age, he was the first of the Germans who not only arrived to an exact imitation of nature by the perfection of his art, but likewise left no second; being so absolute a master of it in all its parts, in etching, engraving, statuary, architecture, optics, symmetry, and the rest, that he had no equal, except Michel Angelo Buonaroti, his contemporary and rival; and left behind him such works as were too much for the life of one man. He lived always in a frugal manner, and with the appearance of poverty. The Italians highly esteem him, and reproach us for not setting a due value on the ornaments of our own country.” We learn from the same authority, that the emperor Rodolphus II. ordered the plate of St. Eustachius to be gilded; and that Durer, at the intimation of his friend and patron Bilibaldus Pirkheimer, corrected an error in it, which was, that the stirrups of the horse on which Eustachius was to ride, were too short.

, knt. memorable for his embassies at several courts, was born at Plymouth, in Devonshire, about 1563. He was the fifth and youngest son of Thomas Edmondes, head customer of that port, and of Fowey, in Cornwall, by Joan his wife, daughter of Antony Delabare, of Sherborne, in Dorsetshire, csq. who was third son of Henry Edmondes, of New Sarum, gent by Juliana his wife, daughter of William Brandon, of the same place. Where he had his education is nut known. But we are informed that he was introduced to court by his name-sake, sir Thomas Edmonds, comptroller of the queen’s household; and, being initiated into public business under that most accomplished statesman, sir Francis Walsingham, secretary of state, he was, undoubtedly through his recommendation, employed by queen Klizabcth in several embassies. In 1592, she appointed him her resident at the court of France, or rather agent for her affairs in relation to king Henry IV. with a salary of twenty shillings a day, a sum so ill paid, and so insufficient, that we find him complaining to the lord treasurer, in a letter dated 1593, of the greatest pecuniary distress. The queen, however, in May 1596, made him a grant of the office of secretary to her majesty for the French tongne, “in consideration of his faithful and acceptable service heretofore done.” Towards the end of that year he returned to England, when sir Anthony Mild may was sent ambassador to king Henry; but he went back again to France in the beginning of May following, and in less than a month returned to London. In October, 1597, he was dispatched again M agent for her majesty to the king of France and returned to EngJand about the beginning of May 1598, where his stay Was extremely short, for he was at Paris in the July following. But, upon sir Henry Neville being appointed ambassador to the French court, he was recalled, to his great satisfaction, and arrived at London in June 1597. Sir Henry Neville gave him a very great character, and recommended him to the queen in the strongest terms. About December the 26th of that year, he was sent to archduke Albert, governor of the Netherlands, with a letter of credence, and instructions to treat of a peace. The archduke received him with great respect; but not being willing to send commissioners to England, as the queen desired, Mr. Edmondes went to Paris, and, having obtained of king Henry IV. Boulogne for the place of treaty, he returned to England, and arrived at court on Sunday morning, February 17. The llth of March following, he embarked again for Brussels and, on the 22d, had an audience of the archduke, whom having prevailed upon to treat with the queen, he returned home, April 9, 1600, and was received by her majesty with great favour, and highly commended for his sufficiency in his negotiation. Soon after he was appointed one of the commissioners for the treaty of Boulogne, together with sir Henry Neville, the queen’s ambassador in France, John Herbert, esq. her majesty’s second secretary, and Robert Beale, esq. secretary to the council in the North; their commission being dated the 10th of May, 1600. The two last, with Mr. Edmondes, left London the 12th of that month, and arrived at Boulogne the 16th, as sir Henry Neville did the same day from Paris. But, after the commissioners had been above three months upon the place, they parted, July 28th, without ever assembling, owing to a dispute about precedency between England and Spain. Mr. Edmondes, not long after his return, was appointed one of the clerks of the privy-council; and, in the end of June 1601, was sent to the French king to complain of the many acts of injustice committed by his subjects against the English merchants. He soon after returned to England but, towards the end of August, went again, and waited upon king Henry IV. then at Calais to whom he proposed some measures, both for the relief of Ostend, then besieged by the Spaniards, and for an offensive alliance against Spain. After his return to England he was appointed one of the commissioners for settling, with the two French ambassadors, the depredations between England and France, and preventing them for the future. The 20th of May, 1603, he was knighted by king James I; and, upon the conclusion of the peace with Spain, on the 18th of August, 1604, was appointed ambassador to the archduke at Brussels. He set out for that place the 19th of April, 1605; having first obtained a reversionary grant of the office of clerk of the crown and, though absent, was chosen one of the representatives for the Burgh of Wilton, in the parliament which was to have met at Westminster, Nov. 5, 1605, but was prevented by the discovery of the gunpowder-plot. During his embassy he promoted, to the utmost of his power, an accommodation between the king of Spain and the States-General of the United Provinces . He was recalled in 1609, and came back to England about the end of August, or the beginning of September. In April 1610, he was employed as one of the assistant-commissioners, to conclude a defensive league with the crown of France; and, having been designed, ever since 1608, to be sent ambassador into that kingdom , he was dispatctyed thither in all haste, in May 1610, upon the new of the execrable murder of king Henry IV. in order to learn the state of affairs there. He arrived at Paris, May 24th, where he was very civilly received; and on the 27th of June, had his audience of Mary de Medicis, queen regent; the young king (Lewis XIII.) being present. In November following he caused an Italian to be apprehended at Paris for harbouring a treasonable design against his master, king James I. There being, in 1613, a competition between him and the Spanish ambassador about precedency, we are told that he went to Home privately, and brought a certificate out of the pope’s ceremonial, shewing that the king of England is to precede the king of Castile. He was employed the same year in treating of a marriage between Henrv prince of Wales and the princess Christine, sister of Lewis XIII. king of France; but the death of that prince, on the 6th of November 1612, put an end to this negotiation. And yet, on the 9th of the same month, orders were sent him to propose a marriage between the said princess and our prince Charles, but he very wisely declined opening such an affair so soon after the brother’s death. About the end of December 1613, sir Thomas desired leave to return to England, but was denied till he should have received the final resolution of the court of France about the treaty of marriage; which being accomplished, he came tp England towards the end or' January 1613-14. Though- the privy-council strenuously opposed this match because they had not sooner been made acquainted with so important an affair, yet, so zealous was the king for it, that he sent sir Thomas again to Paris with instructions, dated July 20, 1614, for bringing it ta a conclusion. But, after all, it appeared that the court of France were not sincere in this affair, and only proposed it to amuse the protestants in general. In 1616 sir Thomasassisted at the conference at Loudun, between the protestants and the opposite party; and, by his journey to liochelle, disposed the protestants to accept of the terms offered them, and was of great use in settling the pacification. About the end of October, in the same year, he was ordered to England; not to quit his charge, but, after he should have kissed the king’s hand, and received such honour as his majesty was resolved to confer upon him, in acknowledgment of his long, painful, and faithful services, then to go and resume his charge; and continue in France, till the affairs of that kingdom, which then were in an uncertain state, should be better established. Accordingly he came over to England in December; and, on the 21st of that month, was made comptroller of the king’s household; and, the next day, sworn a privy-counsellor. He returned to the court of France in April 1617; but took his leave of it towards the latter end of the same year. And, on the 19th of January, 1617-18, was advanced to the place of treasurer of the household; and in 1620 was appointed clerk of the crown in the court of king’s bench, and might have well deserved the post of secretary of state that he had been recommended for, which none was better qualified to discharge. He was elected one of the burgesses for the university of Oxford, in the first parliament of king Charles I. which met June 18, 1623, and was also returned for the same in the next parliament, which assembled at Westminster the 26th of February following; but his election being declared void, he was chosen for another place. Some of the speeches which he made in parliament are primed. On the 11th of June 1629, he was commissioned to go ambassador to the French court, on purpose to carry king Charles’s ratification, and to receive Lewis the XIIIth’s oath, for the performance of the treaty of peace, then newly concluded between England and France: which he did in September following, and with this honourable commission concluded all his foreign employments. Having, after this, enjoyed a creditable and peaceful retreat for about ten years, he departed this life, September 20, 1639. His lady was Magdalen, one of the daughters and co-heirs of sir John Wood, knight, clerk of the signet, by whom he had one son, and three daughters. She died at Paris, December 31, 1614, with a character amiable and exemplary in all respects. Sir Thomas had with her the manor of Albins, in the parishes of Stapleford-Abbot, and Navestoke in Essex, where Inigo Jones built for him a mansion ­house, delightfully situated in a park, now the seat of the Abdy family. Sir Thomas was small of stature, but great in understanding. He was a man of uncommon sagacity, and indefatigable industry in his employments abroad; always attentive to the motions of the courts where he resided, and punctual and exact in reporting them to his own; of a firm and unshaken resolution in the discharge of his duty, and beyond the influence of terror, flattery, or corruption. The French court, in particular, dreaded his experience and abilities; and the popish and Spanish party there could scarcely disguise their hatred of so zealous a supporter of the protestant interest in that kingdom. His letters and papers, in twelve volumes in folio, were once in the possession of secretary Thurloe, and afterwards of the lord chancellor Somers. The style of them is clear, strong, and masculine, and entirely free from the pedantry and puerilities which infected the most applauded writers of that age. Several of them, together with abstracts from the rest, were published by Dr. Birch in a work entitled “An historical view of the Negotiations between the Courts of England, France, and Brussels, from the year 1592 to 1617. Extracted chiefly from the ms State-papers of sir Thomas Edmondes, kt. ambassador in France, &c. and of Anthony Bacon, esq. brother to the lord chancellor Bacon,” London, 1749, 8vo. Several extracts of letters, written by him in the early part of his political life, occur in Birch’s “Memoirs of queen Elizabeth,” and other letters are in Lodge’s “Illustrations of British History.”

king of England, deserves notice here as a young prince of great promise and high accomplishments, rather than as a sovereign, although in the latter character he afforded every presage of excellence, had his life been spared. He was the only son of Henry VIII. by queen Jane Seymour, and was born in 1538. From his maternal uncle, the duke of Somerset, he imbibed a zeal for the progress of the reformation. The ambitious policy of his courtiers, however, rendered his reign upon the whole turbulent, although his own disposition was peculiarly mild and benevolent, and amidst all these confusions, the reformation of religion made very great progress. He was at last, when in his sixteenth year, seized with the measles, and afterwards. with the small-pox, the effects of which he probably never quite recovered; and as he was making a progress through some parts of the kingdom, he was afflicted with a cough, which proved obstinate, and which gave way neither to regimen nor mexlicines. Several fatal symptoms of a consumption appeared, and though it was hoped, that as the season advanced, his youth and temperance might get the better of the malady, his subjects saw, with great concern, his bloom and vigour sensibly decay. After the settlement of the crown, which had been effected with the greatest difficulty, his health rapidly declined, and scarcely a hope was entertained of his recovery. His physicians were dismissed by the earl of Northumberland’s advice, and the young king was entrusted to the hands of an ignorant woman, who undertook to restore him to health in a very short time but the medicines prescribed were found useless violent symptoms were greatly aggravated and on the 6th of July, 1553, he expired at Greenwich, in the sixteenth year of his age, and the seventh of his reign. The excellent disposition of this young prince, and his piety and zeal in the prolestant cause, have rendered his memory dear to the nation. He possessed mildness of disposition, application to study and business, a capacity to learn and judge, and an attachment to equity and justice. He is to this day commemorated as the founder of some of the most splendid charities in the metropolis.

The lord chancellor was now more than seventy-six years of age, and feeling both the powers of his mind and body shrink under the pressure of old age and infirmity, by the most earnest solicitations he entreated the king to give him an honourable discharge from his high office; partly from a scrupulous apprehension and conscientious diffidence of being competent to bear the fatigues, and to discharge the duties of it as he ought; but principally from an ardent desire to retreat from the busy scenes of office, in order to devote the evening of a life, spent in the honest and faithful discharge of a high profession, to religious meditation. These sentiments he conveyed to the king in two pathetic letters, who at last consented, though he, as well as the prince of Wales, had endeavoured to induce him, as much as possible, to remain in, office. King James parted with an old and faithful servant with all imaginable tenderness, and, as a mark of his royal favour and approbation, advanced him to the dignity of viscount Brackley on the 7th of November, 1616. Though he then resigned the duties of that high and important office of state, the king let him, however, keep the seal in possession till the beginning of Hilary term following, when, according to Camden, on the 3d of March, 1617, his majesty went to visit the chancellor, and received it from his hands with tears of gratitude and respect. On the seventh it was committed to the custody of sir Francis Bacon, the person whom his lordship desired might succeed him. Another author says, that the king sent secretary Winwood for the seal w.ith this gracious message, “That himself would be his underkeeper, and not dispose of it while he lived to bear the title of chancellor,” and that no one received it out of the king’s sight till lord chancellor Egerton’s death, which followed soon after: these accounts are very reconcileable, as the king might both receive it in form from the chancellor’s hands and send his secretary for it afterwards. On the 24th of January he had, for the same reasons, resigned the office of chancellor of the university of Oxford, and was succeeded by the earl of Pembroke.

, one of the principal lords of the bow Countries, was born in 1522 of an illustrious family in Holland, and served with great distinction in the armies of the emperor Charles V. whom he followed into Africa in 1544. Being appointed general of horse under Philip II. he signalized himself at the battle of St. Quentin in 1557, and that of Graveliwes in 1553. But, after the departure of Philip for Spain, unwilling, as he said himself, to fight for the re-establishment of the penal laws, and the inquisition, he took a part in the troubles which broke out in the Low Countries. He nevertheless made it his endeavour to dispose the governess of those provinces, and the nobles combined against her, to terms of peace and moderation. He even took an oath to that princess to support the Romish religion, to punish sacrilege, and to extirpate heresy; but his connections with the prince of Orange and the chief nobles of that party, brought him into suspicion with the court of Spain. The duke of Alva having been sent by Philip II. into the Low Countries to suppress the rebels, ordered his head to be struck off at Brussels, the 5th of June 1568, as well as that of Philip de Montmorency, comte de Horn. The count Egmont was then in his 46th year; and submitted to death with resignation, professing himself of the communion of the church of Rome. The ambassador of France wrote to his court, that “he had seen that head fall, which had twice made France to tremble.” The same day that the count Egmont was executed, his wife, Sabina of Bavaria, came to Brussels, for the purpose of consoling the countess of Aremberg on the death of her husband; and as she was discharging this office of affection and. charity, the afflicting tidings were announced to her of the condemnation of the count her husband. The count of Egmont had written to Philip II. protesting to him, “that he had never attempted any thing against the catholic religion, nor contrary to the duty of a good subject;” but this justification was deemed insufficient. Besides, it was thought necessary to make an example; and Philip II. observed on occasion of the deaths of the counts Egmont and Horn, that he struck off their heads, because “the heads of salmons were of greater accoufct than many thousands of frogs.” The posterity of count Egmont became extinct in the person of Procopius Francis, count Egmont, general of the horse, and of the dragoons of the king of Spain, and brigadier in the service of the king of France, who died without children at Fraga in Arragon, in 1707, at the age of 38. Maximilian d' Egmont, count 9f Buren, a general in the army of Charles V. of the same family, but of a different branch, displayed his courage and conduct in the wars against Fi%ncis I.; but besieged Terouane in vain, and died of a quinsey at Brussels in 1543. The president De Thou says, that he was great both in war and in peace, and praises his fidelity and magnificence. His physician, Andrew Vesalius, having, as it is pretended, foretold him the time of his death, he made a great feast for his friends, and distributed rich presents among them. When the entertainment was over, he put himself to bed, and died precisely at the time foretold him by Vesalius.

, an ingenious botanical painter, the son of the prince of Baden Durlach’s gardener, was born in 1710, and very early shewed a taste for drawing, and painting the flowers of the garden. Although he received no instructions, yet such was his proficiency, that, whilst a very young man, he had painted 500 plants with a skill and accuracy that was almost unexampled, under the disadvantages of so total a want of instruction as this young artist had experienced. His merit, however, remained long unknown, or at least ineffectually noticed, until it was discovered by a gentleman of curiosity and judgment, who visited the garden of which his father was the superintendant. Fortunately for young Ehret, this stranger was a physician and a friend of the celebrated Dr. Trew, of Norimberg, to whom he justly supposed these paintings would be acceptable. Ehret by this means was introduced to Trew, who immediately purchased the whole 500 paintings, and generously gave him double the price at which the young artist had modestly valued them.

of Guienne, queen of France and England, was married in 1137, at the age of fifteen, to Louis VII. king of France, by whom she had two daughters, but, when she had accompanied him to Palestine, her intrigues with the prince of Antioch, and with a young handsome Turk named Saladin, led to a divorce in 1152. In the following year she married Henry duke of Normandy, who succeeded to the throne of England, in 1154, under the title of Henry II. and by his wile’s influence became a formidable rival to the French king. Eleanor at length became jealous of Henry with the fair Rosamond and this produced the rebellion of her sons against the king, whose unnatural conduct has been imputed wholly to her instigation. She was at length seized, and imprisoned, just as she was attempting to escape to France. In confinement she remained several years, but on the accession of Richard I. in 1189, she was set at liberty, and was when he went upon his crusade, made regent of the kingdom. The zeal which she manifested for this prince led her to considerable exertions on his behalf: she went to Navarre, to procure him, for a wife, Berengaria, daughter of the king of the country; and when Richard on his return from Palestine, was imprisoned in Germany, she proceeded thither with a ransom, accompanied by the chief justiciary, in 1194. After his death she supported the succession of John her son, in prejudice of her grandson Arthur. She died in 1202; though, according to some writers, she took the veil this year, at the abbey of Fontevrault, and there finished her busy and chequered life in 1204.

In the midst of all this danger the queen appeared undismayed, issued her orders with tranquillity, animated her people to a steady resistance; and the more to excite the martial spirit of the nation, appeared on horseback at Tilbury, exhorting the soldiersto their duty, and promising to share with them the same dangers and the same fate. On this occasion the words of her address are said to have been these: “My loving people, we have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit ourselves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery; but assure you, I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people. Let tyrants fear I have always so behaved myself, that, under God, I have placed my chief strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and good-will of my subjects. And therefore I am coma amongst you at this time; not as for my recreation or sport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of the battle, to live or die amongst you all; to lay down, for my God, and for my kingdom, and for my people, my honour and my blood, even in the dust. I know I have but the body of a weak and feeble woman, but I have the heart of a king, and of a king: of England too and think foul scorn that Parma, or Spain, or any prince of Europe, should dare to invade the borders of my realms. To which, rather than any dishonour should grow by me, I myself will take up arms; I myself will be your general, judge, and rewarder of every one of your virtues in the field. I know already, by your forwardness, that you have deserved rewards and crowns; and we do assure you, on the word of a prince, they shall be duly paid you. In the mean time, my lieutenant-general shall be in my stead, than whom, never prince commanded a more, noble and worthy subject; not doubting by your obedience to my general, by your concord in the camp, and your valour in the field, we shall shortly have a famous victory over these enemies of my God, of my kingdom, and of my people.” On hearing this, an attachment to her person became a kind of enthusiasm among the soldiery; and they asked one another, whether it were possible that Englishmen could abandon the glorious cause, could display less fortitude than appeared in the female sex, or could ever by any dangers be induced to relinquish the defence of their heroic princess.

, a physician of Prussia, was born at Pletzaw, in the principality of Anhalt-Bernburgh, in 1689. He received the first rudiments of education at home under a private tutor, and was then sent to the university of Quedlinburgh, and thence to Jena, in 1709. His father intended him for the law; but a passion which he expressed for mathematical and physical researches, soon altered that design, and determined young Eller to follow the profession of physic. As Jena afforded no opportunity for the study of anatomy, he was removed to Halle, and soon after to Ley den, to finish his education under the celebrated Albinus, and the learned Sengerd and Boerhaave. Thence he passed to Amsterdam for the advantage of hearing the lectures of Rau, and examining the preparations of iluysch, and he followed Rau to Leyden, on the latter being appointed to succeed professor Bidloe. Having quitted Leyden, he spent some time in the mines of Saxony and Hartz, where he completed his chemical studies, and made astonishing progress in metallurgy and other parts of natural knowledge. On his visiting Paris, he attended several new courses in chemistry, under Lemery and Homberg, while he was pursuing his anatomical studies under the direction of Pecquet, du Verney, Winslow, and acquiring physiological and practical knowledge by the assistance of Astruc, Helvetius, Jussieu, &c. Though every branch of medical knowledge, and particularly surgery, was successfully practised in Paris, the reputation of Cheselden’s operation for the stone, and the ambition of being known to the immortal Newton, drew Mr. Eller to England, where he arrived in company with the earl of Peterborough, and remained five months. Leaving London in 1721, he returned to his own country, and was immediately honoured with the place of first physician to his sovereign the prince of Anhalt-Bernburgh; but he afterwards removed to Magdeburgh, where he soon attracted the notice of the king of Prussia, Frederick I. by whom he was made physician in ordinary, counsellor of the court, professor of the royal college of physic and surgery at Berlin, physician to the army, and perpetual dean of the superior college of medicine; employments equally honourable and lucrative. On the accession of Frederick II. he was farther promoted, and in 1755 was created a privy counsellor, the greatest honour to which he could possibly arrive, in his career as a scholar; and the same year he was appointed director of the academy called “Curieux de la nature,” where, according to the custom of the society, he was introduced by the name of Euphorbio. These employments and dignities he retained to his death in 1759. After his death was published a work by him, entitled “Observationes de cognoscendis et curandis morbis, praescrtim acutis, 1762, 8vo, which was translated into French by Le Roy, 1774, 12mo. This work is chiefly founded on the results of his long practice. He wrote also various papers in the Transactions of the Academy of Berlin, for the years 1748, 1749, and 1752, which with other pieces by him were collected and published, in German, under the title of” Physical, chemical, and medical treatises," Berlin, 1764, 2 vols. 8vo.

When the earl of Richmond came to the crown of England as Henry VII. bishop Elphinston was sent to his court, with other ambassadors, to arrange the terms of a truce, which was accordingly settled for three years on July 3, 1486. The discontent of the nobles threatening to involve the country in a civil war, Elphinston mediated between them and the king; but, finding it impossible to reconcile their jarring interests, he went to England about the latter end of 1487, to solicit the friendly interposition of Henry, as the ally of the Scotish king; and although he did not succeed as he wished and expected, king James was so sensible of the value of his services, that he advanced him in February 1488, to the office of lord high chancellor of Scotland, which he enjoyed until the king’s death, when he retired to his diocese. During the time he remained at Aberdeen, he was occupied in correcting the abuses that had prevailed in the diocese, and in composing a book of canon law. But he was not long permitted to enjoy the calm of retirement, and was again called to the parliament that assembled at Edinburgh, Oct. 6, 1488, to assist at the coronation of James IV. The earl of Bothwell, who then ruled as prime minister, suspecting that bishop Elphinston would not concur in an act of indemnity in favour of those who were concerned in the rebellion of the last reign, contrived to send him on an embassy to the court of Maximilian of Germany, with a proposal for a marriage between the king, and Margaret, the emperor’s daughter; but the mission was ineffectual, as that lady had been previously promised to the prince of Spain, and was married accordingly, before Elphinston arrived at Vienna. Yet although the bishop did not succeed in this embassy, he performed a lasting service to the country in his way home, by settling a treaty of peace and amity between the states of Holland and the Scotch. In 1492, when the bishop returned, he was made lord privy-seal, and the same year appointed one of the commissioners on the part of Scotland, for the prolongation of the truce with England. But the truce was not strictly observed by the Scotch, and a new commission was found to be necessary for the more effectual settlement of all differences. Bishop Elphinston was included in this commission, and the Scotch deputies meeting with the English at Edinburgh, June 2l, they agreed to prolong the truce till fhe last day of April, 1501.

, another artist, was born atMalines in the year 1527. Though he, has left chiefly pictures in distemper, yet he is allowed to be a very able artist. His principal works are in the church of St, llorabout. He has represented on a large canvas, the works of mercy. A multitude of figures, well designed, form the object of this grand composition, and among them he is said to have distinguished, with great spirit, the poor that deserve our compassion, from those who do not. His works are dispersed in the principal towns of Germany. At Hamburgh, in the church of St. Catharine, was a grand and learned composition representing the conversion of St. Paul. He painted for the prince of Orange, ill the castle of Antwerp, the history of David, from the designs of Lucas van Heere. De Vries painted the architecture of it, the friezes, the terms, and the other ornaments. The whole was executed in water-colours. Enghelrams died in, 1583, at the age of fifty-six.

After four years spent in his travels, he returned to Leyden in July 1612, about which time there was a design to invite him to England, and to settle a liberal stipend on him; but in the February following, he was chosen by the curators of that university, professor of the Arabic. and other oriental tongues, except the Hebrew, of which there was already a professor. He filled this chair with, great applause, and soon after set up, at an extraordinary expence, a press for the eastern languages, at which he printed a great many excellent works. October 1616, he married a daughter of a counsellor in the court of Holland, by whom he had seven children, three of whom survived him. In 1619 the curators of the university erected a second chair for the Hebrew language, of which they appointed him professor. In 1620 he was sent by the prince of Orange and the states of Holland into France, to solicit Peter du Moulin, or Andrew Rivet, to undertake the professorship of divinity at Leyden but, not prevailing then, he was sent again the year following, and after six months stay in France, procured Rivet, with the consent of the French churches, to remove to Leyden. Some time after his return the states of Holland appointed him their interpreter, and employed him to translate the letters they received from the several princes of Africa and Asia, and also to write letters in the -oriental languages; and the emperor of Morocco was so pleased with the purity of his Arabic style, that he shewed his letters to his nobles, as a great curiosity, for their elegance and propriety. In the midst, of these employments, he was seized with a contagious disease, then epidemical, of which he died Nov. 13, 1621, aged only forty years. The learned of his time lamented him, and wrote the highest eulogiums upon him, as indeed he well deserved, for he was not only most eminent as a scholar, but as a man of great piety and benevolence. Besides the advantageous ofler made him in Italy, he rejected another from the king of Spain and the archbishop of Seville, who invited him into that kingdom to explain certain Arabic inscriptions. Gerard John Vossius made his funeral oration in Latin, which was printed at Leyden, 1625, in 4to; and the same year were published at the same place, in 4to, Peter Scriverius’s “Manes Erpeniani, cum epicediis variorum.”

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.

, prince of Savoy, an illustrious general, was born in 1663, and descended from Carignan, one of the three branches of the house of Savoy. His father was Eugene Maurice, general of the Swiss and Grisons, governor of Champaigne in France, and earl of Soissons; his mother donna Olympia Mancini, neice to cardinal Mazarin. In 1670 he was committed to the tuition of a doctor of the Sorbonne; but his father dying before he was ten years of age, after the French king had given him the grant of an abbey as a step to a cardinal’s hat, and the government of Champaigne being given out of his family, occasioned an alteration in his intended profession; which was indeed by no means suitable to his genius, although he gave great and early hopes of proficiency in the belles lettres, and is said to have been particularly fond of Curtius and Cæsar. He was a youth of great spirit, and so jealous of the honour of his family, that when his mother was banished by the king’s order from the French court to the Low Countries, soon after her husband’s decease, he protested against the injustice of her banishment, and vowed eternal enmity to the authors and contrivers of it. After being for a time trained to the service of the church, for which he had no relish, he desired the king, who maintained him according to his quality, to give him some military employment. This, however, was denied him, sometimes on account of the weakness of his constitution, sometimes for want of a vacancy, or a war to employ the troops in. Apprehending from hence that he was not likely to be considered so much as he thought he deserved in France, and perceiving that he was involved in the disgrace of his mother, he resolved to retire to Vienna with one of his brothers, prince Philip, to whom the emperor’s ambassador had, in his master’s name, promised a regiment of horse. They were kindly received by the emperor; and Eugene presently became a very great favourite with his imperial majesty. He had in the mean time many flattering promises and invitations to return to France; but his fidelity to the emperor was unshaken, and he resolved to think no more of France, but to look on himself as a German, and to spend his life in the service of the house of Austria.

When these two brothers arrived in Germany, the Turks were descending upon the Imperialists, in order to make an irruption into the hereditary country. There prince Philip received his death’s wound by the fall of his horse, after he had gallantly behaved himself in a skirmish with the Turks, and left his command to his brother Eugene. This prince, in 1683, signalized himself at the raising of the siege of Vienna, where he made a great slaughter of the Turks, in the presence of John III. king of Poland, the elector of Bavaria, John George III. elector of Saxony, Charles V. duke of Lorrain, Frederic prince of Waldeck, Lewis William margrave of Baden, and many other great men, of whom he learned the art of war. After raising the siege of Vienna, it was resolved not to give the Turks time to recollect themselves. The project was laid to reduce the most important fortresses in Hungary: and the next year, 1684, he again distinguished himself at the sieges of Newhausel and Buda. He behaved so gallantly at the siege of Buda, that the duke of Lorrain wrote a letter in his commendation to the emperor. He was constantly in the trenches, and one of the first who entered the town sword in hand: and at their return to Vienna, when Newhausel was taken, the duke presented him to the emperor in these words, “May it please your majesty, this young Savoyard will some time or other be the greatest captain of the age:” which prophecy, it is universally agreed, was afterwards fulfilled. His imperial majesty caressed him upon all occasions, and had that firm and wellgrounded confidence in his merit, that when Buda was taken, and the army gone into winter quarters, he invested him with the chief command of his troops, during the absence of the supreme officers. Thus he rose daily in the favour of the court of Vienna; and every campaign was only a new step in his advancement to the first military offices.

The queen of England now concerted measures with the emperor for declaring and carrying on a war with France. Her Britannic majesty highly resented the indignity offered to herself, and the wrong done the house of Austria, by the duke of Anjou’s usurping the crown of Spain. She acted, therefore, to preserve the liberty and balance of Europe, to pull down the exorbitant power of France, and at the same time to revenge the affront offered her, by the king of France’s owning the pretended prince of Wales for king of her dominions. Eugene was made president of the council of war by the emperor, and all the world approved his choice; as indeed they well might, since this prince no sooner entered on the execution of his office than affairs took quite a new turn. The nature and limits of our plan will not suffer us to enlarge upon the many memorable actions which were performed by this great statesman and soldier during the course of this war, which proved so fatal to the glory of Louis XIV. The battles of Schellenburg, Blenheim, Turin, &c. are so particularly related in almost every history, that we shall not insist upon them here. In 1710 the enemies of Eugene, who had vowed his destruction, sent him a letter, with a paper inclosed, which was poisoned to such a degree, that it made his highness, with two or three more who did but handle it, ready to swoon; and killed a dog immediately, upon his swallowing it after it was greased. The next year, 1711, in April, the emperor Joseph died of the small-pox; when Eugene marched into Germany, to secure the election of his brother to the throne. The same year, the grand visier sent one of his agas in embassy to his highness, who gave him a very splendid audience at Vienna, and received from him a letter written with the grand visier’s own hand, wherein he styles his highness “the great pattern of Christian princes, president of the Aulic council of war to the emperor of the Romans, the most renowned and most excellent among the Christian princes, first peer among all the nations that believe in Christ, and best beloved visier of the emperor of the Romans.”

In 1713, though forced to act only defensively on the Rhine against the French, who now threatened to overrun the empire, he nevertheless so signalized himself by his vigilance and conduct, that he obliged them to spend one whole summer in taking Landau and Friburg. March 6, 1714, he concluded with marshal Villars, at Rastadt, preliminary articles of a general peace between the empire and France; which were signed by him, as his imperial majesty’s plenipotentiary, Sept. the 27th following, in a solemn treaty of peace, at Baden in Ergau: in which treaty he is entitled “The most high prince and lord Eugene, prince of Savoy and Piedmont, knight of the golden fleece, counsellor of state to his sacred imperial majesty, president of the council of war, lieutenant-general and marshal of the holy Roman empire.” Upon his return to Vienna, he was received with the loudest acclamations of joy by the people, and with the most cordial affection by the emperor, who presented him with a fine sword richly adorned with diamonds. He now seemed to have some respite from the fatigues of war but neither was this to last long: for, though peace was concluded with France, yet war broke out on the side of the Turks, who in 1716 began to make extraordinary preparations. Eugene was sent with the command of the imperial army into Hungary, attacked the Turks in their camp, and obtained a complete victory over them. He took the important fortress of Temeswaer, after the Turks bad been in possession of it 164 years; and next invested Belgrade, which he also took.

In December 1640, he entered the Middle Temple, and at this time his father died of the dropsyin his fiftythird year. The ominous appearance of public affairs in 1641 inclined him to pass some time abroad, and accordingly he set out for Holland, after having witnessed the trial of the earl of Stratford. Having viewed what was most remarkable in the principal towns of Holland, with Brussels, Bruges, &c. and paid a visit to the prince of Orange’s camp before Genap, he returned to Dover by the way of Dunkirk in October. In 1642 he went to Brentford to offer his services to his majesty Charles I. and was assigned to ride volunteer in prince Rupert’s troop; but the king marching to Gloucester, and by that step leaving Surrey and Sussex, where Mr. Evelyn’s estate lay, exposed to the rebels, he was advised to travel, and having obtained his majesty’s leave, went in July 1643 to France, and thence to Italy, in which he spe^t above a year. A thirst of knowledge of every kind was his ruling passion; his mind too at this early period of life, was not unfurnished with science, and he could now contemplate, with consequent improvement, the antiquities, arts, religion, laws, and learning and customs of the countries through which he passed. He has, accordingly, left a large and minute account of what he thought worthy of observation, and nothing seems to have escaped him. At Padua he purchased the rare tables of veins and nerves of Dr. John Athelsteinus Leonaenas; and caused him to prepare a third of the lungs, liver, and nervi sextipar with the gastric veins, which he sent into England, being the first that had been seen here, and which he afterwards presented to the royal society. Another instance of his diligence and curiosity Mr. Boyle has recorded in his works (vol. II. p. 206), who received from Mr. Evelyn, whom he consulted on the occasion, a valuable and minute account of the method by which magazines of snow are preserved in Italy, for the use of the tables of the luxurious. During his stay at Rome, Mr. Evelyn informs us of his having an opportunity of learning the true sentiments of the popish party, on the execution of archbishop Laud, so frequently accused in this country of an inclination towards popery. “I was at Rome,” says he, “in the company of divers of the English fathers, when the news of archbishop Laud’s sufferings, and a copy of his sermon, came thither. They read the sermon, and commented upon it, with no small satisfaction and contempt; and looked on him, as one that was a great enemy to them, and stood in their way, whilst one of the blackest crimes imputed to him was, his being popishly affected.”

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.”

, third son of the former, was born at his father’s house at Sayes-court, near Deptford, January 14, 1654-5, and was there very tenderly educated in his infancy, being considered (after the death of his brother Richard Evelyn, January 27, 1657, who, though but five years of age, was esteemed a kind of prodigy) as the heir of the family. He was likewise universally admired for the pregnancy of his parts, of which he gave a pleasing proof in a Latin letter written to his father in Dec. 1665, and which induced his father to send him in 1666 to Oxford, where he remained in the house of the ingenious and learned Dr. Ralph Bathurst, then president of Trinity-college, before he was admitted a gentleman-commoner, which was in Easter term 1663. It is not clear at what time he left Oxford; but Mr. Wood seems to be positive that he took no degree there, but returned to his father’s house, where he prosecuted his studies under the directions of that great man. There is, however, good reason to believe that it was during his residence in Trinity-college, and when he was not above fifteen years of age, that he wrote that elegant Greek poem which is prefixed to the second edition of the Sylva, and is a noble proof of the strength of his genius, and wonderful progress in learning in the early part of his life. In Nov. 1675, he set out for Paris with lord Berkley, ambassador to the French court; and in May 1676, returned to England. He discovered his proficiency soon afterwards, both in the learned and modern languages, by his elegant translations, as well as his intimate acquaintance with the muses, in some original poems which were very justly admired. If we consider the father’s turn of mind, we need not wonder that he should employ his pen first upon gardening, especially in the easy way of translation, and from a book so justly as well as generally admired as the French Jesuit’s has ever been. The title of our author’s little treatise was, 1. “Of gardens, four books, first written in Latin verse, by Renatus Rapinus; and now made English by John Evelyn, esq.” 1673, 8vo. His father annexed the second book of this translation to his “Sylva,” and it must be allowed that the sense is very faithfully rendered, and the poetry is more easy and harmonious than could have been expected from a youth of his age. 2. “The life of Alexander the great,” translated from the Greek of Plutarch, printed in the fourth volume of Plutarch’s lives by several hands. 3. “The history of the grand visiers, Mahomet and Achmet Coprogli; of the three last grand signiors, their sultanas, and chief favourites; with the most secret intrigues of the seraglio,” &c. Lond. 1677, 8vo. This was a translation from the French, and has been esteemed an entertaining and instructive history. Our author wrote also several poems occasionally, of which two are printed in Dryden’s Miscellanies, and more are in Nichols’s Collection of Poems. The one entitled “On virtue,” has been esteemed excellent in its kind by the best judges and the other, styled “The remedy of love,” has been also much admired. On Feb. 24, 1679-80, he married Martha, daughter and coheiress of Richard Spenser, esq. Turkey merchant, whose widow married sir John Stonehouse, of Radley, in Berks, bart. Mr. Evelyn, who had a turn for business as well as study, and had been introduced to the prince of Orange in 1688, was in 1690 made one of the chief clerks of the treasury, and quitting that situation in 1691, became one of the commissioners of the revenue in Ireland, which country he visited in 1692. He would probably have been advanced to higher employments if he had not been cut off in thd flower of his age, dying at his house in Berkeleystreet, London, March 24, 1698, in the forty-fifth year of his age. He had by his wife two sons and three daughters. His eldest son, Richard, -died an infant at Sayes-court, as did his eldest daughter Martha Mary. His second daughter, Elizabeth, married Simon Harcourt, esq. eldest son and heir of Simon lord viscount Harcourt, lord high chancellor of Great Britain, by whom she became mother to the first earl Harcourt. Jane, his third daughter, died an infant at his house in the parish of St. Martin’s in the fields, and was interred at Kensington. John Evelyn, his second and only surviving son, born at Sayes-court, March 2, 1681, succeeded to his grandfather’s estate. He was married at Lambeth chapel, September 18,- 1705, to Anne, daughter of Edward Boscawen, of Worthivil, co. Cornwall, esq. He was by letters-patent bearing date July 30, 1713, created a baronet. This worthy gentleman, who inherited the virtue and learning as well as the patrimony of his ancestors, made several alterations and additions to the family-seat at Wotton, in 1717, one of which was the erecting a beautiful library, forty-five feet long, fourteen feet broad, and as many high, for the reception of that large ajtd curious collection of books made by his grandfather, his father, and himself, and where they still remain. He was long one of the commissioners of the customs, a fellow of the royal society, and was succeeded by his eldest son, John, who dying in 1767, was succeeded by sir Frederick Evelyn, on whose death, in 1812, the title descended to Mr. John Evelyn, the grandson of Charles, a younger son of the first baronet of the Wotton branch.

, a very eminent lawyer, and upright magistrate, was born at Gripskerque, in the island of Walcheren, in 1462, and studied law at Louvain under Arnold de Bek, and Peter de Themis, whose praises for profound knowledge he has celebrated in his “Topica juris.” In 1493 he took his doctor’s degree, and acquired so much reputation that Erasmus, in a letter to Bernard Buchon, pronounces him a man born for the good and service of his country. Everard’s first public situation was at Brussels, where he was appointed judge in ecclesiastical causes under Henry de Berg, bishop and prince of Cambray: he was then, although not in any of the ecclesiastical orders, presented to the deanry of the collegiate church of St. Peter of Anderlechten, in that city. In 1505 being invited to Mechlin, he was first appointed assessor of the grand Belgic council, and afterwards left that place to become president of the supreme council of Holland and Zealand. During the eighteen years that he executed this important trust, his whole conduct was so marked by profound knowledge, and upright decision, that in 1528, the emperor Charles V. recalled him to Mechlin to exercise the same functions. All who speak of him represent him as a man totally uninfluenced by any interest, or motives of favour, who admitted no solicitations from power or friendship, and administered strict justice without ever giving the laws an inclination that they did not fairly bear, whether the party concerned was poor or rich. He died at Mechlin, Aug. 9, 1532, in his seventieth year. His works were, 1. “Topica juris, sive loci argumentorum legales,” of which he printed the first part or century, at Louvain, in 1516, fol. This he afterwards reviewed and enlarged, and it was published by his sons in 1552, at Louvain, and reprinted in 1568 and 1579, at Lyons, and in 1591 at Francfort. It was afterwards abridged by Abraham Marconet, and published in that form at Magdeburgh, 1655, 12mo. 2. “Consilia, sive responsa juris,” Louvain, 1554, fol. and at Antwerp, 1577, enlarged and corrected by Molengrave. There are also other editions of 1643, &c. By his wife Elissa Bladelle of Mechlin, he left three daughters, one of whom, Isabella, whq became a nun, was celebrated for her learning and knowledge of the Latin language, and five sons, all of considerable eminence in the literary world; Peter Jerome, a religious of the order of the Premonstratenses, a doctor of the civil and canon law at Louvain, and afterwards abbot of St. Mary of Middlebourgh; Nicolas, first, president of the supreme council of Friesland, and afterwards successor to his father in the office of president of the grand council of Mechlin Nicolas Grudius Adrian Marius, and John Secundus. Of these last three, some notice will be taken here, as more suitable to the family connection than under the articles Grudius and Secundus, where they have hitherto been placed.

M. de St. Evremond distinguished himself in the army by his politeness and wit, as well as by his bravery; and his accomplishments procured him the esteem of the mareschals d'Etrées and Grammont, of viscount Turenne, of the count de Moissens, afterwards mareschal de Albret, of count Palluau, afterwards marescUal de Clerembaut, and of the marquis de Crequi, who also became a mareschal of France. He had a share in the confidence of these distinguished noblemen, and they always testified their friendship towards him. In 1640, M. de St. Evremond was at the siege of Arras; and, in the ensuing year, he obtained a post in the horse, which gave him fresh opportunities of signalizing himself. Soon after the duke of Enguien, afterwards prince of Condé, became so much pleased with his conversation, that he made him lieutenant of his guards, that he might have him constantly near him. He often read with him and sometimes communicated to him his most secret projects, and entrusted him with affairs of the greatest moment. After the campaign of Rocroy, in 1643, M. de St. Evremond wrote a kind of satire against the French academy, which was published in 1650, and entitled, “The Comedy of the Academicians for reforming the French tongue .”

In 1644 he made the campaign of Fribourg; and the following year he received a dangerous wound at the battle of Notlingen. Being ordered to head a squadron, and to post himself below an eminence which was possessed by the enemy, he was there exposed, for three hours together, to all the fire of their small shot, and a battery of four field-pieces; so that he lost there most of his men, and was himself wounded in the left knee. His wound was so dangerous, that for six weeks he was supposed to be past recovery; but, by the skill of his surgeons, and the excellency of his constitution, his cure was at length effected. Thirty years after, however, his wound opened afresh in, London; but, being properly treated, he felt no inconvenience from it, excepting that his left leg was somewhat weaker than the other. After the taking of Fumes, in 1646, the duke of Enguien appointed M. de St. Evremond to carry the news of it to court; and having, at the same time, opened to him his design of besieging Dunkirk, charged him to propose it to cardinal Mazarin, and to settle with him every thing which was necessary for the execution of that undertaking. M. de St. Evremond managed this business with so much dexterity, that he prevailed on the prime minister to agree to every thing which was required by the duke of Enguien. But, in 1648, he lost the post which he had near that nobleman, now, by the death of his father, become prince of Conde. This prince took great delight in discovering what was ridiculous in the characters of his acquaintance; and often indulged himself in laughing at their foibles in private, in company with the count de Moissens and M. de St. Evremond. But the prince of Conde, who took great pleasure in ridiculing others, was not fond of being ridiculed himself. He was informed, that St. Evremond and the count had found out, that there was somewhat ridiculous even in him; that his extreme solicitude to discover the foibles of others was in itself a species of the ridiculous; and that they sometimes amused themselves with laughing at his highness. This excited in him so much resentment, that he took from M. de St. Evremond the lieutenancy of his guards, and would have no farther correspondence with the count de Moissens. It is, however, supposed, that a reconciliation would have been effected, if they had not been separated by the civil war, which about this time took place in France. When the prince of Conde" returned into France, after the Pyre nean treaty, M. de St. Evremond went to wait upon him, and was very favourably received. The prince offered him his protection; and afterwards, on several occasions, gave him assurances of his affection and esteem.

In 1649 M. de St. Evremond went into Normandy, to visit his relations. About this time the parliament of Paris had declared against cardinal Mazarin; and the duke of Beaufort, the prince of Conti, and the duke of Longueville, following their example, the latter retired to his government of Normandy, where he assembled the nobility, and very earnestly endeavoured to prevail on St. Evremond to engage in his party. With this view he was offered the command of the artillery; but this office he declined; and has given a facetious account of his refusal in a satirical piece written by him about this time, entitled, “The duke of Longueville’s Retreat to his Government of Normandy.” He says, “They had a mind to bestow the command of the ordnance on St. Evremond; and, to speak the truth, considering his affection for St Germain’s (where the king then was), he would have been glad to have served the court, by accepting a considerable employment, of the business of which he knew nothing. But, having promised count de Harcourt to take no employment, he kept his word, not only from a principle of honour, but that he might not be like the Normans, most of whom had broken their promise. From these considerations, he was induced generously to refuse the money that was offered to him, but which would never have been paid him.”

During his stay in Holland, St. Evremond became acquainted with most of the foreign ministers and persons of distinction there and also visited several eminent literary men, who happened then to be at the Hague particularly Heinsius, Vossius, and Spinoza. Of the latter he gave the following account to Mr. Des Maizeaux: lt He was,“said he,” of a middle stature, and pleasing countenance. His learning, modesty, and disinterestedness, made him esteemed by all the ingenious persons then at the Hague. It did not appear, from his ordinary conversation, that he had those sentiments which were afterwards found in his posthumous works." About 1667, some applications were made to the French king, by means of M. de St. Evremond’s friends, particularly of the marquis de Lionne, to induce that monarch to permit him to return to his own country but these applications were not successful. In 1668, the prince of Tuscany arrived in Holland and, as he designed to make some stay at the Hague, he hired a house there: but it happened, that, in the house which was taken for him, M. de St. Evremond had an apartment, as had also some other persons of distinction. They were, therefore, obliged to seek for other lodgings; but, when St. Evremond was preparing to remove like the rest, the prince not only desired him to stay, but likewise to use his table whilst he continued at the Hague. He also ever afterwards testified his esteem for him, and sent him every year a present of some of the best Italian wines.

, a man of considerable learning, but unfortunately connected with the French prophets, was a native of Switzerland, whither his family, originally Italians, were obliged to take refuge, for religion’s sake, in the beginning of the reformation. He was born Feb. 16, 1664. His father intending him for the study of divinity, he was regularly instructed in Greek and Latin, philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy; learned a little of the Hebrew tongue, and began to attend the lectures of the divinity professors of Geneva: but his mother being averse to this, he was left to pursue his own course, and appears to have produced the first fruits of his studies in some letters on subjects of astronomy sent to Cassini, the French king’s astronomer. In 1682 he went to Paris, where Cassini received him very kindly. In the following year he returned to Geneva, where he became particularly acquainted with a count Fenil, who formed the design of seizing, if not assassinating the prince of Orange, afterwards William III. This design Faccio having learned from him communicated it to bishop Burnet about 1686, who of course imparted it to the prince. Bishop Burnet, in the first letter of his Travels, dated September 1685, speaks of him as an incomparable mathematician and philosopher, who, though only twenty-one years old, was already become one of the greatest men of his age, and seemed born to carry learning some sizes beyond what it had hitherto attained. Whilst Dr. Calamy studied at the university of Utrecht, Faccio resided in that city as tutor to two young gentlemen, Mr. Ellys and Mr. Thornton, and conversed freely with the English. At this time he was generally esteemed to be a Spinozist; and his discourse, says Dr. Calamy, very much looked that way. Afterwards, it is probable, that he was professor of mathematics at Geneva. In 1687 he came into England, and was honoured with the friendship of the most eminent mathematicians of that age. Sir Isaac Newton, in particular, was intimately acquainted with him. Dr. Johnstone of Kidderminster had in his possession a manuscript, written by Faccio, containing commentaries and illustrations of different parts of sir Isaac’s Principia. About 1704 he taught mathematics in Spitafnelds, and obtained about that time a patent fora species of jewel-watches. When he unfortunately attached himself to the new prophets, he became their chief secretary, and committed their warnings to writing, many of which were published. The connexion of such a man with these enthusiasts, and their being supported, likewise, by another person of reputed abilities, Maximilian Misson, a French refugee, occasioned a suspicion, though without reason, that there was some deep contrivance and design in the affair. On the second of December, 1707, Faccio stood in the pillory at Charing-cross, with the following words affixed to his hat: “Nicolas Fatio, convicted for abetting and favouring Elias Marion, in his wicked and counterfeit prophecies, and causing them to be printed and published, to terrify the queen’s people.” Nearly at the same time, alike sentence was executed upon Elias Marion, one of the pretended prophets, and John d'Ande, another of their abettors. This mode of treatment did not convince Faccio of his error; and, indeed, the delusion of a man of such abilities, and simplicity of manners, was rather an object of compassion than of public infamy and punishment. Oppressed with the derision and contempt thrown upon himself and his party, he retired at last into the country, and spent the remainder of a long life in silence and obscurity. He died at Worcester in 1753, about eightynine years old. When he became the dupe of fanaticism, he seems to have given up his philosophical studies and connections. Faccio, besides being deeply versed in all branches of mathematical literature, was a great proficient in the learned and oriental languages. He had read much, also, in books of alchymy. To the last, he continued a firm believer in the reality of the inspiration of the French prophets. Dr. Wall of Worcester, who was well acquainted with him, communicated many of the above particulars to Dr. Johnstone, in whose hands were several of Faccio’s fanatical manuscripts and journals; and one of his letters giving an account of count Fenil’s conspiracy, and some particulars of the author’s family was communicated to the late Mr. Seward, and published in the second volume of his Anecdotes. In the Republic of Letters, vol. I. we find a Latin poem by Faccio, in honour of sir Isaac Newton; and in vol. XVIII. a communication on the rules of the ancient Hebrew poesy, on which subject he appears to have corresponded with Whiston. There are also many of his original papers and letters in the British Museum; and among them a Latin poem, entitled “N. Facii Duellerii Auriacus Throno-Servatus,” in which he claims to himself the merit of having saved king William from the above-mentioned conspiracy.

Hitherto he had acquitted himself with undaunted bravery, and with great and deserved applause from his party. Had he stopped here, or at such times at least as the king’s concessions were in reason and equity a just ground for peace (which was more than once), he might have been honourably ranked among the rest of those patriots, who took up arms only for the redress of grievances. But his boundless ambition, and his great desire to rule, made him weakly engage, with the utmost zeal, in the worst and most exceptionable parts of the rebellion. When the parliamentarians thought fit to new-model their army, and to lay aside the earl of Essex, they unanimously voted sir Thomas Fairfax to be their general in his room, he being ready to undertake or execute any thing that he was ordered. To him Oliver Cromwell was joined with the title of lieutenant-general, but with intention of being his governor, exercising the superiority of deep art over a comparatively weak mind. Sir Thomas, being thus voted commander-in-chief of the parliament’s army on the 21st of January, 1644-5, received orders from the parliament speedily to come up from the north to London, where he arrived privatcsly, Feb. 18, and, the next day, was brought by four of the members into the house of commons, where he was highly complimented by the speaker, and received his commission of general. The 15th of the same month, an ordinance was made, for raising and maintaining of forces under his command: it having been voted, a few days before, that he should nominate all the commanders in his army, to be taken out of any of the other armies, with the approbation of both houses. March 25, the parliament ordered him 1500l. The 3d of April, he went from London to Windsor, where he appointed the general rendezvous and continued there till the last day of that month, new-framing and modelling the army or rather Cromwell doing it in his name. April 16, he was appointed, by both houses, governor of Hull. In the mean time, Taupton, in Somersetshire, one of the parliament’s garrisons, being closely besieged by the royalists, sir Thomas Fairfax received orders to hasten to its relief, with 8000 horse and foot. He began his march May 1, and by the 7th had reached Blandford in Dorsetshire: but, the king taking the field from Oxford, with strong reinforcements brought by the princes Rupert and Maurice, sir Thomas was ordered by the parliament to send 3000 foot and 1500 horse to relieve Taunton, and himself to return, with the rest of Juis forces, to join Oliver Cromwell and major-general Browne, and attend the king’s motions. The 14th of May he was come back as far as Newbury; where having rested three nights, he went and faced Dennington-castle, and took a few prisoners. Thence he proceeded to lay siege to Oxford, as he was directed by the committee of both kingdoms, and sat down before it the 22d. But, before he had made any progress in this siege, he received orders to draw near the king, who had taken Leicester by storm, May 31, and was threatening the eastern associated counties. Sir Thomas therefore rising from before Oxford, June 5, arrived the same day at Marsh-Gibbon, in Buckinghamshire on the llth he was at Wootton, and the next day at Gilsborough, in Northamptonshire where he kept his head-quarters till the 14th, when he engaged the king’s forces, at the fatal and decisive battle of Naseby, and obtained a complete victory. The king, after that, retiring into Wales, sir Thomas went and laid siege on the 16th to Leicester, which surrendered on the 18th. He proceeded, on the 22d, to Warwick; and thence (with 'a disposition either to go over the Severn towards the king, or to move westward as he should be ordered) he marched on through Gloucestershire towards Marlborough, where he arrived the 28th. Here he received orders from the parliament, to hasten to the relief of Taunton, which was besieged again by the royalists; letters being sent at the same time into the associated comities for recruits, and tfce arrears of pay for his army; but on his arrival at Bland ford, he was informed, that lord Goring had drawn off his horse from before Taunton, and left his foot in the passage to block up that place, marching himself with the horse towards Langport. Sir Thomas Fairfax, therefore, advancing against him, defeated him there on the 10th of July; and the next day^ went and summoned Bridgewater, which was taken by storm on the 22d. He became also master of Bath the 30th of the same month; and then laid close siege to Sherborne-castle, which was likewise taken by storm August 15. And, having besieged the city of Bristol from the 22d of August to the 10th of September, it was surrendered to him by prince Rupert. After this laborious expedition, the general rested some days at Bath, having sent out parties to reduce the castles of the Devises and Berkley, and other garrisons between the west and London; and on the 23d moved from Bath to the Devises, and thence to Warminster on the 27th, where he stayed till October 8, when he went to Lyme in Dorsetshire. From this place he came to Tiverton, of which he became master on the 19th; and then, as he could not undertake a formal siege in the winter season, he blocked up the strong city of Exeter, which did not surrender till the 13th of April following: in the mean time, he took Dartmouth by storm, January 18, 1645-6; and several forts and garrisons at different times. Feb. 16, he defeated thelord Hopton near Torrington. This nobleman retreating with his broken forces into Cornwall, sir Thomas followed him: in pursuit of whom he came to Launceston Feb. 25, and to Bodmin March 2. On the 4th, Mount Edgecornbe was surrendered to him; and Fowey about the same time. At last the parliament army approaching Truro, where lord Hopton had his head-quarters, and he being so hemmed in as to remain without a possibility of escaping, sir Thomas, on the 5th of March, sent and offered him honourable terms of capitulation, which after some delays, lord Hoptoit accepted, and a treaty was signed by commissioners on both sides, March 14 in pursuance of which, the royalists, consisting of above 5000 horse, were disbanded and took an oath never to bear arms against the parliament. But, before the treaty was signed, lord Hopton, and Arthur lord Capel, retired to Scilly, whence they passed into Jersey, April 17, with Charles prince of Wales, sir Kdtvard Hyde, and other persons of distinction. Thus the king’s army in the west being entirely dispersed by the vigilance and wonderful success of general Fairfax, he returned, March 31, to the siege of Exeter, which surrendered to him upon articles, the 13th of April, as already observed: and with the taking of this city ended his western expedition. He then marched, with wonderful speed, towards Oxford, the most considerable garrison remaining in the king’s hands, and arriving on the 1st of May, with his army, began to lay siege to it. The king, who was there, afraid of being enclosed, privately, and in disguise, departed thence on the 27th of April; and Oxford surrendered upon articles, June 24, as did Wallingford, July 22. After the reduction of these places, sir Thomas went and besieged Ragland-castle, in Monmouthshire, the property of Henry Somerset, marquis of Worcester, which yielded Aug. 19. His next employment was to disband major-general Massey’s brigade, which he did at the Devises. About that time he was seized with a violent fit of the ston, unjder which he laboured many days. As soon as he was recovered, he took a journey to London; where he arrived November 12, being met some miles off by great crowds of people, and the city militia. The next day, both houses of parliament agreed to congratulate his coming to town, and to give him thanks for his faithful services and wise conduct: which they did the day following, waiting upon him at his house in Queen-street*. Hardly had he had time to rest, when he was called upon to convoy the two hundred thousand pounds that had been granted to the Scotish army; the price of their delivering up their sovereign king Charles. For that purpose he set out from London, December 18, with a sufficient force, carrying at the same time 50,000l. for his own army. The king being delivered by the Scots to the parliament’s commissioners at Newcastle, Jan. 30, 1646-7, sir Thomas went and met him, Feb. 15, beyond Nottingham, in his way to Holmby; and his majesty stopping his horse, sir Thomas alighted, and kissed his hand; and afterwards mounted, and discoursed with him as they rode along. The 5th of March following, after long debate in parliament, he was toted general of the forces that were to be continued. He came to Cambridge the 12th of the same month, where he was highly caressed and complimented, and created master of arts.

In 1751 he appeared among the poets who lamented the death of Frederick prince of Wales, in a poem published at Edinburgh, which probably gratified the humble expectations of a friendly circle, without procuring him much encouragement. He is said, however, to have followed up his first effort, by some small pieces sen to that accustomed repository of early talent, the Gentleman’s Magazine. Mr. Clarke has pointed out “The Chaplain’s petition to the Lieutenants in the ward-room,” the “Description of a ninety-gun Ship,” and some lines “On the uncommon scarcity of Poetry.” Mr. Clarke has likewise presented his readers with a whimsical little poem, descriptive of the abode and sentiments of a midshipman, which was one of Falconer’s early productions; and offers some reasons for being of opinion that he was the author of the popular song “Cease, rude Boreas.”

Being in England at the breaking-out of the civil war, he declared early for the crown, and was employed in several important matters of state. In 1644, attending the court at Oxford, he had the degree of D. C. L. conferred upon him, and was appointed secretary at war to the prince of Wales, whom he attended into the western parts of England, and thence into the islands of Scilly and Jersey. In 1648 he was appointed treasurer to the navy under prince Rupert, which office he held till 1650, when he was created a baronet, and sent to Madrid to represent the necessitous situation of his master, and to beg a temporary assistance from Philip IV. He was then sent for to Scotland, and served there in the capacity of secretary of state to the great satisfaction of all parties, although he took neither covenant nor engagement . About this time he was recommended by the king to the York party, who received him with great kindness, and entrusted him with the broad seal and signet. In 1651 he was taken prisoner at the battle of Worcester, and committed to close custody in London; but, having contracted a dangerous sickness, he had liberty allowed him, upon giving bail, to go for the recovery of his health to any place he should chtise, provided he stirred not five miles thence without leave from the parliament. In 1654 he was at Tankersley park in Yorkshire, which place he hired of his friend lord Sirafford, to whom he dedicated his translation of the “Lusiad of Camoens,” written during his residence there. In February 1659 (under pretence of travelling abroad with the eldestson of Philip earl of Pembroke), he obtained his bail to be returned, and repaired to king Charles II. at Breda, who knighted him in April following; and appointed him master of requests, and secretary of the Latin tongue.

, a celebrated physician, was born at Turin in 1675. He studied philosophy and the belles lettres in the university of his native city, with distinguished success, and then passed to the medical classes, in which he gave farther evidence of his abilities, and obtained his degree of doctor. He was enabled, through the liberality of his prince, to traverse France, Germany, and the Low Countries, every where making valuable additions to his knowledge. On his return to Turin, he commenced public teacher of anatomy, and afterwards was successively chosen to fill the chairs of theoretical and practical medicine. In the interim the king of Sardinia appointed him physician to the prince of Piedmont, his son. This office, however, did not interfere with his labours in the university, where he was still distinguished near the middle of the succeeding century, notwithstanding his advanced age. The period of his death is not known.

His works are: 1. “Notse ad Juveualis et Persu Satyras,” Lond. 1612, 8vo. The third edition was printed at London, in 1620, under the following title “Junii Juvenalis et Auli Persii Flacci Satyrse cum annotationibus ad marginem, quse obscurissima quseque dilucidare possint. Tertia Editio, prioribus multo emendatior et auctior.” book is dedicated to Henry prince of Wales, who received the author very kindly, and in some measure commanded him to write such comments on all the Latin poets. 2. “Notae ad Seneca? Tragcedias,” Lond. 1613, 8vo. The third edition was printed at the same place, in 1634, under the following title: “L. et M, Annaei Senecte Trngccdisc. Post omnes omnium editiones recensionesque editio tertia auctior et emendatior, opera et studio Thorn te Farnabii.” To this edition is prefixed a privilege granted him from the king, dated October 1634, for the sole printing of that, and several other of his works, for one-and-twenty years. The book is accompanied with commendatory verses, by Daniel Heinsius, Richard Andrews, M. D. Hugh Holland, Laurence Whitaker, and Na, Tomkins. 3. “Notrc ad Martialis Epigrammata,” Lond. 1615, 8vo. Other editions in 12 mo, were afterwards printed, both at London and Geneva. These notes were dedicated to sir Robert Killegrew. 4. “Lucani Pharsalia, sive de Bello Civili Caesaris et Pompeii Libri X. Adjeclis ad marginem notis T. Farnabii, quae loca obscuriora illustrent,” London, 1618, 8vo. Dedicated to sir Francis Stuart. To this edition are prefixed commendatory verses by R. A. M. D.and Mr. Selden. 5. “Index Rhetoricus Scholis et Institutioni tenerioris Ætatis accommodatus,” Lond. 1625, 8vo. To an edition published in the same city, in 1646, were added, “Formulae Oratoriae et Index Poeticus.” The fifth edition was printed at London, in 1654, under the following title: “Index Rhetoricus et Oratorius, Scholis et Institutioni tenerioris Ætatis accommodatus. Cui adjiciuntur Formula; Oratoriae et Index Poeticus. Opera et studio Thomae Farnabii. Editio quinta, prioribus emendation” This book is dedicated to Dominico Molino, Senator of Venice. The Index Poeticus, annexed to this, was first printed at London in 1634. In the preface to the “Index Rhetoricus,” Mr. Farnabie informs his readers, that he had published, about twenty years before, his Scheme of Tropes, in verse, without his nume which, meeting with success, was claimed by a certain plagiary upon which our author composed his “Index Rhetoricus.” Mons. Gibert speaks of this work with commendation, and observes that Mons. BaiHet has passed a favourable judgment upon it. Father Vavasseur, though he afiirms that Mr. Farnabie' s Latin is sometimes exceptionable, allows him, nevertheless, to have been a diligent and learned writer. 6. “Florilcgium Epigrammatum Graecorum, eorumque Latino versu a variis redditorum,” London, 1629, 8vo, &c. 7. “Notae ad Virgilium,” London, 1634, 8vo. 8. Ci Systeraa Grammaticum,“London, 1641, 8vo. King Charles the First ordered Mr. Farnabie to write a Latin grammar, for the use of all the schools, when that which had been established by law, and against which many complaints had been made, was to be reformed. 9.” Notae in Ovidii Metamorphoses,“Paris, 1637, folio; and London, in 12mo, 1677, &c. 10.” Phrasiologia Anglo-Latina,“London, 8vo. 11.” Tabula? Graeca? Linguae,“London, 4to. 12.” Syntaxis,“London, 8vo. 13.” Notse in Terentium.“Our author had finished his notes upon Terence only as far as the fourth comedy, when he died. But Dr. Meric Casaubon completed the two last comedies, and published the whole at London, 1651, 12mo. Anthony Wood hath added to the catalogue,” Epistolac variae ad doctissimos Viros." But this article does not refer to a distinct publication, but to the letters occasionally written by Farnabie to learned men, and particularly to Vossius.

, knight, and knight-banneret, a valiant and renowned general, governor, and nobleman in France, during our conquests in that kingdom, under king Henry IV. V. and VI. of England, and knight-companion of the most noble order of the garter, has been supposed, from the title of his French barony, and from his name being so often corruptly mentioned in the French histories^ owing to his long residence, and many engagements in the wars there, to have been born in France, at least of French extraction. Others, allowing him to have been a native of England, have no less erroneously fixed hist birth-place in Bedfordshire; but it is well known that he was descended of an ancient and famous English family in the county of Norfolk, which had flourished there and in other parts of the kingdom, in very honourable distinction, before the conquest: and from a train of illustrious ancestors, many of them dignified with the honour of knighthood, invested with very eminent employments, and possessed of extensive patrimonies. But one of the principal branches being seated at Castre in Fleg near Great Yarmouth in that county, which estate descending to these ancestors, he afterwards adorned with a noble family seat, it is presumed he was born therej or in Yarmouth. His father was John Fastolff, esq. of that town, a man of considerable account, especially for his public benefactions, pious foundations, &c. His mother was Mary, daughter of Nicholas Park, esq. and married to sir Richard Mortimer, of Attleburgh; and this their son was born in the latter end of king Edward the Illd’s reign. As he died at the age of eighty, in 1459, his birth could not happen later than 1378. It may fairly be presumed he was grounded as well in that learning and other accomplishments which afterwards, improved by his experience and sagacity, rendered him so famous in war and peace, as in those virtuous and religious principles which governed his actions to the last. His father dying before he was of age, the care of his person and estate were committed to John duke of Bedford, who was afterwards the most wise and able regent of France we ever had there; and he was the last ward which that duke had: others, indeed, say that he was trained up in the Norfolk family, which will not appear improbable when we consider that it was not unusual in those times for young noblemen whilst under wardship to be trained under others, especially ministers of state, in their houses and families, as in academies of behaviour, and to qualify them for the service of their country at home pr abroad. But if he was under Thomas Mowbray duke pf Norfolk, while he enjoyed that title, it could be but one year, that duke being banished the kingdom by king Richard II. in 1398, though his younger son, who was restored to that title many years after, might be one of sir John FastoltFs feoffees. And it is pretty evident that he was, but a few years after the banishment of that duke, in some considerable post under Thomas of Lancaster, after^ wards duke of Clarence, and second son of the succeeding king Henry IV. This Thomas was sent by his father so early, according to some writers, as the second year of his reign, which was in 1401, lord lieutenant of Ireland. And it is not improbable that Fastolff was then with him; for we are informed by William of Wyrcestre, that in the sixth, and seventh years of the said king Henry, that is, in 1405 and 1406, this John Fastolff, esq. was continually with, him. And the same lord lieutenant of Ireland was again there in 1408, 10 Henry IV. and almost to the beginning of the next year, when it is no less probable that Fastolff was still with him; for, in the year last mentioned, we find that he was married in that kingdom to a rich young widow of quality, named Milicent, lady Castlecomb, daughter of Robert lord Tibetot, and relict of sir Stephen Scrope, knight; the same, perhaps, who is mentioned, though not with the title of knighthood, by sir P. Leycester, to have been the said lord lieutenant’s deputy of Ireland, during most of the intervals of his return to England; which deputy-lieutenant died in his office the same year. This marriage was solemnized in Ireland on the feast of St. Hilary, 1408, and Fastolff bound himself in the sum of 1000l. to pay her 100l. a year, for pin-money during life; and she received the same to the 24th year of king Henry VI. The lands in Wiltshire and Yorkshire which came to Fastolff by this marriage with the said lady, descended to Stephen Le Scrope, her son and heir. We may reasonably believe that this marriage in Ireland engaged his settlement in that kingdom, or upon his estate in Norfolk, till his appointment to the command of some forces, or to some post of trust under the English regency in France, soon after required his residence in that kingdom. For, according to the strictest calculation we can make from the accounts of his early engagements in France, the many years he was there, and the time of his final return, it must be not long after his marriage that he left either England or Ireland for that foreign service; being employed abroad by Henry IV. V. and VI. in the wars in France, Normandy, Anjou, Mayne, and Guyenne, upwards of forty years; which agrees very well with what Caxton has published, in his concise, yet comprehensive character of him, little more than twenty years after his death, where he speaks of his “exercisyng the warrys in the royame of Fraunce and other countrees, &c. by fourty yeres enduryng.” So that, we cannot see any room, either in the time or the temper, in the fortunes or employments of this knight, for him to have been a companion with, or follower and corrupter of prince Henry, in his juvenile and dissolute courses; nor, that Shakspeare had any view of drawing his sir John Falstaff from any part of this sir John Fastolff’s character; or so much as pointing at any indifferent circumstance in it that can reflect upon his memory, with readers conversant in the true history of him. The one is an old, humourous, vapouring, and cowardly, lewd, lying, and drunken debauchee, about the prince’s court when the other was a young and grave, discreet and valiant, chaste and sober, commander abroad continually advanced to honours and places of profit, for his brave and politic atchievements, military and civil; continually preferred to the trust of one government or other of countries, cities, towns, &c. or as a genera^ and commander of armies in martial expeditions while abroad; made knight-banneret in the field of battle; baron, in France, and knight of the garter in England and, particularly, when finally settled at home, constantly exercised in acts of hospitality, munificence, and chanty; a founder of religious buildings, and other stately edifices ornamental to his country, as their remains still testify; a generous patron of worthy and learned men, and a public benefactor to the pious and the poor. In short, the more we compare the circumstances in this historical character, with those in that poetical one, we can find nothing discreditable in the latter, that has any relation to the former, or that would mislead an ignorant reader to mistake or confound them, but a little quibble, which makes some conformity in their names, and a short degree in the time wherein the one did really, and the other is feigned to live. And, in regard to the prince of Wales, or our knight’s being engaged in any wild or riotous practices of his youth, the improbabilities may also appear from the comparison of their age, and a view of this prince’s commendable engagements till that space of time in which he indulged his interval of irregularities, when the distance of our knight will clear him from being a promoter of, or partaker in them. For it is apparent, that he had been intrusted with a command in France some time before the death of king Henry IV. because, in 1413, the rery first year of his son, who was now grown the reformed, and soon after proved the renowned, Henry V. it appears that Fastolff had the castle and dominion of Veires in Gascoigne committed to his custody and defence: whence it is very reasonably inferred, that he then resided in the said duchy, which at that time was possessed by the English. In June 1415, Fastolff, then only an esquire, was returned, by indenture, with ten men of arms, and thirty archers, to serve the king at his arrival in France. Soon after king Henry was arrived in Normandy, in August following, with above 30,000 men, the English army having made themselves masters of Harfleur, the most considerable port in that duchy, Fastolff was constituted lieutenant thereof, with 1500 men, by the earl of Derby, as Basset in his ms history informs us; but, as we find it in others, the king, upon this conquest, constituted his said uncle Thomas Beaufort, earl of Dorset and duke of Exeter, governor of Harfleur, in conjunction sir John Fastolff; and, having repaired the fortificaplaced therein a garrison of two thousand select men, as Titus Livius numbers them; or of fifteen hundred ien at arms, and thirty-five knights, according to Hall’s account; to which number Monstrelet also adds a thousand archers. Towards the latter end of October, in the year last mentioned, he was dangerously engaged in the evermemorable battle of Agincourt, where it is said that Fastolff, among others, signalized himself most gallantly by taking the duke of Alengon prisoner; though other historians say that duke was slain after a desperate encounter with king Henry himself, in which he cut off the crowned crest of the king’s helmet. The fact is, that, in a succeeding battle, Fastolff did take this duke’s son and successor prisoner. In the same year, 1415, he, with the duke and 3000 English, invaded Normandy, and penetrated almost to Rouen; but on their return, loaded with booty, they were surprised, and forced to retreat towards Harfleur, whither the enemy pursuing them, were totally defeated. The constable of France, to recover his credit, laid siege to Harfleur, which made a vigorous defence under sir John Fastolff and others till relieved by the fleet under the duke of Bedford. He was at the taking of the castle of Tonque, the city of Caen, the castle of Courcy, the city of Sees, and town of Falaise, and at the great siege at Rouen, 1417. For his services at the latter he was made governor of Conde Noreau; and for his eminent services in those victories, he received, before the 29th of January following, the honour of knighthood, and had the manor and demesne of Fritense near Harfleur bestowed upon him during life. In 1418 he was ordered to seize upon the castle and dominion of Bee Crispin, and other manors, which were held by James D'Auricher, and several other knights; and had the said castle, with those lands, granted him in special tail, to the yearly value of 2000 scutes. In 1420 he was at the siege of Monsterau, as Peter Basset has recorded; and, in the next year, at that of Meaulx-en-Brie. About five months after the decease of king Henry V. the town of Meulent having been surprized in January 1422, John duke of Bedford, regent of France, and sir John Fastolff, then grand master of his household, and seneschal of Normandy, laid siege to the same, and re-took it. In 1423, after the castle of Craven t was relieved, our knight was constituted lieutenant for the king and regent in Normandy, in the jurisdictions of Rouen, Evreux, Alengon, and the countries beyond the river Seine: also governor of the countries of Anjou and Maine, and before the battle of Verneuil was created banneret, About three months after, being then captain of Alengon, and governor of the marches thereof, he laid siege to the castle of Tenuye in Maine, as a French historian informs us, which was surrendered to him; and, in 1424, he was sent to oppose the delivery of Alenon to the French, upon a discovery made that a Gascoigner had secretly contracted to betray the same. In September 1425, he laid siege to Beaumont le Vicompt, which surrendered to him. Then also he took the castle of Sillie-Je-Guillem, from which he was dignified with the title of baron: but this, revolting afterwards again to the French, was assaulted by the earl of Arundel, and retaken about seven years after. In the year last mentioned, our active warrior took also St. Ouen D'Estrais, near Laval, as likewise the castle of Gravelle, with other places of strength, from the enemy; for which dangerous and indefatigable service in France he was about the same time elected in England, with extraordinary deference to his merits, knight companion of the order of the garter. In 1426 John lord Talbot was appointed governor of Anjou and Maine, and sir John Fastolff was removed to another place of command, which, in all probability, might be the foundation of that jealousy, emulation, or competition, between them, which never was cordially reconciled. In October 1428, he had a protection granted him, being then going into France; and there he performed an enterprise of such bravery and conduct as is scarcely thought to have been paralleled in ancient or modern history. The English army, at the siege of Orleans, being in great want of provisions, artillery, and other necessaries, sir John Fastolff, with some other approved commanders, was dispatched for supplies by William de la Pole duke of Suffolk, to the regent at Paris; who not only provided him plentifully therewith, but allowed him a strong guard at his return, that he might convey the same safely to the siege. The French, knowing the importance of this succour, united two armies of very superior numbers and force to meet him; but, either in different encounters, or in a pitched battle, as the French thetnselv es allow, he totally overthrew them; slew greater numbers than he had under his command, not to mention the wounded and the prisoners; and conducted his convoy safe to the English camp. And because it was in the time of Lent, and he had, among his other provision, several of his carriages laden with many barrels of herrings, which he applied to form a fortification, the French have ever since called this victory “The battle of herrings.” But as the fortune of war is precarious, the English army was soon after obliged to raise the siege of Orleans, and though they received recruits from the duke of Bedford, they were in no degree strong enough to encounter the French army at Patay. At the battle which happened there in June 1429, many of the English, who were of most experienced and approved valour, seeing themselves so unequal, and the onset of the French so unexpected, made the best retreat they could and, among them who saved themselves, as it is said, was sir John Fastolff vfho, with such as could escape, retired to Corbeil thus avoiding being killed, or, with the great lord Talbot, lord Hungerford, and sir Thomas Ramps ton, taken prisoner of war. Here the French tales, which some English historians have inconsiderately credited, contradict or invalidate themselves; for, after having made the regent most improbably, and without any examination, or defence, divest Fastolff of his honours, they no less suddenly restore him to them, for, as they phrase it, “apparent causes of good excuse; though against the mind of the lord Talbot;” between whom there had been, it seems, some emulous contests, and therefore it is no wonder that Fastolff found him upon this occasion an adversary. It is not likely that the regent ever conceived any displeasure at this conduct, because Fastolff was not only continued in military and civil employments of the greatest concern, but appears more in favour with the regent after the battle of Patay than before. So that, rather than any dishonour here can be allowed, the retreat itself, as it is told, must be doubted. It was but in 1430 that he preferred him to the lieutenancy of Caen in Normandy. In 1432 he accompanied him into France, and was soon after sent ambassador to the council of Basil, and chosen, in the like capacity, to negociate a final or temporary peace with France. And that year, Fastolff, with the lord Willoughby, commanded the army which assisted the duke of Bretagne against the duke of Alen^on. Soon after this he was for a short space in England; for, in 1433, going abroad again, he constituted John Fastolff, of Olton, probably a near relation, his general attorney. In 1434, or the beginning of the year after, sir John was again with the regent of France;'and, in 1435, he was again one of the ambassadors to conclude a peace with France. Towards the latter end of this year the regent died at Rouen, and, as the greatest proof he could give of his confidence in the honour and integrity of sir John Fastolff, he made him one of the executors of his. last will. Richard, duke of York, who succeeded in the regency of France, made Fastolff a grant of an annuity of twenty pounds a year of his own estate, “pro notabili et landdbili servicio, ac bono consilio;” which is sufficient to shew this duke’s sentiments also of his merits. In 1436, and for about four years longer, he seems to have been well settled at his government in Normandy; after which, in 1440, he made his final return home, and, loaclen with the laurels he had gathered in France, became as illustrious in his domestic as he had been in his foreign character. The late Mr. Gough, by whom this article was much enlarged, had an inventory of all the rich jewels, plate, furniture, &c. that he either had, or left in France, at his return to England. In 1450 he conveyed to John Kemp, cardinal archbishop of York, and others, his manor of Castre in Fleg, and several other lands specified in the deed of conveyance. The same year, Nov. 8, the king by writ directed Richard Waller, esq. David John William Needham, and John Ingoldsby, to cause Thomas Danyell, esq. to pay to sir John FastolfF, knight, the lOOl. that he was indebted to him for provisions, and for his ship called the George of Prussia, alias Danyell’s Hulk, which ship the said Danyell took on the sea as a prize, and never had it condemned; so that the king seized it, ordered it to be sold, and sir John to be paid out of it. At length being arrived, in 1459, beyond the age of fourscore years, he says of himself, that he was “in good remembrance, albeit I am gretly vexed with sickenesse, and thurgh age infebelyd.” He lingered under an hectic fever and asthma for an hundred and forty-eight days; but before he departed he made his will on the fifth of November in that year, and died at his seat at Castre the next day after, being the festival of St. Leonard, or the eve before, as appears in the escheats, in the 39th or last year of king Henry the Vlth’s reign, and no less than thirty-six years beyond the extravagant period assigned by Fuller. He was buried with great solemnity under an arch, in a chapel of our lady of his own building, on the south side of the choir at the abbey-church of St. Bennet in the Holm, in Norfolk, which was ruined at the dissolution; and so much was he respected after his decease, that John Beauchamp, lord of Powyke, in his last will dated the 15th of Edward IV. appointed a chantry, more especially for the soul of sir John Fastolff.

Afterwards he became the king’s menial servant, whom he attended in war as well as in peace, and served both with his pen and his sword, and rose so much in favour with Henry, as to receive from that monarch a very considerable grant in his native county, out of the king’s private estate. This was in 1535, yet he managed so ill, that some years after, when member of parliament for Plymouth, which he was elected in 1542, he had the misfortune, during the session, to be taken in execution by a sheriff’s officer, and carried to the compter. This, however, being represented to the house of commons, occasioned such a disturbance there, as not only produced his discharge, but a settled rule with respect to privilege. Yet Mr. Hatsell, in his “Collection of cases of Privileges of Parliament,” seems to be of opinion that the measures which were adopted, and the doctrine which was then first laid down with respect to the extent of the privileges of the house of commons, were more owing to Ferrars’s being a servant of the king, than that he was a member of the house of commons. He continued afterwards in high favour with Henry all his reign, who fully approved what the house of commons had done; and Ferrars seems to have stood upon good terms with the protector Somerset, in that of king Edward; since he attended him as a commis^ sioner of the carriage of the army into Scotland, in 1548. Edward also had a singular kindness for him, as appeared afterwards at a very critical juncture; for when the unfortunate duke of Somerset lay under sentence of death, the people murmuring on the one hand, and the king uneasy and melancholy on the other, it was thought expedient to do something to quiet and amuse the people, and if possible to entertain and divert the sovereign. In order to this, at the entrance of Christmas holidays, George Ferrars, esq. was proclaimed Lord Of Misrule, that is, a prince of sports and pastimes. This office, which required no common talents, he discharged for twelve days together at Greenwich, with great magnificence and address, and entirely to the king’s satisfaction. In this character, attended by the politest part of the court, he made an excursion to London, where he was very honourably received by officers created for that purpose, splendidly entertained by the lord mayor, and when he took leave, had a handsome present made him in token of respect.

, or Nicolaus Faber, a very ingenious, learned, and pious man, was born at Paris, June 2, 1544, or according to Perrault, July 4, 1543; and liberally educated by his mother, his father dying in his infancy. During the course of his studies, as he was cutting a pen, a piece of the quill flew into his eye, and gave him such excessive pain, that hastily lifting up his hand to it, he struck it out with the knife. Having finished his application to the languages, he was sent to study the civil law at Tholouse, Padua, and Bologna. He did not come back till he had travelled through Italy: and he resided eighteen months in Rome, about 1571, where he cultivated a friendship with Sigonius, Muretus, and other learned men. He there acquired his taste for the investigation of antiquities, and brought away with him many curiosities. Upon hi$ return to France, he applied himself wholly to letters, and would hear no mention of marriage. His mother and brother dying in 1581, he lived with Peter Pithoeus, with whom he was very intimate; and having no occupation but study, he employed himself in reading the ancients, in correcting them by Mss. of which he had a great number in his own library, and in writing notes upon them. He laboured particularly on Seneca the rhetorician, whom he published in 1587, with a learned preface and notes, an. edition which we do not find mentioned by Dibdin oc Clarke. He applied himself also to studies of a different kind, to the mathematics particularly; in which he succeeded so well, that he discovered immediately the defect in Scaliger’s demonstration of the quadrature of the circle. When Henry the Fourth of France became at length the peaceable possessor of the crown, he appointed Faber preceptor to the prince of Conde. During this important trust, he found time to labour upon some considerable works; and composed that fine preface to the fragments of Hilary, in which he discovered so many important facts relating to the history of Arianism, not known before. After the death of Henry IV. he was chosen, by the queen, preceptor to Louis XIII. He died in 1611, or according to Perrault, Nov. 4, 1612.

, an eminent French civilian, was born at Semur, the capital of Auxois, Dec. 16, 1583. After studying at Dijon, Orleans, and other places, he was received as an advocate of parliament in 1602, when only nineteen years old, and the same year he went into Germany to attend the celebrated Bongars, who was sent by Henry IV. resident from France, into the empire; but soon left him, to study the law at Heidelberg, where the well-known Codefroy was at that time law-professor. Godefroy paid great attention to Fevret, who was recommended by several persons of quality: he received him into his house, and caused him to hold public disputations, which; he did with great applause. In 1607, Fevret returned to Dijon, where he married Mrs. Anne Brunet of Beaulne, by whom he had nineteen children; fourteen of which they brought up together during eight years. After his wife’s death, which happened in 1637, he very whimsically caused his bed to be made one half narrower, and never would marry again. He gained great reputation at the bar at Dijon; and was chosen counsellor to the three estates of the province. In 1629, Lewis the Thirteenth being come to Dijon in order to punish a popular insurrection, Fevret was chosen to petition the king that he would graciously be pleased to pardon the guilty. He spoke for all the corporations, and made so elegant a discourse, that the king commanded him to print it, and to send it to him at Lyons. His majesty then pardoned the authors of the sedition, and granted to Fevret the place of counsellor in the parliament of Dijon; but not being permitted to employ a deputy, he refused it, because he would not quit his profession of an advocate, and contented himself with the posts of king’s counsellor and secretary to the court, with a pension of 900 livres. He wrote a history of this insurrection, which was published some time after. As he was frequently sent a deputy to the court, he was known to de Morillac, keeper of the seals of France, who honoured him with his friendship. As early as 1626 and 1627, Monsieur, the king’s brother, had chosen him for his counsellor in ordinary in all his affairs; and the prince of Conde had made him intendant of his house, and of his affairs in Burgundy. He was continued in the same post by his son Louis de Bourbon prince of Cond6; and, during the life of these two princes, he was honoured with their favour in a distinguished manner. Frederic Casimir, prince palatine of the Rhine, and his consort Amelia Antwerpia, born princess of Orange, chose him also their counsel and intendant for their affairs in Burgundy. He had an extensive correspondence with all the learned civilians in his time. He died at Dijon, in 1661.

He published in 1645, a small Latin treatise entitled <c De claris Fori Burgundici Oratoribus,“and his” Traité de l'Abus“in 1653, which last celebrated work was written at the solicitation of the second Lewis de Bourbon prince of Conde. He enlarged it afterwards by one half, which occasioned a second edition of it after his death, in 1667. It was reprinted a third time ten years after; but the best edition is that of Lyons, 1736, in two volumes, folio. He made an excellent translation of Pibrac’s (See Faur) Quatrains, in Latin verses, printed at Lyons, 1667, with a commentary under this title,” De officiis vitas humanae, give, in Pibraci Tetrasticha Commentarius." Several authors have mentioned him and his works in a very honourable manner. He had a son Peter, also a man of learning, who died in 1706, and left his fine library to the Jesuits of Dijon, with funds for increasing it. In. 1708, a catalogue of it was published in 4to, with a preface by father Oudin.

On the decease of his father in 1682, he succeeded him in his titles and estate; and on the death of Charles II. was one of the privy-council who signed the order, dated at Whitehall, Feb. 6, 1684-5, for proclaiming the duke of York king of England. In that reign he was one of the chief opposers of the abrogation of the test act, which he considered as the strongest fence of the protestant religion. Upon the trial of the seven bishops, he was present in court with several other noblemen; and his brother Heneage, afterwards earl of Aylesford, was of the counsel for those prelates. He was likewise one of the patriots, who, from a true zeal for their religion and their country, often met to concert such advices and advertisements as might be fit for the prince of Orange to know, that he might govern himself by them. When, however, it was secretly proposed to him to invite that prince into England, he felt a conscientious hesitation on the subject, and informed the friends of that measure that he could not personally adopt it, yet would preserve the secret with which they had intrusted him. Upon the prince’s landing in the West, he was one of those lords who made a last attempt on the obstinacy of the king, by presenting a petition to his majesty, advising him to call a parliament regular and free in all respects, to which he was even for adding, “that the peers who had joined the prince might sit in that free parliament;” but this by the other lords was thought unnecessary. He was afterwards one of the commissioners sent by^ his majesty to treat with the prince. When afterwards the convention was opened, he was the principal manager of the debates in favour of a regent, against those who were for setting up another king; supporting his opinion by many arguments drawn from the English history, and adding a recent instance in Portugal, "where Don Pedro had only the title of regent conferred upon him, while his deposed brother lived. However, he owned it to be a principle grounded on the law and history of England, that obedience and allegiance were due to the king for the time being, even in opposition to one, with whom the right was thought still to remain. He likewise told bishop Burnet, that though he could not argue nor vote, but according to the notions which he had formed concerning our laws and constitution, he should not be sorry to see his own side out-voted; and that though he could not agree to the making of a king, as things stood, yet if he found one made, he would be more faithful to him than those who made him could be, according to their principles.

The Mayencois, who had formed themselves into a national convention, sent him to Paris, in order to solicit their re-union with the French republic. But, in the course of his mission, the city of Mentz was besieged and retaken by the Prussian troops. This event occasioned the loss of all his property; and what was still more disastrous, that of his numerous manuscripts, which fell into the hands of the prince of Prussia. One Charles Pougens, who has written his life, after conducting our hero through these scenes of public life, proceeds to give us a view of his domestic habits and private principles. He tells us, that he formed a connexion (whether a njarriage or not, the studied ambiguity of his language leaves rather uncertain) with a young woman named Theresa Hayne, who, by, the illumination of French philosophy, had divested herself of all the prejudices which, we trust, the ladies of this country still consider as their honour, as they are certainly the guardians of domestic peace. Miss Hayne was indignant at the very name of duty. With Eloisa, she had taken it into her head, that

, count of Belle-Isle, more known by the name of marechal Bellisle, grandson of the preceding, was born in 1684. Politics and history attracted his attention from his very infancy, to which studies he afterwards added that of mathematics. He had hardly finished his education when Louis XIV. gave him a regiment of dragoons. He signalized himself at the siege of Lisle, received other steps of promotion, and at the peace returned to court, where the king entirely forgot the faults of the grandfather in the merits of his descendant. When war again broke out, after the death of Louis XIV. he proceeded to distinguish himself, but a change of ministry put a check to his career. He shared the disgrace of the minister Le Blanc, was for a time im-prisoned in the Bastile, and then banished to his own estate. In this retreat he composed a complete justification of himself, was recalled to court, and from that time experienced only favour, fortune, and promotion. In the war of 1733, he obtained a principal command in Flanders, distinguished himself before Philipsburg, and commanded during the rest of the campaign in Germany. In 1735 he was decorated with the order of the Holy Ghost, and was the confidential adviser of the minister, cardinal Fleury. About this time, taking advantage of an interval of peace, he wrote memoirs of all the countries in which he had served: but on the death of the emperor Charles VI. in 1740, he urged the cardinal to declare war. Ambition prompted this advice, and his ambition was not long without gratification. In 1741, he was created marechal of France. The witlings attacked him on his elevation, but he despised their efforts: “These rhymers,” said he, “would gain their ends, should I do them the honour to be angry.” At the election of the emperor in 1742, marechal Bellisle was plenipotentiary of France at the diet of Francfort, where his magnificence was no less extraordinary than the extent of his influence in the diet. He appeared rather as a principal elector than an ambassador, and secured the election of Charles VII. Soon after, by the desertion of the Prussians and Saxons, the marechal found himself shut up in Prague, and with great difficulty effected a retreat. He was obliged to march his army over the ice, and three thousand troops left in Prague were compelled to surrender, though with honour. On his return to Francfort, Charles VII. presented him with the order of the golden fleece, having already declared him a prince of the empire. In December 1743, as he was going again into Germany, he was taken prisoner at Elbingerode, a small town encircled by the territory of Hanover, and was carried into England, where he remained till August 1744. He then served against the Austrians in Provence; and, returning to Versailles to plan the campaign of 1748, was created a peer of France. He had enjoyed the title of duke of Gisors, from 1742. Afterthe peace in 1743, his influence at court continued to increase, and in 1757 he became prime minister; but in this situation he lived only four years; falling a victim, it is said, to his application to business, his sorrow for the misfortunes of France, and his anxious cares to extricate her from them. This patriotic character coincides with other anecdotes related of him. Having lost his brother, whom he tenderly loved, at a very critical period of public affairs, he suppressed his private grief as soon as possible, saying, “I have no brother; but I have a country, let me exert myself to save her.” He died in January, 1761, at the age of 77.

, 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.

, a German, was descended from a learned family, and born at Augsburg, July 26, 1565. He went into France very young, to study the civil law under Cujacius; yet paid so much attention to history and criticism, that he became eminent in both. When he was scarcely three and twenty, he was chosen among the counsellors of Casimir, prince of Palatine, and the year after made professor of law at Heidelberg, where he lived in friendship with Leunclavius, Sylburgius, Opsoprcus, the younger Douza, and other learned men of his time. Some little time after, he resigned his professor’s chair, and was taken into the most important employments by the elector Frederic IV. This prince made him vice-president of his court, and sent him in quality of ambassador to several places. In the midst of these occupations he never intermitted his usual method of studying; and wrote a great many works upon criticism, law, and history, the history of his own country in particular. When we view the catalogue of them given by Melchior Adam, we are ready to imagine that he must have lived a very long life, and hardly have done any thing but write books; yet he died in his forty-ninth year, May 13, 1614. Oouza says that he seems to have been born for the advancement of polite literature: and Thuanus acknowledges that it would be difficult to find his equal in all Germany. Casaubon calls him a man of profound and universal knowledge; and Scioppius says that he joined great acuteness to an incredible depth of learning. Add to this, that he was perfectly skilled in coins, medals, statues, antiques of all sorts, and could paint very well. His moral qualities are described as not inferior to his intellectual; so that Melchior Adam seems justly to have lamented, that a man who deserved so much to be immortal, should have died so soon. His principal works are, 1. “Origines Palatinae,” fol. 2. “De Inquisitionis processu,” 1679, 4to. 3. “De re monetaria veterum Romanorum, &c.” Leyden, 1605, 4to, inserted by Graevius in vol. II. of his Roman Antiquities. 4. “Rerum Bohemicarum scriptores,” Hanau, 1602, fol. 5. “Rerum Germanic-arum scriptores,” fol. S vols. 1600 1611, reprinted in 1717. 6. “Corpus historia Francia,” fol. &c.

Soon after he obtained his liberty he was made physician to the prince of Wales; and, on that prince’s accession to the throne as George II. became physician to the queen, who honoured him with a share of her confidence and esteem. Very early in 1727-8, bishop Atterbury addressed to Dr. Freind his celebrated “Letter on the Character of Japis,” of whom he justly considered this learned physician to be the modern prototype. But whatever opinion he entertained of his professional abilities, it appears from “Atterbury’s Correspondence” that he had some reason to regret, if not resent, Dr. Freind’s becoming a favourite at court, and as Mr. Morice informs us, “an absolute courtier.” Dr. Freind did not, however, long enjoy this favour, but died of a fever, July 26, 1728, in his fifty-second year. Their majesties expressed the utmost concern at his death, and settled a pension upon his widow, Anne, eldest daughter of Thooias Morice, esq. paymaster of the forces in Portugal. Dr. Freind married this lady in 1709, and by her had an only son, John, who was educated at Westminster school, and became afterwards a student at Christ Church in Oxford. He died in 1752, unmarried. Dr. Freind was buried at Hitcham in Buckinghamshire, near which he had a seat; but there is a monument erected to him in Westminster-abbey, with a suitable inscription. He had himself rendered the like kind office to more than one of his friends, being peculiarly happy in this sort of composition; for the inscription on the monument of Sprat, bishop of Rochester, was from his pen; but that on Philips, which had been ascribed to him, is since ascertained to be by Atterbury. Dr. Wigan published his Latin works together at London, in 1733, in folio, adding to them a translation of his “History of Physic” into the same language, with an excellent historical preface; and to the whole is prefixed an elegant dedication to his royal patroness the late queen, by his brother Dr. Robert Freind. His works were reprinted at Paris in 1735, 4to.

Hitherto Frischlin had been prosperous; but now an affair happened which laid the foundation of troubles that did not end but with his life. In 1580 he published an oration in praise of a country life, with a paraphrase upon Virgil’s Eclogues and Georgics. Here he compared the lives of modern courtiers with those of ancient husbandmen; and noticing some with great severity, who had degenerated from the virtue and simplicity of their ancestors, made himself so obnoxious, that even his life was in danger. He made many public apologies for himself; his prince even interceded for him, but he could not continue safe any longer at home. With his prince’s leave, therefore, he went to Laubach, a town of Carniola, in the remote part of Germany, and kept a school there; but the air not agreeing with his wife and children, he returned in about two years, to his own country. He met with a very ungracious reception; and therefore, after staying a little while, he went to Francfort, from Francfort into Saxony, and from thence to Brunswick, where he became a schoolmaster again. There he did not continue long, but passed from place to place, till at length, being reduced to necessity, he applied to the prince of Wirtemberg for relief. His application was disregarded, which he supposing to proceed from the malice of his enemies, wrote severely against them. He was imprisoned at last in Wirtemberg castle; whence attempting to escape by ropes not strong enough to support him, he fell down a prodigious precipice, and was dashed to pieces among the rocks. His death happened in 1590, and was universally and justly lamented; for he was certainly ingenious and learned in a great degree. He left a great many works of various kinds, as tragedies, comedies, elegies, translations of Latin and Greek authors, with notes upon them, orations, &c. These were published 1598 1607, in 4 vols. 8vo. He had also written a translation of Oppian, but this was never published. His scholia and version of “Callimachus,” with his Greek life of that poet, are in Stephens’ s edition of 1577, 4to. While he was master of the school at Labacum, or Laubach, he composed a new grammar; for there was no grammar extant that pleased him. This was more methodical, and shorter than any of them; and, indeed, was generally approved; but, not content with giving a grammar of his own, he drew up another piece, called “Strigil Grammatica,” in which he disputes with some little acrimony against all other grammarians; and this, as was natural, increased the number of his enemies. With all his parts and learning, he seems not a little to have wanted prudence.

Of all the particulars of Froissart’s life during his residence in England, we only know that he was present at the separation of the king and queen in 1361, with their son the prince of Wales and the princess his lady, who were going to take possession of the government of Acquitaine; and that he was between Eltham and Westminster in 1363, when king John passed on his return to England. There is in his poems a pastoral which seems to allude only to that event. With regard to his travels during the time he was attached to the service of the queen, he' employed six months in Scotland, and penetrated as far as the Highlands. He travelled on horseback with his portmanteau behind him, and followed by a greyhound. The king of Scotland, and many lords whose names he has preserved to us, treated him so handsomely, that he could have wished tq have returned thither. William earl of Douglas lodged him during fifteen days in his castle of Dalkeith, near Edinburgh; but we are ignorant of the date of this journey, and of another which he made into North Wales. It may be inferred, however, that he was at this time no ordinary character, and that he must have possessed talents and accomplishments to entitle him, to so much respect.

He was in France, at Melun sur Seine, about April 20, 1366; perhaps private reasons might have induced him to take that road to Bourdeaux, where he was on All Saints’ day of that year, when the princess of Wales was brought to bed of a son, who was afterwards Richard II. The prince of Wales setting out a few days afterwards for the war in Spain, Froissart accompanied him to Dax, where the prince resided some time. He had expected to have attended him during the continuance of this grand expedition; but the prince would not permit him to go farther; and shortly after his arrival, sent him back to the queen his mother. Froissart could not have made any long stay in England, since in the following year, 1368," he was at different Italian courts. It was this same year, that Lionel duke of Clarence, son of the king of England, espoused Joland, daughter of Galeas II. duke of Milan. Froissart, who probably was in his suite, was present at the magnificent reeeption which Amadeus count of Savoy, surnamed the count Verd, gave him on his return: he describes the feasts on this occasion, which lasted three days; and does not forget to tell us that they danced a virelay of his composition. From the court of Savoy he returned to Milan, where the same count Amadeus gave him a good cotardie, a sort of coat, with twenty florins of gold; and from thence to Bologna and Ferrara, where he Feceived f forty ducats from the king of Cyprus, and then to Rome. Instead of the modest equipage he travelled with into Scotland, he was now like a man of importance, travelling on a handsome horse attended by a hackney.

, an ingenious artist, was a native of Ireland, where he was born in 1710. He came very early to London, when he practised portrait-painting in oil, crayons, and in miniature. In 1734 he had the honour of painting his royal highness, Frederick prince of Wales, a full length, now in Sadler’s-hall, Cheapside. But his genius was not confined to this art, and it is said that he was the inventor and first manufacturer of porcelain in England, and that he spent fifteen years of his life in bringing this to perfection at a manufactory at Bow, during which, his constitution being impaired by constantly working in furnaces, he retired into Wales, with little hope of recovery. Here, however, his health was perfectly restored, and he returned again to London, and resumed his profession, to which he now added the art of mezzotinto engraving, and had considerable employment and success, both as a painter and engraver, tie died of a decline, brought on by intense application, April 2, 1762.

, a Swiss artist, and a man of considerable learning, was born at Zurich in 1706. After acquiring the elements of painting from a very indifferent artist, he left his country in the eighteenth year of his age, and going to Vienna, associated himself with Sedelmeier. Gran and Meitens were his principal guides, if he could be said to have any other guide than his own genius. He became well known at court, but his love of independence induced him to refuse very advantageous offers. He would not, however, have probably ever left Vienna, had not the prince of Schwarzeuburg persuaded him to go to Kadstadt, where he became the favourite of the court. Among others whose portraits he painted was the margrave of Dourlach, who had a great affection for him, and advised him to go to Ludwigsbourg, which he did with letters of recommendation to the duke of Wirtemberg, who immediately took him into his service. Here he passed his time very agreeably, making occasional excursions to paint the portraits of persons of distinction, until the war of Poland, when the entrance of the French into Germany threw every thing into confusion. The duke his patron at the same time fell sick, and was removed to Stutgard, but on Fuessli’s leaving him to go to Nuremberg, his highness presented him with a gold watch, and requested him to return when the state of public affairs was changed. At Nuremberg he had a strong desire to see the celebrated artist Kupezki, of whose manners he had imbibed an unfavourable impression, but he was agreeably disappointed, and they became friends from their first interview. After remaining six months at Nuremberg, the duke of Wirtemberg died, and there being no immediate prospect of peace, Fuessli returned to his own country, and in 1740 married. Although his wife was a very amiable woman, he used to say that marriage was incompatible with the cultivation of the fine arts: if, however, he felt himself occasionally disturbed by domestic cares, he had the happiness to communicate his art to his three sons, Rodolph, who settled at Vienna; Henry, at present so well known in England; and Caspar, who died in the vigour of life, an entomologist of fidelity, discrimination, and taste.

, after Hippocrates prince of the Greek physicians, was a native of Pergamus in the Lesser Asia, where he was born about A. D. 131, in the reign of the emperor Adrian. His father, whose name was Nicon, was an able architect, and spared neither trouble nor expence in the education of his son. Galen studied with success all the philosophy of his time, but finally applied himself to medicine as his profession. Satyro and Peiops, two eminent physicians of his time, were his chief preceptors in that science. But his application to the works of Hippocrates contributed more than any other instruction to the eminence he attained.

Thus distinguished above his contemporaries, did this prince of physicians continue to practise at Rome, the capital of the world, till his death, which happened A. D. 201, in his 70th year. He had usually enjoyed a perfect state of health, the effect of observing a strict regimen both in diet and exercise: for, being subjected to frequent disorders in his younger days he studied his own constitution, and having fixed the methods of preserving it, followed them strictly. This was nothing more than taking care to eat such meats as. were of easy and equal digestion, abstaining particularly from summer fruits, confining himself to figs and raisins, and using a constant and equal exercise. By following these rules, he never had any distemper, except once a fever of one day’s continuance, occasioned by too much study and over-fatigue.

In his private character, Gardiner is entitled to some respect, not from its morality, for he is said to have been, licentious; but he was a man of learning, and in some remarkable instances a patron of learned men. Thomas Smith, who had been secretary to Edward VI. was permitted by him to live in Mary’s days, in a state of privacy unmolested, and with a pension of 100l. a year for his better support, though he had a good estate of his own. Roger Ascham, another secretary to the same prince, of the Latin tongue, was continued in his office, and his salary inCreased by this prelate’s favour; which he fully repaid, by those elegant epistles to him, that are extant in his works. Strype, who notices this circumstance, adds: “Thus lived two excellent protestants, under the wings, as it were, of the sworn enemy and destroyer of protestants.” He is said also to have been of a liberal and generous disposition; kept a good house, and brought up several young gentlemen, some of whom became afterwards men of the first rank in the state.

Without blaming his father, farther than by calling his disinheritance “a froward deed,” he now resolved to assume the airs of independence, in hopes that his courtly friends would render him in reality independent; but he soon found that their favours were not to be obtained without solicitations incompatible with a proud spirit. A more honourable resource then presented itself. William prince of Orange was at this time endeavouring to emancipate the Netherlands from the tyranny of the Spanish monarch, and Gascoigne, prompted by the hope of gaining laurels in a field digntfied by patriotic bravery, embarked on the 19th of March, 1572, for Holland. The vessel being under the guidance of a drunken Dutch pilot, was run aground, and twenty of the crew who had taken to the long-boat were drowned. Gascoigne, however, and his friends remained at the pumps, and being enabled again to put to sea, landed safe in Holland, where, having obtained a captain’s commission under the prince of Orange, he acquired considerable military reputation, but an unfortunate quarrel with his colonel retarded his career. Conscious of his deserts, he repaired immediately to Delf, and resolved to resign his commission to the hands from which he received it; the prince in vain endeavouring to close the breach between his officers. During this negociation a circumstance occurred which had nearly- cost our poet his life. A lady at the Hague (then in the possession of the enemy) with whom Gascoigne had been on intimate terms, had his portrait in her hands, and resolving to part with it to himself alone, wrote a letter to him on the subject, which fell into the hands of his enemies in the camp; from this paper they meant to have raised a report unfavourable to his loyalty: but upon its reaching his hands, Gascoigne, conscious of his fidelity, laid it immediately before the prince, who saw through their design, and gave him passports for visiting the lady at the Hague: the burghers, however, watched his motions with malicious caution, and he was cabled in derision “the Green Knight.” Although disgusted with the ingratitude of those on whose side he fought, Gascoigne still retained his commission, till the prince coming personally to the siege of Middleburg, gave him an opportunity of displaying his zeal and courage, and rewarded him with 300 gilders beyond his regular pay, and a promise of future promotion. He was, however, surprised soon after by 3000 Spaniards, when commanding, under captain Sheffield, 500 Englishmen lately landed, but retired in good order at night, under the walls of Leyden; the jealousy of the Dutch was then displayed by their refusing to open their gates, and Gascoigne with his band were in consequence made captives. At the expiration of twelve days his men were released, and the officers after an imprisonment of four months, were sent back to England.

From his general conduct, as related by historians, there is sufficient reason to place sir William Gascoigne in the rank of chief justices of the first merit, both for his integrity and abilities, and he had once occasion to distinguish himself above his brethren, by a memorable transaction in the latter end of this king’s reign. A servant of the prince of Wales (afterwards Henry V.) being arraigned for felony at the bar of the King’s-bench; the news soon reached his master’s ears, who, hastening to the court, ordered him to be unfettered, and offered to rescue him. In this being opposed by the judge, who commanded him to leave the prisoner and depart, he rushed furiously up to the bench, and, as is generally affirmed, struck the chief justice, then sitting in the execution of his office. On this sir William, after some expostulations upon the outrage, indignity, and unwarrantable interruption of the proceedings in that place, directly committed him to the king’s bench prison, there to wait his father’s pleasure; and the prince submitted to his punishment, with a calmness no less sudden and surprising, than the offence had been which drew it upon him. The king, being informed of the whole affair, instead of being displeased with the chief justice, returned thanks to God, “That he had given him both a judge who knew how to administer, and a son who could obey justice.” This extraordinary event has been recorded, not only in the general histories of the reigns of these two sovereigns, but celebrated also by the poets; and particularly Shakspeare, in the second part of “Henry IV.”

Thus his merit found all the reward and encouragement which he could expect, from the court and ministry of queen Anne; but this brought him under the displeasure of the administration in the succeeding reign, "which, being shewn, as he conceived, without any just or reasonable grounds, was resented by him. At this period he became a patron to the university; and appeared warmly in its vindication in the house of lords, when it was attacked there for a pretended riot on the birth-day of the prince of Wales in 1717. At the same time he testified the greatest abhorrence of this and all other marks of disloyalty, and used all his influence to prevent and check them.

, a fine performer on the violin, and composer for tfctat instrument, was born at Lucca in Italy, about 1666. He received his first instructions in music from Lonati and Scarlatti, but finished his studies under Corelli. In 1714, he came to England; and, two years after, published twelve sonatas, “a Violino, Violone, e Cembalo.” These, together with his exquisite manner of performing, had such an effect, that he was at length introduced to George I. who had expressed a desire to hear some of the pieces, contained in this work performed by himself. Geiuiniani wished, however, that he might be accompanied on the harpsichord by Handel; and both accordingly attended at St. James’s. The earl of Essex, being a lover of music, became a patron of Geminiani: and, in 1727, procured him the offer of the place of master and composer of the state music in Ireland: but this, not being tenable by one of the Romish communion, he declined; saying, that, though he had never made great pretensions to religion, yet the renouncing that faith in which he had been baptized, for the sake of worldly advantage, was what he could not answer to his conscience. He afterwards composed Corelli’s solos into concertos; he published six concertos of his own composition, and many other things. The life of this musician appears to have been very unsettled; spent in different countries, for he was fond of making excursions; and employed in pursuits which had no connection with his art. He was, particularly, a violent enthusiast in painting; and, to gratify this propensity, bought pictures; which, to supply his wants, he afterwards sold. The consequence of this kind of traffic was loss, and its concomitant distress: which distress was so extreme, that he was committed to, and would have remained in prison, if a protection from his patron the earl of Essex had not delivered him. Yet his spirit was such, that when the prince of Wales, who admired his compositions, would have settled upon him a pension of 100l. a year, he declined the offer, affecting an aversion to a life of dependence.

, in Latin Gy raid us, an ingenious and learned Italian critic, was born at Ferrara in 1479, of an ancient and reputaWe-family. He learned the Latin tongue and polite literature under Baptist Guarini; and afterwards the Greek at Milan under Demetrius Chalcondyles. He retired into the neighbourhood of Albert Picus, prince of Carpi, and of John Francis Picus, prince of Mirandula; and, having by their means access to a large and well-furnished library, he applied himself intensely to study. He afterwards went to Modena, and thence to Rome, but being unfortunately in this city when it was plundered by the soldiers of Charles V. in 1527, he lost his all in the general ruin; and soon after his patrou cardinal Rangone, with whom he had lived some time. He was then obliged to shelter himself in the house of the prince of Mirandula, a relation of the great Picus, but had the misfortune to lose this protector in 1533, who was assassinated in a conspiracy headed by his nephew. Giraldi was at that time so afflicted with the gout, that he had great difficulty to save himself from the hands of the conspirators, and lost all which he had acquired since the sacking of Rome. He then returned to his own country, and lived at Ferrara, where he found a refuge from his misfortunes. The gout, which he is said to have heightened by intemperance, tormented him so for the six or seven last years of his life, that, as he speaks of himself, he might be said rather to breathe than to live. He was such a cripple in his hands and feet, that he was incapable of moving himself. He made, however, what use he could of intervals of ease, to read, and even write: and many of his books were composed in those intervals. He died at length of this malady in 1552 and was interred in the cathedral of Ferrara, where an epitaph, composed by himself, was inscribed upon his tomb.

At the usual period Glover became engaged in the Hamburgh trade, but continued his attachment to literature and the muses, and was, says Dr. Warton, one of the best and most accurate Greek scholars of his time. It is mentioned in the life of Green, that he published “The Spleen” of that poet, in which he is complimented on account of his study of the ancient Greek poets, and his wish to emulate their fame. Green had probably seen some part of “Leonidas,” which was begun when he was young, and had been submitted in specimens to many of his friends. This poem was first published in 1737, in a 4to volume, consisting of nine books. Its reception was highly flattering, for in this and the following year it passed through three editions. It was dedicated to lord Cobham, one of his early patrons, and whom, it is supposed, he furnished with many of the inscriptions at Stowe, now erased. It was also strongly recommended by such of that nobleman’s political friends as were esteemed the arbiters of taste. Lord Lyttelton, in the periodical paper called “Common Sense,” praised it in the warmest terms, not only for its poetical beauties, but its political tendency, “the whole plan and purpose of it being to show the superiority of freedom over slavery; and how much virtue, public spirit, and the love of liberty, are preferable, both in their nature and effects, to riches, luxury, and the insolence of power.” The same nobleman also addressed verses to our author, in which he inveighs with much asperity against the degeneracy of the times, but, not very consistently, compares England to Greece, and France to Persia. Other writers, particularly Fielding, in the paper called “The Champion,” took up the pen in favour of “Leonidas,” which being published just after the prince of Wales had been driven from St. James’s, and began to keep a separate court, it was praised by the whole of this new court, and by the adherents in general of opposition, not beyond its merit, but too evidently from a motive which could not always prevail, and which ceased to animate their zeal in its favour, when Walpole, the supposed author of all our national grievances, was compelled to resign.

During the period of his embarrassment, he retired from public notice, until the respect and gratitude of his humbler friends in the city induced them to request that he would stand candidate for the office of chamberlain of London, which was vacant in 1751, but his application was unfortunately made when the majority of the votes had already been engaged to sir Thomas Harrison. His feelings on this disappointment did him much honour, and were elegantly expressed in the speech he addressed to the livery on the occasion. In it he made an allusion to the favour of the prince of Wales, which was probably well understood at that time. By the death of that most illustrious personage, he no doubt lost a powerful patron.

On the accession of James II. he was appointed lord chamberlain to the queen, and on the removal of the earl of Rochester, was again made one of the commissioners of the treasury. On the landing of the prince of Orange, he was one of the commissioners sent by king James to treat with that prince, which employment he discharged with great address and prudence. In the debate concerning the vacancy of the throne, after the abdication of king James, his lordship, out of a regard to the succession, voted for a regency; yet when king William was advanced to the throne, his majesty appointed him one of the lords commissioners of the treasury, and a privy-councillor, and in 1690 he was appointed first lord of the treasury. In 1695, he was one of the seven lords justices for the administration of the government, during the king’s absence, as he was likewise the year following, and again in 1701, when he was restored to the place of first commissioner of the treasury, from which he had been removed in 1697. On the accession of queen Anne, he was constituted lord high treasurer, which post he had long refused to accept, till the earl of Marlboro ugh pressed him in so positive a manner, that he declared, he could not go to the continent to command the armies, unless the treasury was put into his hands; for then he was sure that remittances would be punctually made to him. Under his lordship’s administration of this high office, the public credit was raised, the war carried on with success, and the nation satisfied with his prudent management. He omitted nothing that could engage theteubject to bear the burthen of the war with chearfulness; and it was owing to his advice, that the queen contributed one hundred thousand pounds out of her civil list towards it. He was also one of those faithful and able counsellors, who advised her majesty to declare in council against the selling of offices and places in her household and family, as highly dishonourable to herself, prejudicial to her service, and a discouragement to virtue and true merit, which alone ought and should recommend persons to her royal approbation. And so true a friend was his lordship to the established church, that considering how meanly great numbers of the clergy were provided for, he prevailed upon her majesty to settle her revenue of the first-fruits and tenths for the augmentation of the small vicarages. In July 1704 he was made knight of the garter; and in December 1706, advanced to the dignity of earl of Godolphin and viscount Rialton. But notwithstanding all his great services to the public, on the 8th of August 1710, he was removed from his post of lord high treasurer.

, professor of Arabic at Leyden, descended from a considerable family in that city, was born at the Hague, in 1596. At Leyden he made himself master of all the learned languages, and proceeded to physic, divinity, and the mathematics. His education being finished, he took a journey to France with the duchess de la Tremouille; and was invited to teach the Greek language at Rochelle, which he continued to do, until that city was in the following year reduced again to the dominion of the French king, after which he resolved to return to Holland. He had early taken a liking to Erpenius, the Arabic professor at Leyden; by the help of whose lectures he made a great progress in the Arabic tongue, and having in 1622 an opportunity of attending the Dutch ambassador to the court of Morocco, he consulted with Erpenius, who directed him to observe carefully every production, either of nature, art, or custom, which were unknown in Europe; and to describe them, setting down the proper name of each, and the derivation of it, if known. He also gave him a letter directed to that prince, together with a present of a grand atlas, and a New Testament in Arabic. These procured him a very gracious reception from Muley Zidan, then king of Morocco, who expressed great satisfaction in the present, and afterwards read them frequently. In the mean time Golius made so good use of Erpenius’ s advice, that tie attained a perfect skill in the Arabic tongue; and in indulging his curiosity respecting the customs and learning of that country, contrived to make himself very agreeable to the doctors and courtiers. By this means he became particularly serviceable to the ambassador, who growing uneasy because his affairs were not dispatched, was advised to present to his majesty a petition written by Golius in the Arabic character and language, and in the Christian style, both circumstances rather novel in that country. The king was astonished at the beauty of the petition, both as to writing and style; and having learned from the ambassador that it was done by Golius, desired to see him. At the audience, the king spoke to him in Arabic, and Golius said in Spanish, that he understood his majesty very well, but could not keep up a conversation in Arabic, by reason of its guttural pronunciation, to'which his throat was not sufficiently inured. This excuse was accepted by the king, who granted the ambassador’s request, and dispatched him immediately. Before his departure, Golius had an opportunity of examining the curiosities of Fez, and took a plan of the royal palace, which was afterwards communicated to Mr. Windus, and inserted in his “Journey to Mequinez,” 1721, 8vo. Go* lius brought with him to Holland several books unknown in Europe; and among others, “The Annals of the Ancient Kingdom of Fez and Morocco,” which he resolved to translate. He communicated every thing to Erpenius, who well knew the value of them, but did not live long enough to enjoy the treasure; that professor dying in Nov. 1624, after recommending this his best beloved scholar to the curators of the university for his successor. The request was complied with, and Golius saw himself immediately in the Arabic chair, which he filled so ably as to lessen their sense of the loss of Erpenius. Being, however, still desirous of cultivating oriental languages and antiquities, he applied to his superiors for leave to take a journey to the Levant; and obtained letters patent from the prince of Orange, dated Nov. 25, 1625. He set out immediately for Aleppo, where he continued fifteen months; after which, making excursions into Arabia, towards Mesopotamia, he went by land to Constantinople, in company with Cornelius Hago, ambassador from Holland to the Porte. Here the governor of the coast of Propontis gave him the use of his pleasant gardens and curious library in which retirement he applied himself wholly to the reading of the Arabic historians and geographers, whose writings were till then either unknown to, or had not been perused by him. Upon his return to the city, discovering occasionally in conversation with the great men there a prodigious memory of what he had read, he excited such admiration, that a principal officer of the empire made him an offer of a commission from the grand signor to take a survey of the whole empire, in order to describe the situation of places with more exactness than was done in such maps as they then had; but he pretended that this would interfere with the oath which he had taken to the States, although his real fear arose from the danger of such an undertaking. In this place also he found his skill in physic of infinite service in procuring him the favour and respect of the grandees; from whom, as he would take no fees, he received many valuable and rich presents, and every liberal offer to induce him to settle among them. But after a residence of four years, having in a great measure satisfied his thirst of eastern learning, and made himself master of the Turkish, Persian, and Arabic tongues, he returned in 1629, laden with curious Mss. which have ever since been valued among the richest treasures of the university library at Leyden. As soon as he was settled at home, he began to think of making the best use of some of these manuscripts by communicating them to the public; but first printed an “Arabic Lexicon,” 1653, folio; and a new edition of “Erpenius’s Grammar, enlarged with notes and additions;” to which also he subjoined several pieces of poetry, extracted from the Arabian writers, particularly Tograi and Ababella. One purpose on which he employed his knowledge and influence cannot be too highly commended. He had been an eye-witness of the wretched state of Christianity in the Mahometan countries, and with the compassion of a Christian, resolved, therefore, to make his tfkill in their language serviceable to them. With this laudable view he procured an edition of the “New Testament” in the original language, with a translation into the vulgar Greek by an Archimandrite, which he prevailed with the States to present to the Greek church, groaning under the Mahometan tyranny; and, as some of these Christians use the Arabic tongm? in divine service, he took care to have dispersed among them an Arabic translation of the confession of the reformed protestants, together with the catechism and liturgy .

, a Spanish poet, was born at Cordova, in 1562, of a very distinguished family. He studied at Salamanca, and was known to have a talent for poetry, though he never could be prevailed on to publish any thing. Going into orders, he was made chaplain to the king, and prebendary of the church of Cordova, in which station he died, in 1627. His works are all posthumous, and consist of sonnets, elegies, heroic verses, a comedy, a tragedy, &c. and have been published several times under the title of “Obras de Dom. Louis de Gongora-y- Argore,” 4to. The best edition is that with notes by D. Garcia de Salcedo Coronel, Madrid, 1636—1648, 3 vols. 4to. The Spaniards have so high an idea of this poet, as to entitle him prince of the poets of their nation, and notes and commentaries have been written on his works but he is not free from affectation in theuse of figures, a false sublime, and an obscure and embarrassed diction.

, a French historian, was born in 1565, and, after a liberal education, became counsellor and master of the requests to Mary de Medicis, queen of France. He frequented the court in his youth, and devoted himself to the service of Henry IV. by whom he was much esteemed and trusted. Being a man of probity, and void of ambition, he did not employ his interest with Henry to obtain dignities, but spent the greatest part of his life -in literary retirement. Among other works which he composed, are “The History of Henry IV.” and “The History of Lewis XIII. to the death of the Marshal d'Ancre,” in 1617; both which were published in /olio, under the title of “Decades.” The former he presented to Lewis XIII. who read it over, and was infinitely charmed with the frankness of the author: but the Jesuits, who never were friendly to liberality of sentiment, found means to have this work castrated in several places. They served “The History of Lewis XIII.” worse; for, Le Grain having in that performance spoken advantageously of the prince of Conde, his protector, they had the cunning and malice to suppress those passages, and to insert others, where they made him speak of the prince in very indecorous terms. Conde was a dupe to this piece of knavery, till Le Grain had time to vindicate himself, by restoring this as well as his former works to their original purity. He died at Paris in 1643, and ordered in his will, that none of his descendants should ever trust the education of their children to the Jesuits; which clause, it is said, has been punctually observed by his family.

, son of Antony duke of Gramont, served as a volunteer under the prince of Conde, and Turenne, and came into England about two years after the restoration. He was under a necessity of leaving France for having the temerity to pay his addresses to a lady to whom Lewis XIV. was known to have a tender attachment. He possessed in a high degree every qualification that could render him agreeable to the licentious court of Charles II. He was gay, gallant, and perfectly well-bred, had an inexhaustible fund of ready wit, and told a story with extraordinary humour and effect. His vivacity infused life wherever he came, and was generally inoffensive. He had also another qualification very well suited to the company he kept. He had great skiil and success in play; and seems to have been chiefly indebted to it for support. Several of the ladies engaged his attention upon his first coming over; but miss Elizabeth Hamilton, whom he afterwards married, seems to have been his favourite, though some say he endeavoured to break off the connection. She was the daughter of sir George Hamilton, fourth son of James first earl of Abercorn. His “Memoirs” were written from his own information, and probably in much the same language in which they are related, by his brother-in-law, Anthony, who, following the fortunes of James II. entered the French service, and died at St. Germain’s, April 21, 1720. He was generally called Count Hamilton. Count Gramont died Jan. 10, 1707. There have lately been several editions of the “Memoirs” printefd here, both in French and English, and in a splendid form, illustrated with portraits. They contain many curious particulars respecting the intrigues and amusements of the court of Charles II. but present upon the whole a disgusting picture of depraved manners.

, 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.

He was so true a lover of learning, and was so much addicted to his studies, that, notwithstanding the multiplicity of his business while at the bar, and his great attention to his charge when a judge, he nevertheless found time to write various treatises, on very different yet important subjects some political, which were remarkably well-timed, and highly serviceable to the government others of a, most extensive nature, such as his essays on law, religion, and education, which were dedicated to his late majesty hen prince of Wales, by whose command, his then secretary, Mr. Samuel Molyneux, wrote him a letter of thanks, in which were many gracious expressions, as well in relation to the piece as to its author. He composed, besides these, many discourses on literary subjects, for the exercise of his own thoughts, and for the better discovery of truth, which went no farther than his own closet, and, from a principle of modesty, were not communicated even to his most intimate friends.

When the prince of Orange declared his intended expedition to England, our young hero made a fresh application, in the most importunate terms, to let him prove his loyalty. His letter to his father, on this occasion, which is printed by Dr. Johnson, is an elegant composition; but this was likewise unavailing, as the danger was now increased in a greater proportion than his age. The king’s affairs were become so desperate, that any attempt to serve him could only have involved him in his royal master’s ruin. On this he sat down a quiet spectator of the revolution, in which most of his family acquiesced, but was certainly far from being pleased with the change; he saw no prospect of receiving any favours from the new administration; and resolving to lay aside all thoughts of pushing his fortune either in the court or the camp, he endeavoured to divert his melancholy in the company and conversation of the softer sex. His adopted favourite was the countess of Newburgh, and he exerted all his powers of verse x in singing the force of this enchantress’s charms, and the sweets of his own captivity. But he sang in vain, hapless like Waller in his passion, while by his poetry he endeavoured to raise his Myra to the immortality which Waller had given to Sacharissa. In the mean time some of his friends were much grieved at this conduct in retiring from business, as unbecoming himself, and disgraceful to his family. One of these in particular, a female relation, whose name was Higgins, took the liberty to send to him an expostuiatory ode in 1690, in hopes of shaming him out of his enchantment; but this was his age of romance, and he persisted in asserting that his resolution was unchangeable, and that he would barter no happiness for that of a lover.

He was educated at Eton, under the protection of Mr. Antrobus, his maternal uncle, who was at that time assistant to Dr. George, and also a fellow of Peter-house, Cambridge, where Gray was admitted as a pensioner in 1734, in his nineteenth year. At Eton his friendship with Horace Walpole (the late earl of Orford), and more particularly with Richard West, commmenced. In the latter, who was a son of the Irish lord chancellor West, henet with one whose proficiency in literature was considerable for his age, whose mind was amiable and ingenuous, wnose disposition was similar to his own, but whose loss he had to deplore, after a strict friendship of eight years. When Gray removed to Peter-house, West went to Christ church, Oxford, and Walpole to King’s -college, Cambridge. It is difficult to trace the line of study which Gray pursued at college. His correspondence at that time treats chiefly of his poetry, and other private pursuits; and he seems to have withdrawn himself entirely from the severity of mathematical studies, while his inquiries centered in classical literature, in the acquisition of modern languages, in history and other branches of polite literature. During his residence at college from 1734 to 1738, his poetical productions were some Latin verses entitled “Luna habitabilis,” inserted in the “Musae Etonenses;” a poem “Onthe marriage of the prince of Wales;” and a “Sapphic Ode to West,” both in Latin also a Latin version of the “Care selve beate” of the Pastor Fido, and fragments of translations in English from Statins and Tasso.

, a younger son of the preceding, and brother to sir John Greenville first eari of Bath, of his name, was born in Cornwall, admitted gentleman commoner of Exeter college, Sept. 22, 1657, actually created in convocation master of arts Sept. 28, 1660. About this time he married Anne, the daughter of Dr. Cosin, bishop of Durham, who conferred several preferments on him, as the rectories of Easington and Elwick in. the county palatine of Durham; the archdeaconry of Durham, to which he was collated on the death of Dr. Gabriel Clarke, Sept. 16, 1662, and to the first stall of prebendaries of the church of Durham, Sept. 24, 1662, from whence he was removed to the second, April 16, 1668. On December 20, 1670, he was created doctor of divinity, being then one of the chaplains in ordinary to Charles II.; and on the 14th of December, 1684, he was installed dean of Durham in the place of Dr. John Sudbury deceased. In the register of Eton college we find that immediately after the restoration, Dr. Greenville was recommended in very strong terms to the master and fellows for a fellowship, by three several letters from the king, but for what reason this recommendation did not take effect, does not appear; probably he might wave his interest on account of other preferment which was more acceptable to him. On the 1st of February 1690, he was deprived of all his >referments upon his refusal to comply with the new oaths >f allegiance and supremacy to the prince of Orange then in possession of the throne, a change which he utterly abhorred, always considering the revolution as a rebellion and usurpation. Soon after the prince of Orange’s landing, he left Durham in order to retire into France; and sometimes lived at Corbeil (from whence it is supposed his family originally sprung), but more frequently at Paris and St. Germain’s, where he was very civilly treated and much countenanced by the queen-mother, as we find in several of his own letters, notwithstanding what has been falsely asserted by Mackay in an account of the court of St. Germain’s. He owns he _was sometimes attacked by the priests, but with much good manners and civility. Mr* Wood says, that during his retirement, he was, on the death of Dr. Lamplugh, nominated to the see of York, by king James II. though never consecrated; but this seems rery doubtful. In April 1695 he came incognito into EngJand; but soon returned. For some time before his death he enjoyed but a very indifferent state of health, having been much troubled with a sciatica, and other infirmities. He died at Paris, after a series of many sufferings, on April 7, 1703, N. S. and was buried at the lower end of the Holy Innocents’ church in that city. Lord Lansdowne in a letter to a nephew of his, who was going to enter into holy orders, says of him, “You had an uncle whose mejnory I shall ever revere: make him your example. Sanctity sate so easy, so unaffected, and so graceful upon him, that in him we beheld the very beauty of holiness. He was as cheerful, as familiar, as condescending in his conversation, as he was strict, regular, and exemplary in his piety; as well bred and accomplished as a courtier, and as reverend and venerable as an apostle. He was indeed apostolical in every thing, for he abandoned all to follow his Lord and Master.” There seems little reason to doubt this character, as far as it respects Dr. Greenville’s private character, but in bigotry for restoration of James II. he probably excelled all his contemporaries, and from some correspondence lately published in the Life of Dr. Comber, his successor in the deanery of Durham, there is reason tp doubt whether in his latter days his mind was not unsound. He published, 1. “The Complete Conformist, or seasonable advice concerning strict conformity and frequent celebration of the Holy Communion,” preached on the 7th of January, being the first Sunday after the Epiphany, 1682, in the cathedral church of Durham, on John i. 29, Loud. 1684, 4to. To which is added “Advice or a letter written to the clergy of the archdeaconry of Durham,” to the same purpose. 2. “A Sermon preached in the cathedral church of Durham, upon the revival of the ancient and laudable practice of that and some other cathedrals, in having sermons on Wednesdays and Fridays during Advent and Lent,” on Rom. xiii. 11, Loud. 1686, 4to. 3. “Counsels and Directions divine and moral: in plain and familiar letters of advice to a young gentleman his nephew, soon after his admission into a college in Oxford,” Lond. 1685, 8vo. Besides these pieces which we have just mentioned, our author, immediately after his retiring into France, published some small tracts at Rouen, which are very scarce, and not very correctly printed; and perhaps it is remarkable that such an unusual favour should be permitted in a popish country to a dignified clergyman of the church of England. The titles of the pieces printed at Rouen are, viz. 4. “The resigned and resolved Christian and faithfull and undaunted loyalist: in two plaine farewell sermons, and a loyal farewell visitation speech. Both delivered amidst the lamentable confusions occasioned by the late foreign invasion and home-defection of his majestie’s subjects in England. By Denis Granville, D. D. deane and archdeacon of Durham, now in exile, chaplaine in ordinary to his majestic. .Whereunto are added certaine Letters to his relations and friends in England, shewing the reasons and manner of his withdrawing out of the kingdom.” “A Letter to his brother the earl of Bathe.” “A Letter to his bishop the bishop of Durham.” “A Letter to his brethren the prebendaries” “A Letter to the clergy of his archdeaconry.” “A Letter to his curates, at Easington and Sedgefield,” printed at Rouen, 1689. 5. “The chiefest matters contained in sundry Discourses made to the clergy of the archdeaconry of Durham, since his majestic‘ s coming to the crown. Summed up and seasonably brought again to their view in a loyal farewell visitation speech on the 13th of November last, 88, being ten days after the landing of the prince of Orange.*’ This is dated from his study at Rouen Nov. 15, 1689. With a preface to the reader and an advertisement. 6.” A copy of a paper penned at Durham, by the author, Aug. 27, 1688, by way of reflection on the then dismal prognostics of the time.“7.” Directions which Dr. Granville, archdeacon of Durham, rector of Sedgefield and Easington, enjoins to be observed by the curates of those his parishes, given them in charge at Easter-visitation held at Sedgefield, in the year 1669."

* Their business was, in conjunc- France, against Spain; but this was tion with lord Cecil, on the part of not successful: Grotius fives a historyEngland, to negociate a triple al- of this embassy in the 7th book of his liance between England. Holland, and Annals. M, cle Buzanval, who had been ambassador in Holland, introduced him to the king-, who presented him with his picture and a gold chain, with which Grotius was so highly flattered, as to have a print engraved of himself, adorned with the chain. After almost a year’s stay in France he returned home, much pleased with his journey; one thin“­only was wanting to complete his satisfaction, a sight of the celebrated M. de Thou, or Thuanus, the person among all the French whom he most esteemed. He had eagerly sought an acquaintance with that great man, and as he did not succeed, he now resolved to open a literary correspondence, and present him with the first-fruits of his studies in print, which he had just dedicated to the prince of Conde”. This was his edition of“Maitianus Capella.” He had formed the plan of this work, when only fourteen years old, almost finished it before he left Holland, and published it presently after his return in 1599. M. de Thou was extremely well pleased with this address, and from this time to his death there subsisted an intimate correspondence between them. In 1600, Grotius sent de Thou an epithalamiuin he had written on the marriage of Henry IV. with Mary of Medicis, but this is not in the collection of his poems.

Having collected some materials in prison for his Apology, he printed it in the beginning of 1622; and it was translated into Latin, and published the same year at Paris. It was sent to Holland immediately, where it caused so much disgust, that the States-General proscribed it as slanderous, tending to asperse by falsehoods the sovereign authority of the government of the United Provinces; the person of the prince of Orange, the States of the particular provinces, and the towjis themselves; and forbad all persons to have it in their custody on pain of death. Grotius presenteJ a petition to the king of France, to be protected against this edict, because it imported, that he should be apprehended wherever found; on which his majesty tqok him into his special protection, the letters for that purpose being issued at Paris, February 25, 1623. The malevolence of those who were then in place made no change in Grotius. In the height of this new persecution, he wrote to his brother, that he would still labour to promote the interest of Holland; and that, if the United Provinces were desirous of entering into a closer union with France, he would assist them with all his credit. This candour enabled him still to preserve many friends, who ardently wished for his return; though they were not able to facilitate it. In 1623, he published at Paris his edition of Stobsp,us.

As soon as he could thtis depend upon an establishment, he resolved to renounce his country, and to make it known by some public act, that he considered himself as no longer a Dutchman. In this spirit he sent his brother letters for the prince of Orange and the Dutch to that purport, July 13 of this year: he likewise wrote to Rotterdam, whick had deferred nominating a pensionary after the sentence passed against him, that they might proceed to an election, since they must no longer look upon him as a Dutchman. He set out from Mentz on his embassy to France in the beginning of 1636, and made his public entry into Paris, March 2, and was introduced to Louis XIII. on the sixth. The great business of this embassy was to obtain the French king’s assistance to Sweden against the imperialists, in transacting which, he always supported with great firmness the rights and honours belonging to the rank of an ambassador. He continued in that character in -France till 1644, when he was recalled at his own request. In order to his return, having obtained a passport through Holland, he embarked at Dieppe, and arrived at Amsterdam in 1645, where he was extremely well received, and entertained at the public expence. That city fitted out a vessel to carry him to Hamburgh, where he was, May 16, this year. He went next day to Lubeck, and thence to Wismar, where count Wrangle, admiral of the Swedish fleet, gave him a splendid entertainment, and afterwards sent a man of war with him to Calmar, whither the chancellor sent a gentleman with his coach to bring him to Suderacher. He continued there about a fortnight with the chancellor and other ambassadors, who treated him with great honours. Returning to Calmar, he went by land to Stockholm, whither queen Christina came from Upsal to see him.

But here again an unlucky accident cut short his hopes; he carried with him to Florence Guarino Guarini, his third son, but fifteen years of age, and sent him to Pisa to complete his studies in that city. There the youth fell in love with a noble but poor widow, named Cassandra Pontaderi, and married her. Guarino no sooner heard the news, but suspecting the grand duke was privy to the marriage, and even promoted it, he left his service abruptly; and, returning to Ferrara, went thence to the prince of Urbino, but in a year’s time came back to Ferrara, in 1604. He was sent the same year by the magistrates of the city of Rome, to congratulate Paul V. on his elevation to the papal chair. This was probably his last public employ. He resided at Ferrara till 1609, going occasionally to Venice to attend his law-suits, which carried him in 1610 to Rome, where they were determined in his favour. Passing through Venice on his return home, he was seized, in his inn there, with the distemper which put a period to his life, October 7, 1612, when he was seventy-four years of age.

, 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.

, 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.

, an eminent natural philosopher, particularly distinguished by his experiments on the physiology of plants, was the sixth son of Thomas Hales, esq. of Beakeborn, or Beckesbourn, Kent, and grandson of sir Robert Hales, bart. of Beckesbourn, where he was born, Sept. 17, 1677, and was admitted a pensioner of Bene't college, Cambridge, under the tuition of Mr. Moss, June 19, 1696, where, after taking his first degree in arts, he was admitted a fellow, Fob. 25, 1702-3. He proceeded M. A. at the next commencement, and was admitted B. D. in 1711. The degree of D. D. was conferred on him by the university of Oxford in 1733. Botany and anatomy formed his studies of relaxation while at Cambridge, his companion in which was the celebrated antiquary Dr. Stukeley. He was advanced successively to the perpetual curacy of Teddington, Middlesex, and to the livings of Portlock, Somersetshire, and Farringdon, Hampshire. He married Mary, the daughter and heiress of Dr. Henry Newce of Much-Hadham, in the county of Hertford, and rector of Halisham in Sussex. This lady died at the end of two years, leaving no issue, nor did he ever marry strain. He resided to the end of his life at Teddington, wliere he was visited by persons of rank and taste, amongst others by Frederick late prince of Wales, after whose death Dr. Hales was made clerk of the closet to the princess dowager, who always entertained a high respect for him, and after his decease erected a handsome monument to his memory in Westminster-abbey, near that of Handel. On this is liis bust in a large medallion, supported by a female figure representing Botany, accompanied by Religion. The epitaph is in Latin. He refused a canonry 01 Windsor, that he migbt continue to devote himself to his parochial duties, and his favourite scientific pursuits; and as piety, truth, and virtue were the principles of his character, he lived in universal esteem to the age of eighty-four, dying at Teddington, January 4, 1761, where he was buried, under the church tower, which he had rebuilt at his own expence.

, a learned Lutheran divine, was born at Osnabrug, in 1525, and began to publish his opinions at Camen; but being driven from thence, was received by the canons at Bilefeldt,~ and taught the youth there according to Luther’s catechism. His enemies having obliged him to retire to Rostock, he took a doctor of divinity’s degree, and attended the conference at Antwerp in 1567, by desire of the prince of Orange. He was appointed superintendant of the churches in the duchy of Brunswick, that they might be regulated according to the confession of Augsburg; and at last, superintendant-general of the county of Oldenburg, 1593; where he died June 27, 15L5. His principal works are, 4 * Commentaria in Pentateuchum,“Dilingae, 1563, fol.; Cbronicum Dldenburgicum,”.&c. and “Opera Genealogico-Historica de Westphalia et Saxonia inferiori,” 1711, 4to, new edit.

Among the papers left by sir William at his death, are found more than fifty memoirs directed by Father Anthony to the marquis of Sambuca, soliciting his patronage for the great work of the manuscripts, to which solicitations that minister seemed to be deaf. Numberless other memoirs of the kind were also presented to several persons in the royal service, and they met with no better success. The consequence was, that Father Anthony at last put himself under the protection of sir William, and tendered his services for any information which the latter might wish concerning the Museum. The propriety of accepting this offer may be questioned. It was considered, however, by one who was not particularly acquainted with the administration of the establishment, as too important not to meet with an immediate compliance: a treaty was concluded, that sir William should grant to Father Anthony a pension of 600 ducats a year (100l.), and the latter should regularly send to him every week a sheet of original information; and in order to elude any ministerial inquisition, it was also agreed that the correspondence should be carried on in cyphers. This correspondence lasted till the death of Father Anthony in 1798; and, if we except a want of delicacy, and perhaps also a breach of trust in the monk, we may presume that, in the main object, it proved satisfactory to both parties: sir William was indeed so satisfied, that, some years after the commencement of the treaty, he procured for Father Anthony an additional pension, of the same sum of 600 ducats a year (100l.), from his royal highness the Prince of Wales; and Father Anthony, on his side, seemed also so sensible of the favours he had received, that on his death, he bequeathed all his manuscripts and papers of every kind to his patron.

, well remembered as a man esteemed and caressed by the elegant and great, was the second son of Anthony Hammond mentioned above: he was born about 1710, and educated at Westminster-school; but it does not appear that he was of any university, although Mr. Cole claims him for Cambridge, but without specifying his college. When about eighteen, he was introduced to the earl of Chesterfield, and from a conformity of character, manners, and inclinations, soon became particularly attached to his lordship. He was equerry to the prince of Wales, and seems to have come very early into public notice, and to have been distinguished by those whose patronage and friendship prejudiced mankind at that time in favour of those on whom they were bestowed; for he was the companion of Cobham, Lyttelton, and Chesterfield. He is said to have divided his life between pleasure and books; in his retirement forgetting the town, and in his gaiety losing the student. Of his literary hours all the effects are exhibited in his memorable “Love Elegies,” which were written very early, and his “Prologue” not long before his death. In 1733, he obtained an income of 400l. a year by the will of Nicholas Hammond, esq. a near relation. In 1741 he was chosen into parliament for Truro in Cornwall, probably one of those who were elected by the prince’s influence; and died June 2, 1742, at Stowe, the famous seat of the lord Cobham. His mistress long outlived him, and, in 177D, died unmarried, bed-chamber woman to the queen. The character which her lover bequeathed her was, indeed, not likely to attract courtship, yet it was her own fault that she remained single, having had another very honourable offer. The “Elegies” were published after his death; and while the writer’s name was remembered with fondness, they were read with a resolution to admire them. The recommendatory preface of the editor, who was then believed, and is affirmed by Dr. Maty, to be the earl of Chesterfield, raised strong prejudices in their favour; but Dr. Johnson is of opinion that they have neither passion, nature, nor manners, and Dr. Beattie was informed on very good authority that Hammond was not in love when he wrote his “Elegies.”

, a learned English divine, was born at Chertsey in Surrey, August 18, 1605; and was the youngest son of Dr. John Hammond, physician to Henry prince of Wales, svho was his godfather, and gave him his own name. In his infancy he was remarkable for sweetness of temper, the love of privacy, and a devotional turn. He was educated at Eton-school, and sent to Magdalen-college, Oxford, in 1618; of which, after taking his degrees in a regular way, he was elected fellow in July 1625. During the whole of his residence here, he generally spent thirteen hours every day in study; in the course of which he not only went through the usual academic studies, but read almost all the classics, writing emendations, critical remarks, &c. as he proceeded. Having applied himself also with great diligence to the study of divinity, he was admitted to holy orders in 1629, and soon, after took the degree of bachelor of divinity. In 1633 he was presented to the rectory of Penshurst in Kent, by Robert Sidney earl of Leicester. That nobleman, happening to be one of his auditors while he was supplying a turn at court for Dr. Frewen, the president of his college, and one of his majesty’s chaplains, was-so deeply affected with the sermon, and conceived so high an opinion of the preacher’s merit, that he conferred on him this living, then void, and in his gift. Upon this he quitted his college, and went to his cure, where he resided as long as the times permitted him, punctually performing every branch of the ministerial function in the most diligent and exemplary manner. In 1639 he took the degree of D. D.; in 1640, was chosen one of the members of the convocation, called with the long parliament, which began that year; and, in. 1643, made archdeacon of Chichester by the unsolicited favour of Dr. Brian Duppa, then bishop of Chichester, and afterwards of Winchester. The same year also he was named one of the assembly of divines, but never sat amongst them.

From conducting the performance he became composer to the Chouse; and “Almeria,” his first opera, was composed when he was not much above fourteen years of age. The success of it was so great, that it ran for thirty nights without interruption; and this encouraged him to compose others, as he did also a considerable number of sonatas during his stay at Hamburgh, which was about four or five years. He contracted an acquaintance at this place with many persons of note, among whom was the prince of Tuscany, brother to the grand duke. The prince, who was a great lover of the art for which his country was famous, would often lament Handel’s not being acquainted with the Italian music; shewed him a large collection of it,; and was very desirous he should return with him to Florence. Handel plainly answered, that he could see nothing in the music answerable to the prince’s character of it; but, on the contrary, thought it so very indifferent, that the singers, he said, must be angels to recommend it. The prince smiled at the severity of his censure, yet pressed him to return with him, and intimated that no convenience should be wanting. Handel thanked him for the offer of a favour which he did not chuse to accept; for he resolved to go to Italy on a speculation of his own, as soon as he could raise a sum sufficient for the purpose. He had in him from his childhood a strong spirit of independence, which was never known to forsake him in the most distressful seasons of his life; and it is remarkable that he refused the greatest offers from persons of the first distinction, because he would not be cramped or confined by particular attachments.

, an eminent political writer, was born in January 1611, being the eldest son of sir Sapcote Harrington, and Jane the daughter of sir William Samuel of Upton, in Northamptonshire, the place of his nativity. When he had made a progress in classical learning, he was admitted in 1629 a gentleman-commoner of Trinity college, in Oxford, and placed under Mr. Chillingworth, who had lately been elected fellow of that college; from whom he might possibly acquire some portion of that spirit of reasoning and thinking for himself, which afterwards shone forth so conspicuously in his writings. About three years after, his father died; upon which he left the university, and commenced travelling, having previously furnished himself with the knowledge of several foreign languages. His first step was into Holland, then the principal school of martial discipline; and, what may be supposed to have affected him more sensibly, a country wonderfully flourishing, under the auspices of liberty, commerce, strength, and grandeur. Here it is probable that he began to make government the subject of his meditations; for, he was often heard to say, that, “before he left England, he knew no more of anarchy, monarchy, aristocracy, democracy, oligarchy, or the like, than as hard words, whose signification he found in his dictionary.” On coming into the Netherlands, he entered a volunteer, and remained in that capacity some months, in lord Craven’s regiment; during which time, being much at the Hague, he had the farther opportunity of accomplishing himself in two courts, those of the prince of Orange, and of the queen of Bohemia, daughter of our James I. who was then a fugitive in Holland. He was taken into great favour by this princess, and also by the prince elector, whom he attended to Copenhagen, when his highness paid a visit to the king of Denmark; and, after his return from travelling, was entrusted by him with the affairs of the Palatinate, so far as they were transacted at the British court.

, an English historian, was educated at Cambridge, where he took the degree of LL. D. In 1599 he published, in 4to, The first Part of the Life and Raigne of King Henrie IV. extending to the end of the first yeare of his raigne,“dedicated to Robert earl of Essex; for which he suffered a tedious imprisonment, on account of having advanced something in defence of hereditary succession to the crown. We are informed, in lord Bacon’s” Apophthegms,“that queen Elizabeth, being highly incensed at this book, asked Bacon, who was then one of her council learned in the law,” whether there was any treason contained in it?“who answered,” No, madam for treason, I cannot deliver my opinion there is any but there is much felony.“The queen, apprehending it, gladly asked,” How and wherein“Bacon answered,” because he had stolen many of his sentences and conceits out of Cornelius Tacitus.“This discovery is thought to have prevented his being put to the rack. Carnden tells us, that the book being dedicated to the earl of Essex, when that nobleman and his friends were tried, the lawyers urged, that” it was written on purpose to encourage the deposing of the queen;“and they particularly insisted on these words in the dedication* in which our author styles the earl” Magnus & present! judicio, & futuri temporis expectatione.“In 1603 he published, in quarto,” An Answer to the first part of a certaine Conference concerning Succession, published not long since under the name of R. Doleman.“Tais R. Doleman was the Jesuit Parsons. In 1610 he was appointed by king James one of the historiographers of Chelsea college, near London, which, as we have often had occasion to notice, was never permanently established. In 1613, he published in 4to,” The Lives of the Three Normans, kings of England; William I; William II.; Henry I.“and dedicated them to Charles prince of Wales. In 1619, he received the honour of knighthood from his majesty, at Whitehall. In 1624, he published a discourse entitled” Of Supremacie in Affaires of Religion,“dedicated to prince Charles, and written in the manner of a conversation held at the table of Dr. Toby Matthews, bishop of Durham, in the time of the parliament, 1605. The proposition maintained is, that supreme power in ecciesiasticaJ affairs is a right of sovereignty. He wrote likewise,” The Life and Raigne of King Edward VI. with the beginning of the Raigne of queen Elizabeth,“1630, 4to, but this was posthumous; for he died June 27, 1627. He was the author of several works of piety, particularly” The Sr.nctuarie of a troubled soul,“Lond. 1616, 12mo;” David’s Tears, or an Exposition of the Penitential Psalms,“1622, 8vo. and te Christ’s Prayer on the Crosse for his Enemies,” 1623. Wood says that “he was accounted a learned and godly man, and one better read in theological authors, than in those belonging to his profession; and that with regard to his histories, the phrase and words in them were in their time esteemed very good; only some have wished that in his” History of Henry IV.“he had not called sir Hugh Lynne by so light a word as Mad-cap, though he were such; and that he had not changed his historical style into a dramatical, where he introduceth a mother uttering a woman’s passion in the case of her son.” Nicolson observes, that “he had the repute in his time, of a good clean pen and smooth style; though some have since blamed him for being a little too dramatical,” Strype recommends that our author “be read with caution that his style and language is good, and so is his fancy but that he uses it too much for an historian, which puts him sometimes on making speeches for others, which they never spake, and relating matters which perhaps they never thought on.” In confirmation of which censure, Kennet has since affirmed him to be “a professed speech-maker through all his little history of Henry IV.”

, an enterprising English navigator, was born in 1745; he was the son of Mr. Hearne, secretary to the water-works, London-bridge, a very sensible man, and of a respectable family in Somersetshire; he died of a fever in his fortieth year, and left Mrs. Hearne with this son, then but three years of age, and a daughter two years older. Mrs. H. finding her income too small to admit her living in town as she had been accustomed, retired to Bimmister, in Dorsetshire (her native place), where she lived as a gentlewoman, and was much respected. It was her wish to give her children as good an education as the place afforded, and accordingly she sent her son to school at a very early period: but his dislike to reading and writing was so great, that he made very little progress in either. His masters, indeed, spared neither threats nor persuasion to induce him to learn, but their arguments were thrown away on one who seemed predetermined never to become a learned man; he had, however, a very quick apprehension, and in his childish sports shewed unusual activity and ingenuity; he was particularly fond of drawing; and though he never had the least instruction in the art, copied with great delicacy and correctness even from nature. Mrs. Hearne’s friends, finding her son had no taste for study, advised tier fixing on some business, and proposed such as they judged most suitable for him; but he declared himself utterly averse to trade, and begged he might be sent to sea. His mother very reluctantly complied with his request, took him to Portsmouth, and remained with him till he sailed. His captain (now lord Hood) promised to take care of him, and gave him every indulgence his youth required. He was then but eleven years of age. They had a warm engagement soon after he entered, and took several prizes: the captain told him he should have his share; but he begged, in a very affectionate manner, it might be given to his mother, and she would know best what to do with it. He was a midshipman several years under the same commander; but on the conclusion of the war, having no hopes of preferment, he left the navy, and entered into the service of the Hudson’s Bay company, as mate of one of their sloops. He was, however, soon distinguished from his associates by his ingenuity, industry, and a wish to undertake some hazardous enterprize by which mankind might be benefited. This was represented to the company, and they immediately applied to him as a proper person to be sent on an expedition they had long had in view, viz. to find out the north-west passage: he gladly accepted the proposal, and how far he succeeded is shewn to the public in his Journal. On his return he was advanced to a more lucrative post, and in a few years was made commander in chief, in which situation he remained till 1782, when the French unexpectedly landed at Prince of Wales’ s Fort, took possession of it, and after having given the governor leave to secure his own property, seized the stock of furs, &c. &c. and blew up the fort. At the company’s request Mr. H. went out the year following, saw it rebuilt, and the new governor settled in his habitation (which they took care to fortify a little better than formerly), and returned to England in 1787. He had saved a few thousands, the fruits of many years’ industry, and might, had he been blessed with prudence, have enjoyed many years of ease and plenty; but he had lived so long where money was of no use, that he seemed insensible of its value here, and lent it with little or no security to those he was scarcely acquainted with by name; sincere and undesigning himself, he was by no means a match for the duplicity of others. His disposition, as may be judged by his writing, was naturally humane; what he wanted in learning and polite accomplishments, he made up in native simplicity; and was so strictly scrupulous with regard to the property of others, that he was heard to say, a few davs before his death, “he could lay his hand on his heart and say, he had never wronged any man of sixpence.”

Such are the outlines of Mr. Hearne’s character; who, if he had some failings, had many virtues to counterbalance them, of which charity was not the least. He died of the dropsy, November 1792, aged forty-seven. In 1797 appeared his “Journey from the Prince of Wales’s Fort, in Hudson’s Bay, to the Northern Ocean; undertaken by order of the Hudson’s Bay Company, for the discovery of Copper-mines, a North-west passage, &c. in the years 1769, 1770, 1771, 1772,” a volume which forms a very valuable addition to the discoveries of our enterprizing countrymen.

, at first an advocate, afterwards an ecclesiastic, and abbé of Auhignac and Meimac, was born at Paris in 1604. Cardinal Richelieu, whose nephew he educated, bestowed on him his two abbeys, and the protection of that minister gave him consequence both as a man of the world and as an author. He figured by turns as a grammarian, a classical scholar, a poet, an antiquary, a preacher, and a writer of romances; but he was most known by his book entitled “Pratique du Theatre,” and by the quarrels in which his haughty and presumptuous temper engaged him, with some of the most eminent authors of his time. The great Corneille was one of these, whose disgust first arose from the entire omission of his name in the celebrated book above mentioned. He was also embroiled, on different accounts, with madame Scuderi, Menage, and Richelet. The warmth of his temper exceeded rhat of his imagination, which was considerable; and yet he lived at court a good deal in the style of a philosopher, rising early to his studies, soliciting no favours, and associating chiefly with a few friends, as unambitious as himself, he describes himself as of a slender constitution, not capable of taking much exercise, or even of applying very intensely to study, without suffering from it in his health; yet not attached to any kind of play. “It is,” ays he, “too fatiguing for the feebleness of my body, or too indolent for the activity of my mind.” The abbé d'Aubignac lived to the age of seventy-two, and died at xnours in 1676. His works are, 1. “Pratique du Theatre,” Amsterdam, 1717, two vols. 8vo; also in a 4to edition published at Paris; a book of considerable learning, but little calculated to inspire or form a genius. 2. “Zenobie,” a tragedy, in prose, composed according to the rules laid down in his “Pratique,” and a complete proof of the total inefficacy of rules to produce an interesting drama, being the most dull and fatiguing performance that was ever represented. The prince of Condé said, on the subject of this tragedy, “We give great credit to the abbé d'Aubignac for having so exactly followed the rules of Aristotle, but owe no thanks to the rules of Aristotle for having made the abbé produce so vile a tragedy.” He wrote a few other other tragedies also, which are worse, if possible, than Zenobia. 3. “Macaride; or the Queen of the Fortunate Islands,” a novel, Paris, 1666, 2 vok 8vo. 4. “Conseils d'Ariste à Celimene, 12mo. 5.” Histoire da terns, ou Relation du Royaume de Coqueterie,“12mo, 6.” Terence justifié,“inserted in some editions of his” Pratique.“7.” Apologie de Spectacles," a work of no value. A curious book on satyrs, brutes, and monsters, has been attributed to him; but, though the author’s name was Hedelin, he does not appear to have been the same.

, son of the preceding, was born in 1618, and like his father, became celebrated for his knowledge, and his paradoxes was very skilful in physic and chemistry, and was esteemed a man of universal learning, and acquainted with most trades and arts. He was even suspected of having found the philosopher’s stone, because he lived at an apparently great expence with a small income; but was much esteemed and respected at Amsterdam. After living many years with the prince of Sultzbach, who was a great patron of the learned, he set out for Berlin, by desire of the queen of Prussia, and died at Cologn in 1699. His works are, “Alphabeti vere naturalis Hebraic! delineatio;” “Cogitationes super quatuor priora capita Geneseos,” Amsterdam, 1697, 8vo “De attributis divinis” “De Inferno,” &c. He believed the Metempsycosis, and maintained many other paradoxes.

, a physician, was born of a noble family in the principality of Atihalt,about 1625. He obtained at an early age a considerable reputation for his knowledge of medicine and chemistry; and having settled in Holland about 1649, he practised at the Hague with so much success, that he was appointed first physician to the States-general, and to the prince of Orange, he died August 20, 1709. His works serve, however, rather to prove his devotion to the absurdities of the alchemists, physiognomists, and such visionaries of his time, than his advancement in true science; and therefore it may be sufficient to refer for their titles to our authorities His son Adrian [Helveticus], who was born in 1656, journeyed to Paris, without any design of fixing there, and only to see that new world, and sell some medicines, but accident detained him very unexpectedly. The dysentery then prevailed in that city-, and all who applied to him are said to have been infallibly cured. His success was celebrated; and Louis XIV. ordered him to publish the remedy which produced such certain and surprising effects. He declared it to be Ipecacuanha, and received 1000 louis-d'ors for the discovery. He settled in Paris, became physician to the duke of Orleans, and was also made inspector-general of the military hospitals. He died in 1721, leaving some works behind him, of little value; the principal of which is, “Traité des Maladies de plus frequentes, & des Remedies specifiques pour les guerir,” 2 vols. 8vo.

, 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.”

, a political and poetical writer of considerable fame, was the eldest son of John first earl of Bristol, by his second wife, Elizabeth, sole daughter and heir to sir Thomas Felton of Playford in the county of Suffolk, bart. He was born Oct. 15, 1696, and educated at Clare-hall, Cambridge, where he took his master’s degree in 1715, previously to which, on Nov. 7, 1714, he had been made gentleman of the bed-chamber to the Prince of Wales. He came into parliament soon after the accession of George I. and was appointed vice-chamberlain to the king in 1730, and a privy counsellor. In 1733 he was called up by writ to the house of peers, as lord Hervey of Ickworth; and in 1740 was constituted lord privy seal, from which post he was removed in 1742. He died Aug. 5, 1743, in the forty-seventh year of his age, a short period, but to which his life had been protracted with the greatest care and difficulty. Having early in life felt some attacks of the epilepsy, he entered upon and persisted in a very strict regimen, which stopped the progress of that dreadful disease, but prevented his acquiring, or at least long enjoying, the blessing of sound health. It is to this rigid abstemiousness that Pope malignantly alludes in the character he has given of lord Hervey, under the name of Sporus, in the line “the mere white curd of asses milk.” But lord Hervey affords a memorable instance of the caution with which we ou^ht to read the characters drawn by Pope and his associates; nor can too much praise be given to his late editors for the pains they have taken to rescue some of them from the imputations which proceeded from the irritable temper and malignity of that admired satirist. In the character of Sporus, Dr. Warton has justly observed, that language cannot afford more glowing or more forcible terms to express the utmost bitterness of contempt. Pope and his lordship were once friends; but they quarrelled at a time when the poetical world seemed to be up in arms, and perpetually contending in a manner disgraceful to their characters. In the quarrel between Pope and lord Hervey, it appears that Pope was the aggressor, and that lord Hervey wrote some severe lines in reply, and An Epistle from a Nobleman to a Doctor of Divinity.“1733. (Dr. Sherwin). In answer to this, Pope wrote the” Letter to a Noble Lord, on occasion of some libels written and propagated at court in the year 1732-3,“which is printed in his Works, and, as Warburton says,” is conducive to what he had most at heart, his moral character,“to which, after all, it conduced very little, as he Violated every rule of truth and decency in his subsequent attack on lord Hervey in the” Prologue to the Satires,“under the character of Sporus, whic,h, we agree with Mr. Coxe,” cannot be read without disgust and horror disgust at the indelicacy of the allusions, and horror at the malignity of the poet, in laying the foundation of his abuse on the lowest species of satire, personal invective; and what is still worse, on sickness and debility."

The principal works of Dr. Hickes are the three following: 1. “Institutiones Grammaticse Anglo-Saxonicae & Maeso-Gothicae. Grammatica Islandica Runolphi Jonas. Catalogus librorum Septentrionalium. Accedit Edwardi Bernardi Etymologicum Britannicum,” Oxon. 1689, 4to. inscribed to archbishop Sancroft. While the dean was writing the preface to this book, there were great disputes in the house of commons, and throughout the kingdom, about the original contract; which occasioned him to insert the ancient coronation oath of our Saxon kings, to shew, what was not very necessary, that there is not the least footstep of any such contract. 2. “Antiquae literature Septentrionalis libri duo: quorum primus G. Hickesu S. T. P. Linguarum Veterum Septentrionalium thesaurum grammatico-criticum & Archaeologicum, ejusdem de antique literatures Septentrionalis militate dissertationem epistolarum, & Andreas Fountaine equitis aurati numismata Saxonica& Dano-Saxonica, complectitur alter contn Humfredi Wanleii librorum Veterum Septentnonaliiim, qui in Ano-liae Bibiiothecis extant, c.ialogum histonco-cr im, necmTn multorum veteruni codicum Septentrionalium alibi extantiuro notitiam, cum totius operis sex mdicibus, Oxon. 1705, 2 or sometimes 3 vols. folio. Foreigners as well as Englishmen, who had any relish for antiquities, have justly admired this splendid and laborious work, which is now scarce and dear. It was originally published at 3l. 3s. the small, and 5l. 5s the large paper. The latter now rarely appears, and the former is worth 15l. The great duke of Tuscany' s envoy sent a copy of it to his master, which his highness looking into, and finding full of strange characters, called a council of the Dotti, and commanded them to peruse and give him an account of. They did so, and reported it to be an excellent work, and that they believed the author to be a man of a particular head; for this was the envoy’s compliment to Hirkes, when he went to him with a present from his master. 3. Two volumes of Sermons, most of which were never before printed, with a preface by Mr. Spinckes, 1713, 8vo. After his death was published another volume of his Sermons, with some pieces relating to schism, separation, &c. 4.” A Letter sent from beyond the seas to one of the chief ministers of the ndnconforming party, &c. 1674“which was afterwards reprinted in 1684, under the title of” The judgment of an anonymous writer concerning these following particulars first, a law for disabling a papist to inherit the crown secondly, the execution of penal laws against protestant dissenters; thirdly, a bill of comprehension all briefly discussed in a letter sent from beyond the seas to a dissenter ten years ago.“This letter was in reality an answer to his elder brother, Mr. John Hickes, a dissenting minister, bred up in Cromwell’s time at the college of Dublin; whom the doctor always endeavoured to convince of his errors, but without success. John persisted in them to his death, and at last suffered for his adherence to the duke of Monrnouth; though, upon the doctor’s unwearied application, the king would have granted him his.life,^ but that he had been falsely informed that this Mr. Hickes was the person who advised the duke of Monmouth to take upon him the title of king. 5.” Ravillac Redivivus, being a narrative of the late trial of Mr. James Mitchel, a conventicle preacher, who was executed Jan. 18, 1677, for an attempt on the person of the archbishop of St. Andrew’s, &c.“6.” The Spirit of Popery speaking out of the mouths of fanatical Protestants; or, the last speeches of Mr. John Kid and Mr. John King, two presbyterian ministers, who were executed for high treason at Edinburgh, 'ten Aug. 14, 1679.“These pieces were published in 1630, and they were occasioned by his attendance on the duke of Lauderdale in quality of chaplain. The spirit of faction made them much read, and did the author considerable service with several great personages, and even with the king. 7.” Jovian; or, an answer to Julian the apostate;“printed twice in 1683, 8vo. This is an ingenious and learned tract in defence of passive obedience and nonresistance, against the celebrated Samuel Johnson, the author of” Julian.“8.” The case of Infant Baptism, 1683;“printed in the second vol. of the” London Cases, 168.5,“4to. 9.” Speculum beatae Virginis, a discourse on Luke i. 28. of the due praise and honour of the Virgin Mary, by a true Catholic of the Church of England, 1686.“10.” An apologetical Vindication of the Church of England, in answer to her adversaries, who reproach her with the English heresies and schisms, 1686,“4to; reprinted, with many additions, a large preface, and an appendix of” Papers relating to the Schisms of the Church of Rome,“1706, 8vo. 11.” The celebrated story of the Thebati Legion no fable: in answer to the objections of Dr. Gilbert Burners Preface to his Translation of Lactantius de mortibus persecutorum, with some remarks on his Discourse of Persecution;“written in 1687, but not published till 1714, for reasons given in the preface. 12.” Reflections upon a Letter out of the country to a member of this present parliament, occasioned by a Letter to a member of the house of commons, concerning the Bishops lately in the Tower, and now under suspension, 1689.“The author of the letter to which these reflections are an answer, was generally presumed to be Dr. Bumet, though that notion was afterwards contradicted, 13.” A Letter to the author of a late paper entitled A Vindication of the Divines of the Church of England, &c. in defence of the history of passive obedience, 16S9.“The author of the” Vindication,“was Dr. Fowler, bishop of Gloucester, though his name was not to it. 14.” A Word to the Wavering, in answer to Dr. Gilbert Burnet’s Inquiry into the present state of aflairs, 1689.“15.” An Apology for the new Separation, in a letter to Dr. Sharp, archbishop of York, &c. 1691.“16.” A Vindication of some among ourselves against the false principles of Dr. Sherlock, &c. 1692.“17.” Some Discourses on Dr. Burnet and Dr.Tillotson, occasioned by the lute funeral sermon of the former upon the latter, 1695.“It is remarkable, that in this piece Hickes has not scrupled to call Tiilotson an atheist. 18.” The Pretences of the Prince of Wales examined and rejected, &c. 1701.“19. A letter in the” Philosophical Transactions,* entitled, “Epistola viri Rev. D G. Hickesii S. T. P ad D. Hans Sloane, M. D. & S. R. Seer, de varia lectione inscriptions, quse in statua Tagis exaratur per quatuor alphabeta Hetrusca” 20. “Several Letters which passed between Dr. G. Hickes and a Popish priest, &c. 1705.” The person on whose account this book was published, was the lady Theophila Nelson, wife of Robert Nelson, esq. 21. “A second collection of controversial Letters relating to the church of England and the church of Rome, as they passed between Dr. G. Hickes and an honourable lady, 1710.” This lady was the lady Gratiana Carew, of Hadcomb in Devonshire. 22. “Two Treatises; one of the Christian Priesthood, the other of the dignity of the episcopal order, against a book entitled, The Rights of the Christian Church.” Trie third edition in 1711, enlarged into two volumes, 8vo. 23. “A seasonable ana 1 modest apology in behalf of the Rev. Dr. Hickes and other nonjurors, in a letter to Thomas Wise, D. D. 1710.” 24. “AVindication of Dr. Hickes, and the author of the seasonable and modest apology, from the reflections of Dr. Wise, &c. 1712.” 25. “Two Letters to Robert Nelson, esq. relating to bishop Bull,” published in Bull’s life. 26. “Some Queries proposed to civil, canon, and common lawyers, 1712;” printed, after several editions, in 1714, with another title, “Seasonable Queries relating to the birth and birthright of a certain person.” Besides the works enumerated here, there are many prefaces and recommendations written by him, at the earnest request of others, either authors or editors.

In 1731, he met with a very great shock in the loss of a wife, to whom he had been married twenty years. She xvas the only daughter of Edmund Morris, esq. of Stratford in Essex, by whom he had nine children, and also a handsome fortune. After this he appears to have continued in London until 1738, when he retired to Plaistow in Essex, and devoted himself to study, and to the concerns of his family. One more project he attempted here, and with some success, although not to himself; viz. the' art of making pot-ash equal to that brought from Russia. Here also he wrote several poetical pieces, particularly an heroic poem, entitled “The Fanciad,” another of the same kind, “The Impartial,” a “Poem upon Faith,” and three books of an epic poem on the story of Gideon. He also adapted to the English stage, Voltaire’s tragedy of “Merope,” which was the last work he lived to complete. This he just lived to see introduced to the public but the day before it was, by command of Frederic prince of Wales, to have been represented for his benefit, he died, in the veiy minute of the memorable earthquake, Feb. 8, 1750, of the shock of which, it is said, he appeared sensible. He was interred near lord Godolphin’s monument, in the great cloister of Westminster-abbey, in the same grave with his wife.

In consequence of this, Dr. Hinchliffe was appointed tutor and domestic chaplain to the duke of Devonshire, with whom he continued at Devonshire-house till his grace went abroad; and, by the joint interest of his two noble patrons he was presented to the vicarage of Greenwich, in 1766. About this time, Miss Elizabeth, the sister of his pupil Mr. Crewe, a young lady about twenty-one years of age, was courted by an officer of the guards, who not being favoured with the approbation of Mr. Crewe, this latter gentleman applied to Dr. Hinchliffe, requesting him to dissuade his sister from encouraging the addresses of her suitor. This he did so effectually, that the lady not only gratified her brother’s wishes, but her own, by giving both her heart and hand to the doctor. Mr. Crewe acquiesced immediately in his sister’s choice, encreasing her fortune from five thousand^ the sum originally bequeathed to her, to fifteen thousand pounds; but at the same time withdrawing the three hundred per annum before mentioned. Dr. Hinchliffe, it is said, was offered the tuition of the prince of Wales, which important trust he declined, from his predilection, as it is supposed, to what were called Whig principles. On the death of Dr. Smith, in 1768, his lordship was elected, through the recommendation of the duke of Grafton, master of Trinity college, Cambridge; and scarce a year had elapsed, when he was raised to the bishopric of Peterborough on the death of Dr. Lamb, in. 1769, by the interest of the duke of Grafton, then prime minister. It is probable his lordship might have obtained other preferment, had he not uniformly joined the party in parliament who opposed the principle and conduct of the American war. The only other change he experienced was that of being appointed dean of Durham, by which he was removed from the mastership of Trinity college. He died at his palace at Peterborough Jan. 11, 1794, after a long illness, which terminated in a paralytic stroke. His lordship, although a man of ^considerable learning, published three sermons, preached on public occasions. He was a graceful orator in parliament, and much admired in the pulpit. Mr. Jones, in his Life of bishop Home, says that “he spake with the accent of a man of sense (such as he really was in a superior degree), but it was remarkable, and, to those who did not know the cause, mysterious, that there was not a corner of the church, in which he could not be heard distinctly.” The reason Mr. Jones assigns, was, that he made it an invariable rule, “to do justice to every consonant, knovxing that the vowels will be sure to speak for themselves. And thus he became the surest and clearest of speakers: his elocution was perfect, and never disappointed his audience.” Two years after his death, a volume of bishop Hinchliffe’s “Sermons” were published, but, probably from a want of judgment in the selection, did not answer the expectations of those who had been accustomed to admire him in the pulpit.

How dubious soever many of the circumstances of the life of Hippocrates may be, it is not questioned that he acquired a reputation, which has ranked him high among the great men of Greece, and which may be traced from age to age, from the time in which he flourished through all succeeding periods. He has not only passed, by almost universal consent, for the father of physic and the prince of physicians, but his opinions were every where respected as oracles, not only in the schools of medicine, but in the courts of law. Philosophers of every sect were eager to rend, to quote, and to comment upon his writings. He has shared with Plato the title of divine; and not only statues, but temples were erected to his memory, and his altars were covered with incense, like those of Æscuiapius himself. Indeed the qualifications and duties required in the character of the physician, were never more fully exemplified than in his conduct, or more eloquently described than by his pen. He had formed a very exalted notion of the dignity and usefulness of his profession, which is only lowered, he said, in the public estimation, by the ignorance of its professors; and he supported this dignity in his own person by the most rigid attention to the morality of private lite, by great simplicity, candour, and benevolence in all his intercourse with the sick, and by unwearied zeal in investigating the nature and progress of diseases, and in administering to their cure. He is said to have admitted no one to his instructions without the solemnity of an oath, the form of which is transmitted to us among his writings. The books attributed to Hippocrates amount to sevemytwo in number, of which, however, a considerable part are regarded as spurious; some containing opinions which were not prevalent till long after the age of Hippocrates, and some differing altogether in style and composition from the genuine writings of that master, which are composed in the ionic dialect, and are distinguished by a remarkable conciseness, and, as it were, compression oflanguage, which at times, indeed, borders upon obscurity. Some pieces have been obviously written after the commencement of the Christian tera; and Galen affirms that several interpolations and alterations were made by Dioscorides and Artemidorus, surnamed Capito, in the time of Adrian. Polybus, the son-in-law of Hippocrates, who collected and edited his works, is believed to have written some of the pieces, and Thessalus and Draco, his sons, as well as Hippocrates III. and IV., his grandsons, are supposed to have written others, especially several of the books of “Epidemies.” The following, however, are generally deemed original productions of Hippocrates the Coan namely, 1. The essay “On Air, Water*, and Soils” 2. The first and third books of “Epidemics” 3. The book On Prognostics 4. The fir&t and second books of “Predictions;” and 5. The books of “Aphorisms” but the two last contain many interpolations 6. The treatise *' On the Diet in acute diseases“7. That *' On Wounds of the Head.” Haller includes several more treatises in the list of genuine works of Hippocrates, which have “been disputed, even from ancient times such as those” On the Nature of Man“”On the Humours;“”On Fractures;“”On the Joints;" tnd one or two others.

* Archbishop Seeker one day, at be Christians, replied, “If they were, his table, when the Monthly Reviewers it was certainly ‘secundum usum Winwt-re said, by one of the company, to ton’.” the list of persons to be created doctors of physic: but either by chance or management, his name was not found in the last list; and he had not his degree of M. D, till about a month after, by a particular mandamus. He was elected F. R. S. in 1726, when he was very young, and had the honour of being made known to the learned world as a philosopher, by “A Letter from the rev. Dr. Samuel Clarke to Mr. Benjamin Hoadly, F. R. S. occasioned by the present controversy among the mathematicians concerning the proportion of Velocity and Force in bodies in motion.” He was made registrar of Hereford while his father filled that see; and was appointed physician to his majesty’s household so early as June 9, 1742. Jt is remarkable, that he was for some years physician to both the royal households; having been appointed to that of the prince of Wales, Jan. 4, 1745-6, in the place of Dr. Lamotte, a Scotch physician, whom the prince had himself ordered to be struck out of the list, on some imprudent behaviour at the Smyrna coffee-house at the time of the rebellion in 1745. The appointment was attended with some circumstances of particular honour to Dr. Hoadly. The prince himself, before the warrant could be finished, ordered the style to be altered; and that he should be called physician to the household, and not extraordinary, as the other had been: observing, that this would secure that place to him in case of a demise, and be a bar against any one getting over him. Nay, not content with this, his royal highness voluntarily wrote a letter to the bishop with his own hand “that he was glad of this opportunity of giving him a token of his gratitude for his services formerly to his family; and that he was his affectionate Frederic, P.” Dr. Hoadly is said to have filled these posts with singular honour. He married, 1. Elizabeth, daughter of Henry Betts, esq. of Suffolk, counsellor at law, by whom he had one son, Benjamin, that died an infant. 2 Anne, daughter and co-heiress of the honourable general Armstrong, by whom he left no issue. He died in the lifetime of his father, Aug. 10, 1757, athishouM it Chelsea, which he had built ten years before. He published, 1. “Three Letters on the Organs of Respiration, read at the royal college of physicians, London, A. D. 1737, being the Gulstonian lectures for that year. To which is added, an Appendix, containing remarks on some experiments of Dr. Houston, published in the Transactions of the Royal Society for the year 1736, by Benjamin Hoadly, M. B. fellow of the college of physicians, and of the royal society, London,” 1740, 4to. 2. “Oratio anniversaria in Theatro Coll. Medicor. Londinensium, ex Harveii instttuto habita die 18 Oct. A. D. 1742, a Benj. Hoadly, M. D. Coll. Med. & S. R. S.” 1742, esteemed a very elegant piece of Latin. 3. “The Suspicious Husband, a Comedy.” 4. “Observations on a Series of Electrical experiments, by Dr. Hoadly and Mr. Wilson, F. R. S.” 1756, 4to. The doctor was, in his private character, an amiable humane man, and an agreeable sprightly companion. In his profession he was learned and judicious; and, as a writer, has been long known in the theatrical world as the author of a comedy, “The Suspicious Husband,” which appeared first in 1747, and has kept its place on every stage since with undiminished attractions.

, LL. D. the youngest son of Dr. Benjamin Hoadly, bishop of Winchester, was born in Broad-street, Oct. 8, 1711, and educated at Mr. Newcome’s school in Hackney, where he gained great applause by performing the part of Phocyas in “The Siege of Damascus.” In June 1730 he was admitted at Corpus Christi college in Cambridge, and about the same time at the Temple, intending to study the law. This design, however, he soon abandoned; for in the next year we find he had relinquished all thoughts of the law as a profession. He took the degree of LL. B. in 1735; and, on the 29th of November following was appointed chancellor of Win-, chester, ordained deacon by nis father Dec. 7, and priest the 21st of the same month. He was immediately received into the prince of Wales’s household as his chaplain, as he afterwards was in that of the princess dowager, May 6, 1751.

Among many illustrious persons who upon the shipwreck of the royal cause retired to France for safety, was sir Charles Cavendish, brother to the duke of Newcastle, who, being skilled in every branch of mathematics, proved a constant friend and patron to Hobbes: and Hobbes himself, by embarking, in 1645, in a controversy about the quadrature of the circle, became so celebrated, although certainly undeservedly as a mathematician, that, in 1647, he was recommended to instruct Charles prince of Wales, afterwards Charles II. in that branch of study. His care in the discharge of this office gained him the esteem of that prince in a very great degree: and though he afterwards withdrew his public favour from Hobbes on account of his writings, yet he always retained a sense of the services he had done him, shewed him various marks of his favour after he was restored to his dominions, and, as some say, had his picture hanging in his closet. This year also was printed in Holland, by the care of M. Sorbiere, a second and more complete edition of his book “De Cive,” to which are prefixed two Latin letters to the editor, one by Gassendi, the other by Mersenne, in commendation of it. While Hobbes was thus employed at Paris, he was attacked by a violent fit of illness, which brought him so low that his friends began to despair of his recovery. Among those who visited him in this weak condition was his friend Mersenne, who, taking this for a favourable opportunity, began, after a few general compliments of condolence, to mention the power of the church of Rome to forgive sins; but Hobbes immediately replied, “Father, all these matters I have debated with myself long ago. Such kind of business would be troublesome to me now; and you can entertain me on subjects more agreeable; when did you see Mr. Gassendi?” Mersenne easily understood his meaning, and, without troubling him any farther, suffered the conversation to turn upon general topics. Yet some days afterwards, when Dr. Cosin, afterwards bishop of Durham, came to pray with him, he very readily accepted the proposal, and received the sacrament at his hands, according to the forms appointed by the church of England.

, the most eminent physician of his name, was born at Halle, in Saxony, Feb. 19, 1660. He received his early education in his native town, and had made great progress in philosophy and the mathematics, when, at the age of fifteen, he lost his father and mother during the prevalence of an epidemic disease. In 1679 he commenced the study of medicine at Jena, and in the following year attended the chemical lectures of Gaspar Cramer, at Erfurth; and, on his return to Jena, received the degree of M. D. in February 168!. In 1682 he published an excellent tract “De Cinnabari Antimonii,” which gained him great applause, and a crowd of pupils to the chemical lectures, which he delivered there. He was then induced to visit Minden, in Westphalia, op the invitation of a relation, and practised there for two years with considerable success. He then travelled into Holland and thence to England, where he was received with distinction by men of science, and particularly by Paul Herman, the botanist, in the former, and Robert Boyle in the latter. On his return to Minden, in 1685, he was made physician to the garrison there, and in the following year was honoured by Frederic William, elector of Brandenburg, with the appointments of physician to his own person, and to the whole principality of Minden. Yet he quitted that city in 1688, in consequence of an invitation to settle at Halberstadt, in Lower Saxony, as public physician. Here he published a treatise “De uisufficientia acidi ct viscidi,” by which he overthrew the system of Cornelius Bontekce. In 1689 he married the only daughter of Andrew Herstel, an eminent apothecary, with whom he had lived forty-eight years in perfect iniion, when she died. About this time, Frederic III., afterwards first king of Prussia, founded the university of Halle; and in Hoffmann was appointed primary professor of medicine, composed the statutes of that institution, and extended its fame and elevated its character, while his own reputation procured him admission into the scientific societies at Berlin, Petershurgh, and London, as well as the honour of being consulted by persons of the highest rank. He was called upon to visit many of the German courts in his capacity of physician, and received honours from several princes; from whom some say that he received ample remuneration in proportion to the rank of his patients; while others have asserted that he took no fees, but contented himself with his stipends. Haller asserts that he acquired great wealth by various chemical nostrums which he vended. In 1704 he accompanied some of the Prussian ministers to the Caroline warm baths in Bohemia, on which occasion he examined their nature, and published a dissertation concerning them. On subsequent visits, he became acquainted with the Sedlitz purging waters, which he first introduced to public notice, having published a treatise on them in 1717: and he afterwards extended his inquiries to the other mineral waters of Germany. In 1 708 he was called to Berlin to take care of the declining health of Frederic, and was honoured with the titles of archiater and aulic counsellor, together with a liberal salary. After three years residence at this court he returned to Halle, and gladly resumed his academical functions. He continued also to labour in the composition of his writings; and in 1718, at the age of 60, he began the publication of his “Medicina Rationalis Systematica,” which was reoeived with great applause by the faculty in various parts of Europe, and the completion of which occupied him nearly twenty years. He likewise published two volumes of “Consultations,” in which he distributed into three “centuries,” the most remarkable cases which had occurred to him; and also “Observationum Physico-Chemicarum Libri tres,” 1722. In 1727 he attended the prince of Schwartzemburg through a dangerous disease; in recompence for which his noble patient created him count palatine. He quitted Halle in 1734, in order to pay a short visit to his daughter and son-in-law at BerJin, and was detained five months by the king of Prussia, Frederic William, in order to attend him during a dangerous illness, by whom he was treated with great honour, elevated to the rank of privy counsellor, and presented with a portrait of the king, set in diamonds. Hoffmann declined a pressing invitation to settle at Berlin, on account of his advanced age, and returned to Halle in April 1735. The illness and death of his heloved wife, in 1737, turned his thoughts to the consolations of religion, and he drew up in Latin a summary of Christian doctrine, which, at the king’s desire, was translated into German. He continued to perform his academical duties until 174!?, when he died in the month of November, aged eighty-two. Frederick Hoffmann was an industrious and copious writer. Haller has occupied thirty-eight quarto pages in the enumeration of his works in detail. The principal of these were collected, during the life of the author, by two Genevese booksellers, and published with his approbation, and with a preface from his pen, in 1740, in six vols. folio. It was reprinted by the same booksellers, the freres de Tournes, in 1748; and in the following year, having raked together every thing which his pen had touched, they published a supplement in three additional volumes folio, which was also reprinted in 1753-4. The writings of Hoffmann contain a great mass of practical matter of considerable value, partly compiled from preceding writers, and partly the result of his own observation; but they contain also many trifling remarks, and not a little hypothetical conjecture, which was indeed a common fault of the times; and in the detail there is considerable prolixity and repetition. Asa theorist his suggestions were of great value, ad contributed to introduce that revolution in the science of pathology, which subsequent observation has extended and confirmed. His doctrine of atony and spasm in the living solid, by which he referred all internal disorders to some “preternatural affection of the nervous system,” rather than to the morbid derangements and qualities of the fluids, first turned the attention of physicians from the mere mechanical and chemical operations of the animal body to those of the primary moving powers of the living system. To Hoffmann Dr. Cullen acknowledges the obligations we are under for having first put us into the proper train of investigation; although he himself did not apply his fundamental doctrine so extensively as he might have done, and every where mixed with it a humoral pathology as incorrect and hypothetical as any other. Hoffmann pursued the study of practical chemistry with considerable ardour, and improved the department of pharmacy by the addition of some mineral preparations; but on the whole, and especially in his latter years, his practice was cautious, and even inert, and he trusted much to vegetable simples.

1639, and adorned with several portraits of the royal family, etched for the purpose by the hand of Hollar. The same year was published the portrait of his patron the earl of Arundel on horseback; and afterwards he etched another of him in armour, and several views of his countryseat at Aldbrough in Surrey. In 1640, he seems to have been introduced into the service of the royal family,“togive the prince of Wales some taste in the art of designing; and it is intimated, that either before the -eruption of the civil wars, or at least before he was driven by them abroad, he was in the service of the duke of York. This year appeared his beautiful set of figures in twenty-eight plates, entitled,” Ornatus Muliebris Anglicanus," and containing the several habits of English women of all ranks or degrees: they are represented at full length, and have rendered him famous among the lovers of engraving. In 1641, were published his prints of king Charles and his queen: but now the civil wars being broke out, and his patron the earl of Arundel leaving the kingdom to attend upon the queen and the princess Mary, Hollar was left to support himself. He applied himself closely to his bu<iness, and published other parts of his works, after Holbein, Vandyck, &c. especially the portraits of several persons of quality of both sexes, ministers of state, commanders of the army, learned and eminent authors; and especially another set or two of female habits in divers nations in Europe. Whether he grew obnoxious as an adherent to the earl of Arundel, or as a malignant for drawing so many portraits of the royal party, is not expressly said: but now it seems he was molested, and driven to take shelter under the protection of one or more of them, till they were defeated, and he taken prisoner of xvar with them, upon the surrender of their garrison at Basing-house in Hampshire. This happened on Oct. 14, 1645; but Hollar, either making his escape, or otherwise obtaining his liberty, went over to the continent after the earl of Arundel, who resided at Antwerp, with his family, and had transported thither his most valuable collection of pictures.

, knight, lord chief justice of the court of King’s-bench in the reign of king William, was son of sir Thomas Holt, knight, serjeant at law; and born at Thame in Oxfordshire, 1642. He was educated at Abingdon-school, while his father was recorder of that town; and afterwards became a gentleman -commoner of Orielcollege, Oxford. In 1658 he entered himself of Gray’sinn, before he took a degree; some time after which he was called to the bar, where he attended constantly, and soon became a very eminent barrister. In the reign of James II. he was made recorder of London, which office he discharged with much applause for about a year and a half; but refusing to give his hand towards abolishing the test, and to expound the law according to the king’s design, he was removed from his place. In 1686 he was called to the degree of a serjeant at law, with many others. On the arrival of the prince of Orange, he was chosen a member of the convention parliament; and appointed one of the managers for the commons at the conferences held with the lords, about the abdication and the vacancy of the throne. He had here an opportunity of displaying his abilities; and as soon as the government was settled, he was made lord chief justice of the court of King’s-bench, and admitted into the king’s privy-council.

Being now duly qualified, and having lost his father in 1729, who left a very slender provision for his widow and: son, he quitted the hospital, and engaged himself as surgeon’s mate on board the Duke of Cumberland Indiaman, which sailed from Gravesend Feb. 2, 1732, and proceeded to Bengal, where he was appointed surgeon of a frigate belonging to the company, bound for the gulph of Persia. In the course of this voyage he acquired some knowledge of the Arabic tongue, and on his return to Calcutta employed his leisure hours in studying the Moorish and common Hinduee languages, and the Lingua Franca of the Portuguese. In January 1734 he made another voyage, as aurgeon of the ship Prince of Wales, to Surat, &c. and soon after his return to Bengal, he was appointed surgeonmajor to the Patna party, usually consisting of about 400 European infantry, which annually left the presidency in the latter end of September, with the company’s trade for their factory at Patna. His next voyage was in the ship Prince of Orange, to Mocha and Judda in the Arabian gulph. During nis stay there he added to his knowledge of the Arabic tongue, and on his return to Calcutta was able to speak it with tolerable fluency. After another visit, however, to Patna, as surgeon -major, he was anxious to quit this rambling life, and by the interest of his friends was appointed surgeon to the company’s factory at Decca; and here, besides farther improving himself in the Moorish and Hinduee tongues, he commenced his researches into the Hindu theology.

His pencil is free and firm, and his colouring has a great deal of force, although it often is not pleasing, by a predominancy of the yellow and brown tints; yet undoubtedly Honthorst would have been an excellent painter if he had known how to give more grace and more correctness to his figures. At his return from London to Holland he adorned the pleasure houses of the prince of Orange with many poetical subjects, which he executed in fresco as well as in oil; but he principally was employed in painting portraits, which are described as having good expression, and extraordinary life and force, by their broad masses of light being contrasted by strong shadows. He died in 1660, aged sixty-eight. His brother, William, was born at Utrecht in 1604, and learned the art of painting from Abraham Bloemart. The portraits which he painted were very much esteemed, and are far superior to his historical subjects, which are in no degree equal to those of Gerard, although they are frequently sold for the works of that master. He died in 1683, aged seventy-nine.

, a Dutch poet and historian, but principally eminent in the latter capacity, was born at Amsterdam in 1581. He was honoured by Louis XIII. with a ribband of the order of St. Michael, probably in consequence of his history of Henry IV. Frederic Henry prince of Orange being dead, Hooft was preparing to attend his funeral, when he was himself taken violently ill, and died in 1647. His works consist of, 1. “Epigrams, Comedies, and other Poems.” 2. “The History of the Low Countries, from the abdication of Charles V. to the year 1598.” A good edition of it appeared in 1703, in 2 vols. folio. 3. “A History of Henry IV. of France,” in Latin. 4. “A Translation of Tacitus into Dutch,” very highly esteemed in that country. To familiarize the style of his author completely to his mind, he is said to have read all the extant works of Tacitus fiftytwo times.

, a professor of the belles lettres, was born at Rotterdam in 1658, and died at Amsterdam in 1724. In the evening of Nov. 13, there suddenly arose so thick a mist, that he lost his way, and fell into a canal. He was soon taken out; but the coldness of the water, and the fright from the fall, brought on so strong an oppression upon the breast, that he died in eight days after. There are of Ims, 1. “Latin Poems.” 2. “Flemish Poems.” 3. “A Flemish and Latin Dictionary.” 4. “Notes upon C. Nepos and Terence.” 5. “An edition of Phaedrus,” for the prince of Nassau, 4to, in imitation of the Delphin editions. 6. A fine edition of “Janus Broukhusius’s Poems.”

, in Latin Hototnanus, a learned French civilian, was born in 1524, at Paris, where his family, originally of Breslau in Silesia, had flourished for some time. He made so; rapid a progress in the belles lettres, that at the age of fifteen, he was sent to Orleans to study the civil law, and in three years was received doctor to that faculty. His father, a counsellor in parliament, had already designed him for that employment; and therer fore sent for him home, and placed him at the bar. But Hotman was soon displeased with the chicanery of the court, and applied himself vigorously to the study of the Roman law and polite literature. At the age of twentythree, he was chosen to read public lectures in the schools pf Paris: but, relishing the opinions of Luther, on account of which many persons were put to death in France, and finding that he could not profess them at Paris, he Went to Lyons in 1548. Having now nothing to expect“from his father, who was greatly irritated at the change of his religion, he left France, and retired to Geneva; where he lived some time in Calvin’s house. From hence he went to Lausanne,' where the magistrates of Bern gave him the place of professor of polite literature. He published there some books, which, however, young as he was, were not his first publications; and married a French gentlewoman, who had also retired thither on account of religion. His merit was so universally known, that the magistrates of Strasburg offered him a professorship of civil law; which he accepted, and held till 1561, and during this period, received invitations from the duke of Prussia, the landgrave of Hesse, the dukes of Saxony, and even from queen Elizabeth of England; but did not accept them. He did not refuse, however, to go to the court of the king of Navarre, at the begining of the troubles; and he went twice into Germany, to desire assistance of Ferdinand, in the name of the princes of the blood, and even in the name of the queen-mother. The speech he made at the diet of Francfort is published. Upon his return to Strasburg, he was prevailed upon to teach civil law at Valence; which he did with such success, that he raised the reputation of that university. Three years after, he went to be professor at Bourges, by the invitation of Margaret of France, sister of Henry II. but left that city in about five months, and retired to Orleans to the heads of the party, who made great use of his advice. The peace which was made a month after, did not prevent him from apprehending the return of the storm: upon which account he retired to Sancerre, and there wrote an excellent book,” De Consolatione,“which his son published after his death. He returned afterwards to his professorship at Bourges, where he very narrowly escaped the massacre of 1572: which induced him to leave France, with a full resolution never to return. He then went to Geneva, where he read lectures upon the civil law. Some time after, he went to Basil, and taught civil law, and was so pleased with this situation, that he refused great offers from the prince of Orange and the States-general, who would have draxvn him to Leyden. The plague having obliged him to leave Basil, he retired to Montbeliard, where he lost his wife; and went afterwards to live with her sisters at Geneva. He returned once more to Basil, and there died in 1590, of a dropsy, which had kept him constantly in a state of indisposition for six years before. During this, he revised and digested his works for a new edition, which appeared at Geneva in 1599, in 3 vols. folio, with his life prefixed by Neveletus Doschius> The first two contain treatises upon the civil law; the third, pieces relating to the government of France, and the right of succession; five books of Roman antiquities; commentaries upon Tally’s” Orations and Epistles;“notes upon Caesar’s” Commentaries,“&c. His” Franco-Gallia,“or,” Account of the free state of France,“has been translated into English by lord Molesworth, author of” The Account of Denmark." He published also several other articles without his name; but, being of the controversial kind, they were probably not thought of consequence enough to be revived in the collection of his works.

Among Dr. Hunt’s intimate friends was Dr. Gregory Sharpe, who sought his acquaintance and highly prized it, and their correspondence was frequent and affectionate. Dr. Hunt not only promoted Dr. Sharpe’s election into the royal society, but was a liberal and able assistant to him in his literary undertakings. When, however, Dr. Sharpe published his edition of Dr. Hyde’s Dissertations in 1767, no notice was taken of these obligations; and the reason assigned is Dr. Hunt’s having declined a very unreasonable request made by Dr. Sharpe, to translate into Latin a long English detail of introductory matter. Such treatment Dr. Hunt is said to have mentioned “to his friends, with as much resentment as his genuine good-nature would permit.” This very learned scholar, who had long been afflicted with the gravel, died Oct. 31, 1774, aged seventyeight, and was buried in the north aile joining to the body of the cathedral of Christ-church, with an inscription expressing only his name, offices, and time of his death. His library was sold the following year by honest Daniel Prince of Oxford. In that same year Dr. Kennicott pub.­lished a valuable posthumous work of his friend, entitled “Observations on several passages in the Book of Proverbs, with two Sermons. By Thomas Hunt,” &c. 4to. A considerable part of this work was printed before his death; and the only reason given why he himself did not finish it, was, that he was remarkably timorous, and distrustful of his own judgment; and that, in his declining years, he grew more and more fearful of the severity of public criticism, for which he certainly had little cause, had this been his only publication. His character, as an Orientalist, had been fully established by his former works; and he justly retained it to the close of his life, leaving the learned world only to regret that he did not engage in some gra-id and critical work, or that he did not complete an edition of Job which he bad long intended.

In 1775, by the recommendation of lord Mansfield, who had for some time cultivated his acquaintance, and had a high esteem for his talents, he was promoted to the bishopric of Lichneld and Coventry, and consecrated Feb. 12, of that year. On this occasion he received an elegant and affectionate letter of congratulation from the members of Emanuel college, to which he returned an equally elegant and respectful letter of thanks. In this year he edited ft republication of bishop Jeremy Taylor’s “Moral Demonstration of the Truth of the Christian Religion,” 8vo; and early in 1776, published a volume of “Sermons preached at Lincoln’s-inn,” which was followed afterwards by a second and third. These added very greatly to the reputation he had derived from his sermons on prophecy, and are equally distinguished by elegant simplicity of style, perspicuity of method, and acuteness of elucidation. On June 5th of this year, he was appointed preceptor to their royal highnesses the prince of Wales, and prince Frederick, now duke of York. Very soon after entering into the episcopal office, appeared an excellent “Charge delivered to the clergy of the diocese of Lichneld and Coventry, at the bishop’s primary visitation in 1775 and 1776,” and soon after, his “Fast Sermon” for the “American rebellion,” preached before the House of Lords. In 1781 he* was elected a member of the royal society of Gottingen. It is somewhat remarkable that he did not belong to that of London.

Hyde withdrew to the king at York, having first obtained the great seal to be sent thither on May 20, 1642: and, upon his arrival, was admitted into the greatest confidence, though he was not under any official character in the court for some months. But, towards the latter end of the year, upon the promotion of sir John Colepepper to be master of th,e rolls, he succeeded him in the chancellorship of the exchequer, and the same year was knighted, and made a privy-counsellor. With these characters he sat in the parliament assembled at Oxford, Jan. 1643; and, in 1644, was one of the king’s commissioners at the treaty of Uxbridge. Not long after, the king sending the prince of Wales into the West, to have the superintendency of the affairs there, sir Edward Hyde was appointed to attend his highness, and to be of his council; where he entered, by his majesty’s command, into a correspondence with the marquis of Ormond, then lord-lieutenant of Ireland. Upon the declension of the king’s cause, he with the lords Capel and Colepepper sailed from Pendennis castle in Cornwall to Scilly, and thence to Jersey, where he arrived in March 1645; but being greatly disgusted at the prince’s removal thence the following year to France, he obtained leave to stay in that island. His opinion respecting the prince’s removal into France, is warmly expressed in the following letter to the duke of Ormond:

On the accession of James II. he was first made lord privy-seal, and then lord-lieutenant of Ireland: but being too firmly attached to the protestant religion for those times, he was recalled from his government to make room for lord Tyrconnel; and soon after removed from the privy-seal, that lord Arundel, of Wardour, another papist, fhight succeed him. About this time he was made highsteward of the university of Oxford. After the landing of the prince of Orange, he was one of the protestant lords, summoned by the king, when it was too late, to repair the ill consequences of his popish councils, and had spirit enough to take the lead, and to speak his mind frankly and openly in that memorable assembly. Yet though he had so great a regard to the constitution as to oppose king James’s encroachments, he would not transfer his allegiance to the new establishment, nor take the oaths to king William: on which account he was, with some others, suspected of designs against the government; and, when the king was in England, and the French fleet appeared on the English coast, the regency thought proper to secure him in the Tower. After some months he was released, and spent the remainder of his days privately at his own house in the country; where he died Oct. 22, 1709, aged seventy -one.

The genuine and ancient Scots melodies are so truly national, that they resemble no music of any other part of Europe. They seem to have been wholly preserved by tradition till the beginning of the last century, when a collection of Scots songs was published by a Mr. Thomson of Edinburgh, for which there was a very large subscription; and in February 1722, a benefit concert was advertised for the editor, to be terminated at the desire of several persons of quality, with a Scottish song. To this publication and concert may be ascribed the subsequent favour of their national, singular, and often touching melodies, south of the Tweed. Tassoni, indeed, (lib. x. cap. 22.) tells us, that “Jarnes I. king of Scotland, had not only composed sacred music, but invented a new species of plaintive melody different from all others in which he has beenimitated by the prince of Venosa; who,” he adds, “in our times has embellished music with many admirable inventions.” This assertion, says Dr. Burney, greatly increased our desire to examine works in which so many excellencies were concentred; particularly as we had long been extremely desirous of tracing the peculiarities of the national melodies of Scotland, from a higher source than David Rizzio. But in a very attentive perusal of all the several parts of the whole six books of the prince of Venosa’s madrigals, we were utterly unable to discover the least similitude or imitation of Caledonian airs in any one of them; which, so far from Scots melodies, seem to contain no melodies at all; nor, when scored, can we discover the least regularity of design, phraseology, rhythm, or, indeed, any thing remarkable in these madrigals, except unprincipled modulation, and the perpetual embarrassments and inexperience of an amateur, in the arrangement and filling up of the parts. As a poet, however, there is less room to doubt James’s talents. He has found abundance of editors, but no complete and accurate impression of his works has hitherto made its appearance. Mr. Park, in his excellent edition of the “Royal and Noble Authors,” has given a list of them, and more particulars may be found in our principal authorities.

king of England, and VI. of Scotland, was the son of the unfortunate Mary queen of Scotland, by her cousin Henry, lord Darnley, and was born at Edinburgh-castle in June 1566, at the time when his mother had fixed her affections on the earl of Bothwell; the young prince, however, was committed to the charge of the earl of Mar, and in the following year, his mother being forced to resign the crown, he was solemnly crowned at Stirling, and all public acts from that time ran in his name. He was educated by the celebrated Buchanan while he was at Stirling castle; his progress in school-learning was rapid, and he manifested talents which presaged the future great man: but he became the prey of flatterers, who urged him to unpopular measures, which in 1582 produced a conspiracy of the nobles against him, who took possession of his person at Ruthven castle. From thence he was conveyed to the palace of Holyrood-house, and treated with much external respect, while in reality he was held in the utmost restraint. A new confederacy of other nobles produced his liberation, and he put himself under the sway of his favourite the earl of Arran, who was violent and unprincipled, and who carried on measures of severity againsf the nobles of the former conspiracy, and against the clergy who favoured them. He contrived to engage the mind of the young king with a constant round of amusement, and he himself exercised with unlimited sway all the regal authority, and by his insolence and rapacity rendered himself universally odious. Queen Elizabeth of England had long employed her arts to maintain a party in the country, which policy was become more necessary on account of her conduct to its queen. Though James had hitherto been induced to treat his mother very irreverently, yet when her life appeared to be in imminent danger, from the sentence pronounced against her by an English court of judicature, he felt himself bound to interfere, and wrote a menacing letter to Elizabeth on the occasion. He also applied to other courts for their assistance, and assembled his own nobles, who promised to stand by him in preventing or avenging such an injustice. When he learned the fatal catastrophe, he rejected with a proper spirit of indignation the hypocritical excuses of Elizabeth, and set about preparations for hostilities; but reflecting on his own resources, which were inadequate to the purposes of carrying on a serious war, he resolved to resume a friendly correspondence with the English court. It is to the honour of James that one of the' first acts of his full iriajority, in 1587, was an attempt to put an end to all family feuds among the nobility, and personally to reconcile them with each other at a solemn festival in Holyrood-house. When the invasion of England was resolved upon by Philip, king of Spain, he put his kingdom into a state of defence, resolving to support the queen against her enemies. His people also were zealous for the preservation of Protestantism, and entered into a national bond for the maintenance of true religion, which was the origin and pattern of all future engagements of the kind, under the name of solemn leagues and covenants. In 1589 he married Anne, daughter of Frederic king of Denmark, and as contrary winds prevented her coming to Scotland, he went to fetch her, and passed the winter in a series of feasting and amusements at Copenhagen. On his return he was frequently in danger from conspiracies against his life, particularly from those excited by the earl of Bothwell. In 1600, while the country was in a state of unusual tranquillity, a very extraordinary event took place, the nature and causes of which were never discovered. While the king was upon a hunting excursion, he was accosted by the brother of Ruthven earl of Gowrie, who, by a feigned tale, induced him and a small train to ride to the earl’s house at Perth. Here he was led to a remote chamber on pretence of having a secret communicated td him, where he found a man in complete armour, and a dagger was put to his breast by lluthven, with threats of immediate death. His attendants were alarmed, and came to his relief; in the end Gowrie and his brother were slain, and the king escaped unhurt. In 1603, on the death of queen Elizabeth, James was proclaimed her successor, and proceeded, amidst the acclamations of his new subjects, to London. One of his first acts was to bestow a profusion of honours and titles upon the great men, as well of his own country as those of England. A conference held at Hampton-court in 1604, between the divines of the established church and the Puritans, afforded James a good opportunity of exhibiting his skill in theological controversy, and the ill-will he bore to popular schemes of church-government. Although the king had distinguished himself in his own country by lenity to the Roman Catholics, yet those of that religion in England were so much disappointed in their expectations of his favour, that a most atrocious plot was formed by the zealots of that party to bloxv up the House of Lords at the first meeting of parliament, and with it the king, queen, and prince of Wales, and all the principal nobility and gentry of the kingdom, and then to set upon the throne the young princess Elizabeth, and establish the Catholic religion. This plot was fortunately discovered on the eve of the designed execution, and the principal persons in it suffered the punishment dae to their crimes. His next object was to reduce Ireland to a settled form of law and government. fc

Jarchi wrote also Commentaries upon the Talmud, and upon Pirke-Avon, and other works. It is said that he was skilled in physic and astronomy, and was master of several languages besides the Hebrew. He died at Troyes in 1180 and his body was carried into Bohemia, and buried at Prague. His decisions were so much more esteemed, as he had gathered them from the mouths of all the doctors of the Jewish academies in the several countries through which he had travelled. His “Commentary upon the Gemara,” appeared so full of erudition, that it procured him the title of “Prince of Commentaries.” His Commentaries upon the Bibles of Venice are extant; his glosses or Commentaries upon the Talmud are also printed with the text. They were published collectively in 1660, in 4 vols. 12mo. He was so highly esteemed among the Jews, as to be ranked among the most illustrious of their rabbies. He married, and had three daughters, who all were married to very learned rabbies.

, son of the preceding, was born in 1729 at Stratford in Essex, where his father, the subject of the preceding article, practised as a physician. He had a liberal classical education at Cambridge; but being by principle a nonjuror, from his father, he could not be matriculated, nor take any degree at that university. He afterwards studied medicine in London and in Leyden; and from the unive sity in the latter city he obtained the degree of doctor of medicine. Upon settling in London he entered as licentiate of the college of physicians; and in 1768 he was elected a fellow of that body. He was for some time physician both to St. George’s hospital, and to the Westminster infirmary. As a practitioner he became so eminent, that when the duke of Gloucester fell dangerously ill in Italy, he was requested to go abroad to attend the health of that prince; and on this occasion his conduct gave so much satisfaction that he was called abroad ii second time to visit the same prince, on a future illness, in 1777. About this time he was made physician-extraordinary to the king; and in 1780 was appointed physician in ordinary to the prince of Wales. He not only held these offices about the royal family, but was for several years one of the physicians chiefly employed by them. Upon the death of sir Edward Wilmot, in 1786, he was appointed one of the physicians in ordinary to his majesty; but this office he did not enjoy many months; for, being in attendance on two of the princesses, who were affected with the measles, he was suddenly attacked with a fever in their apartments at Windsor, and fell a victim to the disease, after a few days illness, on the 4th day of July, 1787, in the 58th year of his age.

When the prince of Orange came, and all was in confusion, the lord chancellor, being very obnoxious to the people, disguised himself in order to go abroad. He was in a seaman’s dress, and drinking a pot in a cellar. The scritener, whom he had so severely handled, happening tocome into the cellar after some of his clients, his eye caught that face which made him start; when the chancellor seeing himself observed, feigned a cough, and turned to the wall with his pot in his hand. But the scrivener went out, and gave notice that he was there; and the mob immediately rushed in, seized him, and carried him to the lord-mayor. Thence, under a strong guard, he was set to the lords of the council, who committed him to the Tower, where he died April 18, 1689, of a broken heart, aided by intemperance. He was first interred in the church belonging to the Tower, and afterwards was removed to that of St. Mary Aldermanbury, and deposited near the body of his son. His father survived him, and died in 1690. Pennant records an instance of insult on this once great man during his imprisonment. He received, as he thought, a present of Colchester oysters, and expressed great satisfaction at the thought of having some friend yet left; but on takiiig off the top of the barrel, instead of the usual contents appeared an halter.

The detail of this negotiation is well known, and maybe seen in sir Leoline’s letters, and his colleague’s works, to which we must refer; it being sufficient to observe here, that all expedients proposed by the two mediators were rejected. Sir Leoline quitted the place on Feb. 16, 1679; and retiring to Neerbos, received a warrant from his royal master, dated Feb. 14, three days after the date of his letter of revocation, appointing him ambassador extraordinary at the Hague, in the room of sir William Temple, who had been then recalled. He accordingly arrived there, March 1; but continued in that station no longer than the 25th of the same month; for, by a new commission, dated Feb. 20, and which came to his hands six days after, he returned to Nimeguen March 26, authorised to resume his mediatorial function, at the desire of the prince of Orange and the States, and the earnest intreaty of the Northern princes. His instructions now left him in a great measure to himself, without other direction than to act as Be s ould find most consistent with his majesty’s honour, and the good of the general peace; which, as he was a modest man and very diffident of himself, put him under great anxiety. He happily succeeded, however, in accommodating all differences, and returned home, Aug. 1679, after having been employed about four years and a half in this tedious treaty.

* Some of the city were so much freedom, and afterwards chose master satisfied with the part he acted in this of the Sailers’ company, Wynne, p. affair, that he was presented with his 57. Colonel Jenkinson, who died in 1750, had married Amantha, daughter of Wolfran Cornwall, a captain in the royal navy, by whom he had the subject of this memoir, who was born May 16, 1727, and educated at the Charter-house. He went afterwards to University college, Oxford, where he took the degree of M. A. in Nov. 1752, and thence came to London, having previously distinguished himself by the active part he took in an election controversy for the county of Oxford, where his alliances were numerous, and not unconnected with the contending parties. On this occasion his literary talents were supposed to have contributed materially to the interests of the side he espoused; and those talents are likewise said to have been sometimes displayed in the Monthly Review about the period of its commencement. By the first earl of Harcourt, who was governor to the king, when prince of Wales, he was introduced to his majesty, and through the same channel obtained the notice and confidence of the eail of Bute, to jvhom he was private secretary. In 1761 he sat in parliament for Cockermouth, and held the office of under-secretary of state. In 1763 and 1764 he was secretary to the treasury; in 1766 he was nominated one of the lords of the admiralty; and from 1767 to 1773, was a lord of the treasury. In 1772 he was appointed joint vice-treasurer of Ireland, and called to the privy-council; and in exchange for this office, had afterwards the clerkship of the pells in Ireland, which had been purchased back by government of Mr. Charles Fox. In 1778 he was made secretary at war, which he held until the dissolution of lord North’s administration in 1782. On this occasion his principles led him to join that branch of the old administration which supported Mr. Pitt; and when that minister came into power in 1783-4, Mr. Jenkinson was appointed president of the board of trade, of which office he continued to discharge the duties with uncommon industry and abilities until age and bad health incapacitated him, in 18CU, from farther exertions in this department. In 1786 he obtained the situation of chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, which he held till 1803. He was elevated to the peerage in 1786 by the title of baron Hawksbury, of Hawksbury, in the county of Gloucester; and advanced to be carl of Liverpool in 1796. His lordship died at his house in Hertford-street, May Pair, Dec. 17, 1808. At that time he held the place of collector of the customs inwards, in the port of London, and clerk of the pells in Ireland. He was interred in the family vault at Hawksbury, in Gloucestershire, and was succeeded in honours and estate by his eldest son, Robert Banks, second earl of Liverpool, and now first lord of the treasury.

, so called from the place of his birth, where he is held to be a Protestant martyr. It does not appear in what year he was born, but it is certain that he was neither a monk nor an ecclesiastic: but that, being endowed with excellent natural parts, he had a learned education, and studied at Paris, Heidelberg, Cologne, and perhaps at Oxford. The degree of M. A. was conferred on him in the three first-mentioned universities, and he commenced D. D. in 1396. He began to publish the doctrine of the Hussites in 1408, and it is said he had a greater hare of learning and eloquence than John Huss himself. In the mean time, the council of Constance kept a watchful eye over him; and, looking upon him as a dangerous person, cited him before them April 17, 1415, to give an account of Jiis faith. In pursuance of the citation, he went to Constance, in order to defend the doctrine of Huss, as he had promised; but, on his arrival, April 24, finding his master Huss in prison, he withdrew immediately to Uberlingen, whence he sent to the emperor for a safe conduct, which was refused. The council, very artfully, were willing to grant him a safe-conduct to come to Constance, but not for his return to Bohemia. Upon this he caused to be fixed upon all the churches of Constance, and upon the gates of the cardinal’s house, a paper, declaring that he was ready to come to Constance, to give an account of his faith, and to answer, not only in private and under the seal, hut in full council, all the calumnies of his accusers, offering to suffer the punishment due to heretics, it he should be convinced of any errors; for which reason he had desired a safe-conduct both from the emperor and the council; but that if, notwithstanding such a pass, any violence should be done to him, by imprisonment or otherwise, all the world might be a witness of the injustice of the council. No notice being taken of this declaration, he resolved to return into his own country: but the council dispatched a safe-conduct to him, importing, that as they had the extirpation of heresy above all things at heart, they summoned him to appear in the space of fifteen days, to be heard in the first session that should be held after his arrival; that for this purpose they had sent him, by those presents, a safe-conduct so far as to secure him from any violence, but they did not mean to exempt him from justice, as far as it depended upon the council, and as the catholic faith required. This pass and summons came to his hands, yet he was arrested in his way homewards, April 25, and put into the hands of the prince of Sultzbach; and, as he had not answered the citation of April 17, he was cited again May 2, and the prince of Sultzbach, sending to Constance in pursuance of an order of the council, he arrived there on the 23d, bound in chains. Upon his examination, he denied receiving of the citation, and protested his ignorance of it. He was afterwards carried to a tower of St. Paul’s church, there fastened to a post, and his hands tied to his neck with the same chains. He continued in this posture two days, without receiving any kind of nourishment; upon which he fell dangerously ill, and desired a confessor might be allowed, which being granted, he obtained a little more liberty. On July 19, he was interrogated afresh, when he explained himself upon the subject of the Eucharist to the following effect: That, in the sacrament of the altar, the particular substance of that piece of bread which is there, is transubstantiated into the body of Christ, but that the universal substance of bread remains. Thus, with John Huss, he maintained the “universalia ex parte rei.” It is true, on a third examination, Sept. 11, he retracted this opinion, and approved the condemnation of Wickliff and John Huss; but, on May 26, 1416, he condemned that recantation in these terms: “I am not ashamed to confess here publicly my weakness, Yes, with horror, I confess my base cowardice It was only the dread of the punishment by fire, which drew me to consent, against my conscience, to the condemnation of the doctrine of Wickliff and John Huss.” This was decisive, and accordingly, in the 21st session, sentence was passed on him; in pursuance of which, he was delivered to the secular arm, May 30. As the executioner led him to the stake, Jerome, with great steadiness, testified his perseverance in his faith, by repeating his creed with aloud voice, and singing litanies and a hymn to the blessed Virgin; and, being burnt to death, his ashes, like those of Huss, were thrown into the Rhine.

Mr. Johnston’s other publications, of the same kind, delineating in caricature the striking outlines of popular characters and public vices, were, “The Reverie; or a Flight to the Paradise of Fools,” 1762, 2 vols. 12mo; “The History of Arbases, prince of Betlis,” 1774, 2 vols. “The Pilgrim, or a Picture of Life,” 1775, 2 vols.; and “The History of John Juniper, esq. alias Juniper Jack,” 1781, 3 vols. None of these, however, attracted the attention of the public in any considerable degree. In 1782, he had some prospect of passing his days in comfort, if not in opulence, in India, and accordingly embarked for Bengal, with capt. Charles Mears, in the Brilliant, which was wrecked off Johanna, an island situated between Madagascar and the continent of Africa; but capt. Mears, with his son and daughter, and Mr. Johnston, and some others, were saved, and ultimately reached India. Here he employed his talents in writing essays for the Bengal newspapers, under the signature of “Oneiropolos,” and at length became a joint proprietor of a paper, and by this and some other speculations, acquired considerable property. He died there about 1800. These memoirs of a man, certainly deserving of some notice, have been derived from various anonymous authorities, and are therefore given with diffidence.

Before the death of Edward, he returned to his own country, and led a sedentary life, closely pursuing his studies; but, upon the accession of queen Mary, he returned thither; and, being a very good poet, he published, in 1554, an epithalamium on the marriage of Philip II. with that queen, entitled “Philippis.” This address could not fail of introducing him in a favourable light to that court, whence he would probably have made a considerable fortune, had not the turbulent state of those times driven him home again. He confined himself some time in Hoorn, but, after a while, settled at Haeriem; and repaired the disappointment he sustained respecting his finances in England, by marrying a young woman of fortune, which he knew how to improve by making the most of his dedications to his books, of which he published three at Haarlem in 1556. Some years after, he accepted an offer from the king of Denmark, to be his physician, with a considerable salary, and removed to Copenhagen; but neither liking the climate nor genius of the inhabitants, he left the country about 1564, very abruptly, without taking leave of the king. Returning to Haerlem, he practised physic, and was made principal of the college, or great school, in that town. He continued there till the place was besieged by the Spaniards in 1573, when he found means to escape, by obtaining leave to attend the prince of Orange, who desired his assistance as a physician; but lost his library, in which he had left a great many works which had cost him much pains and labour; and the loss was aggravated by this circumstance, that they were almost fit for the press. In this exigency he went to Middleburgh, where the prince had procured him a public salary to practise physic; but the air of the country did not agree with his constitution, and he fell into some disorders, which, with the grief he felt for the loss of his library, put an end to his life in 1575. There was a design to have given him a professorship at Leyden, which university was but just rising when he died. He had a prodigious memory, which enabled him to treasure up a vast stock of learning. Besides his skill in physic, which was his profession, he was an historian, poet, philosopher, and understood perfectly eight languages. His works make up 24 articles, among which are, “Lexicon Graeco-Latinum,” 1548; “Adagiorum ab Erasmo omissorum centuriae octo & dimidia,” 1558 which last was published after his death, as others of his pieces were.

, or Du Jon (Francis), professor of divinity at Leyden, was descended of a noble family, and born at Bourges in 1545. At the age of thirteen he began to study the law, and afterwards went to Geneva, to study the languages; but being restrained in his pursuits for want of a proper support from his family, he resolved to get his bread by teaching school, which he pursued till 1565, when he was made minister of the Walloon church at Antwerp. But as this was both a troublesome and dangerous post, on account of the tumultuous conflicts between the papists and protestants at that time, he was soon obliged to withdraw into Germany. He went first to Heidelberg, where the elector, Frederic III. received him very graciously. He then made a visit to his mother, who was still living at Bourges; after which, returning to the Palatinate, he was made minister of the church of Schoon there. This was hut a small congregation; and, while he held it, he was sent by the elector to the prince of Orange’s army, during the unsuccessful expedition of 1568. He continued chaplain to that prince till the troops returned into Germany; when he resumed his church in the Palatine, and resided upon it till 1579. This year his patron, the elector, appointed him to translate the Old Testament jointly with Tremellius, which employment brought him to Heidelberg. He afterwards read public lectures at Neustadt, till prince Casimir, administrator of the electorate, gave him the divinity-professor’s chair at Heidelberg. He returned into France with the duke de Bouillon; and paying his respects to Henry IV. that prince sent him upon some mission into Germany. Returning to give an account of his success, and passing through Holland, he was invited to be divinity-professor at Leyden; and, obtaining the permission of the French ambassador, he accepted the offer in 1592. He had passed through many scenes of life, and he wrote an account of them himself this year: after which, he filled the chair at Leyden with great reputation for the space of ten years, when he died of the plague in 1602.

, son of the preceding, was born at Heidelberg in 1589, and received the first elements of his education at Leyden, apparently with a view to letters; but upon the death of his father in 1602, resolving to go into the army in the service of the prince of Orange, he applied himself particularly to such branches of the mathematics as are necessary to make a figure in the military life. He had niade a good progress in these accomplishments at twenty years of age; when the war being concluded by a truce for twelve years in 1609, occasioned a change in his purpose, and inclined him to cultivate the arts of peace by a close application to study. His first literary employment was to collect, digest, and publish some of his father’s writings. After some years spent thus in his own country, he resolved, for farther improvement, to travel abroad. With that view he went first to France, and then to England, in which he arrived in 1620, and having recommended himself by his learning and amiable manners to the literati there, he was taken into the family of Thomas earl of Arundel, in which he continued for the space of thirty years. During his abode there he made frequent excursions to Oxford, chiefly for the sake of the Bodleian and other libraries; where, meeting with several Anglo-Saxon books, he resolved to study the language, which was at that time neglected. He soon perceived that the Anglo-Saxon tongue would be of service to him for discovering many etymologies necessary to clear up the Flemish, Belgic, German, and English, languages; and therefore devoted himself wholly to that study, He afterwards learned the ancient language of the Goths, Francs, Cimbri, and Prisons; by which he discovered the etymology of several Italian, French, and Spanish words; for the Goths, Vandals, French, Burgundians, and Germans, spread their language in the provinces they conquered, of which some vestiges are still left.

When he was settled in his see, he attended closely to his episcopal function. He published “An Exposition of the Church Catechism” in 1685, and the same year, “Prayers for the Use of the Bath.” Nor was he less zealous as a guardian of the national church in general, in opposing the attempts to introduce popery. He did not indeed take part in the popish controversy, then agitated so warmly for he had very little of a controversial turn but from the pulpit, he frequently took occasion to mark and confute the errors of popery; nor did he spare, when his duty to the church of England more especially called for it, to take the opportunity of the royal pulpit, to set before the court their injurious and unmanly politics, in projecting a coalition of the sectaries. For some time he held, in appearance, the same place in the favour of king James as he had holden in the former reign; and some attempts were made to gain him over to the interest of the popish party at court, but these were in vain; for when the declaration of indulgence was strictly commanded to be read, by virtue of a dispensing power claimed by the king, this bishop was one of the seven who openly opposed the reading of it: for which he was sent, with his six brethren, to the Tower. Yet though in this he ventured to disobey his sovereign for the sake of his religion, yet he would not violate his conscience by transferring his allegiance from him. When the prince of Orange therefore came over, and the revolution took place, the bishop retired; and as soon as king William was seated on the throne, and the new oath of allegiance was required, he, by his refusal, suffered himself to be deprived. After his deprivation, he resided at Longleate, a seat of the lord viscount Weyrnouth, in Wiltshire; whence he sometimes made a visit to his nephew, Mr. Isaac Walton, at Salisbury, who was a prebendary of that church. In this retirement he composed many pious works, some of the poetical kind; for he had an inclination for poetry, and had many years before written an epic poem of 13 books, entitled “Edmund,” which was not published till after his death. There is a prosaic flatness in this work; but some of his Hymns and other compositions, have more of the spirit of poetry, and give us an idea of that devotion which animated the author. It is said that when he was afflicted with the colic, to which he was very subject, he frequently amused himself with writing verses. Hence some of his pious poems are entitled “Anodynes, or the Alleviation of Pain.”

On being admitted to the friendship and intimacy of sir Joshua Reynolds, Hogarth (who furnished the curious frontispiece to his perspective), and most of the other artists of the kingdom, he removed from Ipswich to London, where he obtained the patronage of the earl of Bute. This nobleman introduced him to his present majesty when prince of Wales, by whom he was ever after highly and deservedly honoured. He was made clerk of the works at Kew, and under his majesty’s patronage, who defrayed the expence of the plates, he published in 1761 his very splendid work, “The Perspective of Architecture,” 2 vols. folio. Tn this work Mr. Kirby wholly confined himself to architectural representations; and gave a variety of designs, elegantly drawn and engraved, which he submitted as “new principles for a complete system of the perspective of architecture, both as it relates to the true delineation of objects, and the doctrine of light and shadow.” Mr. Edwards, however, remarks, as a curious circumstance, that the plates of this work contain no example of architectural features disposed obliquely to the picture; a circumstance from which he would infer that Mr. Kirby was no great adept in architecture, and that his practice in perspective was not very comprehensive, especially as his first work is equally deficient with the last in what relates to mouldings, when inclined to the picture, which position, if not the most abstruse in theory, is yet among the most troublesome in operation, and therefore ought to have been demonstrated.

, an eminent German critic, was born in 1738, at Bischofswerden, near Dresden, where his father was a clergyman. As to his first years, he used to tell Harles that he could not remember how they were spent, except that he was seven years old before his parents could by any means prevail on him to learn any thing. Soon after that, however, he was suddenly seized with such an attachment to letters, that his parents spared no expence to gratify his taste, and to enable him to cultivate his talents to the best advantage. He employed his leisure hours in composing and, reciting German verses, 'and profited very much under Foerstelius, who was his private preceptor, and afterwards at Misna, under Weiss and Cleman.nus. He studied afterwards at Gorlitz, under Baumeister, who taught him the classics, and lodged him in his house. Here Klotz used to say he spent more happy days than he was persuaded he should ever see again. During his stay here, which lasted two years, he gave a specimen of his powers in versification, by a poem composed on the “Destruction of Zittau,” which was laid waste in 1757. In 1758 he proceeded to Leipsic to study jurisprudence, and while here he published several papers in the “Acta Eruditorum,” and some separate pieces. In 1761 he published his “Opuscula Poetica,” containing twenty-three odes, three satires, and as many elegies. From Leipsic he repaired to Jena, where he opened a school, which was well attended. Having accepted of an invitation to a professorship at the university of Gottingen in 1762, he set off for that place, and almost immediately after his arrival he was attacked by a severe illness, from which, however, he recovered, and immediately published a treatise “De Verecundia Virgilii,” to which were added three dissertations relative to the eclogues of the poet. He also published “Miscellanea Critica,” and applied himself to the study of ancient gems and paintings, with which he became well acquainted. His celebrity had now increased so much, that he received two offers in the same day, one from the prince of Hesse Darmstadt, to be professor of the Oriental languages at Giessen, and the other from his Prussian majesty, to be professor of eloquence at Halle. While he was deliberating respecting the choice he should make, he was nominated by his Britannic majesty to be professor of philosophy at Gottingen, with an increased salary, which induced him to remain in that city, till some attempts were made to ruin his reputation. He then quitted Gottingen, and accepted an offer made him by his Prussian majesty, of being professor of philosophy and eloquence at Halle, with the rank and title of aulic counsellor. While preparing for his departure, he published “Historia Nummorum Contumeliosonini et Satyricorum,” containing a history of these coins; and on his removal to Halle he gave the public another work of the same kind, and at the same time he effected, what had been often attempted before without success, the institution of a new society, called the “Literary Society of Halle.” Here also the king conferred upon him the rank of privy-counsellor, and accompanied this mark of honour with a considerable addition to his salary. He died in 1771, and just before his death, revised every thing which he had written on coins, and published “Opuscula, nummaria quibus Juris Antiqui Historiceque nonnnila capita explicantur.” His other works, not already noticed, were, 1. “Pro M. T. Cicerone adversus Dionem Cassium et Plutarchum dissertatio,” Gorlitz, 1758, 4to. 2. “Ad virum doct. I. C. Reichelium epistola, qua de quibusdam ad Homerum pertinentibus disputatur,” Leipsic, 1758, 4to. 3. “Carminum liber unus,” ibid. 1759, 8vo. 4. “Mores Eruditorum,” Altenburgh, 1760, 8vo. 5. “Genius Sxculi,” ibid. 1760. 6, “Opuscula Poetica,” ibid. 1761, 8vo. 7. “Oratio pro Lipsii latinitate,” Jena, 1761, 8vo. 8. “Libellus de minutiarum studio et rixandi libidine grammaticorum quorundam,” ibid. 1761, 8vo. y. “Animadversiones in Theophrasti characteres Ethiros,” jbid. 8vo. 10.“Dissertatio de felici audacia Horatii,” I 762, 4to. 11. “Elegiae,” ibid. 8vo. 12. “Funus Petri Burmanni secundi,” Altenburgh, 8vo. This is a very complete account of the life, &c. of Burman. 13. “Uidicula Litteraria,” ibid. 8vo, a satirical work on useless studies and pursuits. 14. “Vindiciie Horatianae,” against Hardouin, Bremen, 1764, 8vo. 15. “Stratonis epigrammata, uunc primum edita,” Altenburgh, 1764, 8vo. 16. “Epistolae Homericae,” ibid. 1764, 8vo. 17. An edition of Vida, 1766, and of Tyrtacus, 1767. To these may be added many philosophical dissertations, theses, prefaces, &c. enumerated by Harles.

The followers of Labadie, who were now distinguished by the title of Labadists, became so numerous, and so many persons of each sex abandoned the reformed to close with them, that the French church in the United Provinces set themselves in earnest to stop the desertion, which was daily increasing. But Labadie, perceiving their designs against him, aimed to ward off the blow, by turning it upon them. Mr. de Wolzogue, professor and minister of the Walloon church at Utrecht, had lately published a piece, several passages of which had given great offence to the protestants . Labadie therefore took this opportunity to accuse him of heterodoxy, in the name of the Walloon church at Middleburgh, to a synod which was held at Naerden. But, upon hearing the matter, Wolzogue was unanimously declared orthodox, the church of Middleburg censured, and Labadie condemned to make a public confession before the synod, and in the presence of Wolzogue, that he had been to blame in bringing the accusation, by which he had done him an injury. This judgment reaching the ears of Labadie, he resolved not to hear it pronounced and, lest it should be signified to him, he withdrew privately from Naerden and, returning to Middleburgh, raised such a spirit against the synod in his church as even threatened no less than a formal schism. Several synods endeavoured, by their decrees, to cut up the mischief by the root but in some of these Labadie refused to appear he disputed the authority of others, and appealed from the definitive sentences which they pronounced against him. At length commissaries were nominated by the synod, to determine the affair at Middleburgh, but they had no sooner arrived than the people rose against them, possessed themselves of the assemblyhouse, and locked the church-doors to keep them out. The magistrates supported Labadie, and the estates of the province contented themselves with proposing an accommodation; which being haughtily rejected by Labadie, the states were so provoked, that they confirmed the sentence passed by the commissaries, by which he was forbidden to preach, &c. And because Labadie exclaimed loudly against being condemned without a hearing, the decision of the synod to be held at Dort was sent to him, summoning him to appear there. Labadie was deposed by this synod, and cut off from all hopes of mercy on any other condition, except that of thorough repentance, of which he never gave any proofs. On the contrary, he procured a crowd of devotees to attend him to Middleburgh, where they broke open the church-doors; which done, he preached, and distributed the eucharist to such as followed him. The burgo- masters, apprehensive of consequences, sent him an order to quit the town and the boundaries of their jurisdiction. He obeyed the order, and withdrew to Ter-Veer, a neighbouring town, where he had some zealous partisans, among the rich merchants and traders, who had settled, and drawn a large share of commerce thither. They received him joyfully, and procured him a protection from the magistrates. However, the states of Zealand, being resolved to drive him from this fort, made an order to expel him the province. The magistrates of Ter-Veer took his part against the states, alledging three reasons in his favour: first, that he lived peaceably in their town, and had done nothing worthy of banishment secondly, that it was enough to interdict him from preaching in public and lastly, that they had reason to apprehend danger from the populace, who would not quietly be deprived of so edifying a person. The province was obliged to have recourse to the prince of Orange, who was marquis of Ter-Veer; and who ordered Labadie to submit, forbidding at the same time any of the inhabitants to harbour him.

, an useful and agreeable French writer, was born Jan. 3, 1709, at Vauxcouleurs, in Champagne, where his father was a magistrate. He studied in his native place, but particularly at Pont-a-mousson, where he was called “the prince of philosophers,” an academical title given to those who distinguished themselves by their talents and application. Being intended for the church, he was sent to the seminary of St. Louis in Paris, where he remained five years. He afterwards took the degree of bachelor of divinity, was admitted of the house of the Sorbonne in 1734, and of the society in 1736, being then in his licentiateship; but after finishing that career with equal ardour and reputation, he was placed in the second rank, among more than 140 competitors. He took a doctor’s degree June 1738, and afterwards served the curacy of Greux, and Dom-Remi, to which he had been nominated by his bishop. This prelate proposed to have M. Ladvocat near him, fix him in his chapter, and place his whole confidence in him; but the Sorbonne did not give the bishop time to execute his plan for one of their royal professorships becoming vacant by the resignanation of M. Thierri, chancellor of the church and university of Paris, they hastened to appoint M. Ladvocat to it, January 11, 1740. Our new professor was unable to continue his lectures more than two years and a half, from a disorder of his lungs, thought by the physicians to be incurable, but of which he at length cured himself by consulting the best authors. In the mean time he wrote two tracts, one “on the Proofs of religion,” the other, “on the Councils,” both which are valued by catholics. In October 1742, he resigned his chair to be librarian to the Sorbonne, an office then vacant by the premature death of the abbe Guedier de St. Aubin, and made use of the leisure this situation afforded, to improve himself in the learned languages, which he had never neglected in the midst of his other studies. He was often consulted by Louis, duke of Orleans, first prince of the blood, who, among other things, wished to become acquainted with the original language of the holy scriptures. M. Ladvocat took advantage of his situation with this prince to represent to him what great and important benefits religion would derive from the establishment of a professor who should explain the holy scriptures according to the Hebrew text. M. the duke immediately comprehending all the good which would result from this professorship, realized it in 1751, and chose M. Ladvocat to fulfil its duties; desiring that for that time only, without any precedent being drawn from it in future, the offices of librarian and professor, which till then had been incompatible, might center in one person. M. Ladvocat was no sooner appointed to this professorship, than he considered by what means he might procure scholars to it; in which he was again seconded by the pious liberality of its august founder. The seminary of the Holy Family, endowed by Anne of Austria, offered choice subjects; the duke assembled them, and revived that seminary by paying the debts which had been necessarily contracted in repairing its buildings. The extinct, or suspended fellowships, rose to new existence, and were no longer given but to deserving competitors; an emulation for understanding scripture inspired the most indifferent, and. all the students in divinity hastened to receive lectures from the Orleans professor. The example was followed by some other communities, and this school, which seemed at first likely to be deserted, had the credit of training up many men of great talents. M. Ladvocat died at Paris, December 29, 1765, by which event the house and society of the Sorhonne lost one of its most learned members, the faculty of theology one of its most ingenious doctors, and religion one of its ablest defenders. There is scarce any kind of knowledge which he had not pursued; philosophy, mathematics, the learned languages, history, theology, the holy scripture, all fixed his attention. Assiduous and deliberate study had made the Greek and Latin fathers familiar to him: no monument of ecclesiastical antiquity had escaped his researches; but his peculiar study was to find the true sense of the sacred books; and the theses which he caused to be maintained on the Pentateuch, the Psalms, and the Book of Job, at which the most distinguished among the learned were present, prove the utility of his labours. A genius lively and penetrating, uncommon and extensive, accurate and indefatigable; a ready and retentive memory, a delicate and enlightened feeling, a decided taste formed from the best models of antiquity, a clear and impartial judgment, a fertile, singular, and natural imagination, and a conversation, which, without seeking for ornaments of style, never failed to prove agreeable and interesting, characterized the scholar in M. Ladvocat, and gained him the regard and esteem of all with whom he had any intercourse or connections. He was frequently consulted on the most intricate and important points, by persons of the greatest distinction in different departments, while his uniform conduct, full of candour and simplicity, tender and compassionate, honest and virtuous, rendered him, though always far from affluence, the resource of indigent men of letters, and made him a kind relation, an excellent friend, beloved by all who had any intercourse with him, and a most valuable member of society in general. His works are, “A Hebrew Grammar,” 1758, 8vo; “The Historical Dictionary,” 4 vols. 8vo, reprinted several times during his lite; “Tractatus de Consiliis” a “Dissertation on Psalm, 67, Exurgat Deus;” “Lettres sur FAutorite des Textes originaux de FEcriture Sainte;” “Jugemens sur qoelques nouvelles Traductions de ‘lEcriture Sainte, d’apres le Texte Hebreu.” The four last were published after his death. M. Ladvocat assisted in the “Dict. Geographique,” which has appeared under the name of M. the abbé de Vosgiens, the best edition of which is that of 1772, 8vo. He had planned several other works which ke had not time to finish, but which were impatiently expected even in foreign countries.

, an useful French writer, born at Paris in 1619, had a principal hand in some very excellent works, which the Solitaires of Port Royal projected for the education of youth. He taught the belles lettres and mathematics in their school at Paris. He was afterwards charged with the education of the prince of Conti; but, being removed upon the death of the princess his mother, he took the habit of St. Benedict in the abbey of St. Cyran. Certain intestine troubles arising within these walls, he became a victim among others; and was banished to Ruimperlay, in Lower Britanny, where he died in 1695, aged seventy-nine. His principal works are, 1. “Nouvelle Methode pour apprendre la Langue Latine,” 1644, 8vo. This has been looked upon as a judicious extract, from what Valla, Scaliger, Scioppius, and above all, Sanctius, have written upon the subject. Lancelot is said to have been the first who threw off the ridiculous custom of giving boys rules to learn Latin in the Latin language. 2. “Nouvelle Methode pour apprendre Iq Grec,” 1656, in 8vo. These two grammars have been translated into English, under the title of “Port-Royal Grammars.” He was also author of “The Garden of Greek Roots,” 12mo; “An Italian Grammar,” 12mo; “A Spanish Grammar,” 12mo; the “Dissertations, Remarks, and Sacred Chronology” in the Bibles printed by Vitr6; “The general and rational Grammar,” 12mo. This excellent work was planned by M. Arnauld, but Lancelot composed the greatest part; it was published by M. Duclos with remarks, 1756, 12mo; “Delectus Epigrammatum,” of which the preface onlyU by M. Nicole, 12mo; “Mémoires pour servir a la vie de M. de S. Cyran,” in two parts, the second entitled “L'Esprit de M. de S. Cyran,” 2 vols. 12mo. He is accused of having written these memoirs with great partiality and prejudice. “Relation du vo‘iage d’Alet,” 12mo. This is an eulogy on the famous bishop of Alet.

This connexion with Melancthon did not, however, extinguish the inclination which Languet had to travel. In 1551, he took up a resolution to visit some part of Europe every year, for which he set apart the autumn season, returning to pass the winter at Wittenberg. In the course of these travels, he made the tour of Rome in 1555, and that of Livonia and Laponia in 1558. During this last tour, he became known to Gustavus king of Sweden, who conceived a great affection for him, and engaged him to go into France, in order to bring him thence some of the best scholars and artists: for which purpose his majesty gave him a letter of credit, dated Sept. 1, 1557. Two years after, Languet attended Adolphus count of Nassau and prince of Orange, into Italy; and at his return passed through Paris, to visit the celebrated Turnebus; but it was a great deduction from the pleasure of this interview, that he heard at this time of the death of his friend Melancthon.

At length, in the controversy which arose in Saxony between the Lutherans and Zuinglians, respecting the eucharist, Languet was suspected to favour the latter, and in consequence was obliged to beg leave of the elector, being then one of his chief ministers, to retire; which was granted, with a liberty to go where he pleased. He chose Prague for the place of his residence, where he was in 1577; and in, this situation applied himself to John Casimir, count Palatine, and attended him to Ghent, in Flanders, the inhabitants of which city had chosen the count for their governor. On his quitting the government, Languet accepted an invitation from William prince of Orange, and remained with him until the bad state of his health obliged him to go in 1579 to the wells of Baden; and there he became acquainted with Thuanus, who was much struck with his conversation, probity, and judgment, not only in the sciences, but in public affairs. Thuanus tells us that Languet was so well acquainted with the affairs of Germany, that he could instruct the Germans themselves in the affairs of their own country. After Thuanus had left that place, they appear to have corresponded, and Thuanus speaks of some memoirs then in his possession, which Languet sent to him, containing an account of the present state of Germany, of the right of the diets, of the number of the circles, andi-of the order or rank of the different councils of that country.

Languet returned to Antwerp in 1580; and in 1581 the prince of Orange sent him to France to negociate a reconciliation between Charlotte of Bourbon, his consort, and her brother Louis, duke of Montpensier; which he effected. He died at Antwerp, Sept. 20, 1581, and was interred with great funeral solemnity, the prince of Orange going at the head of the train. During his illness he was visited by madam Du Plessis, who, though sick herself, attended him to his last moment. His dying words were, that “the only thing which grieved him was, that he had not been able to see mons. Du Plessis again before he died, to whom he would have left his very heart, had it been in his power: that he had wished to live to see the world reformed; but, since it became daily worse, he had no longer any business in it: that the princes of these times were strange men: that virtue had much to suffer, and little to get: that he pitied mons. Du Plessis very much, to whose share a great part of the misfortunes of the time would fall, and who would see many unhappy days; but that he must take courage, for God would assist him. For the rest, he begged one thing of him in his last farewell, namely, that he would mention something of their friendship in the first book he should publish.” This request was performed by Du Plessis, soon after, in a short preface to his treatise “Of the Truth of the Christian religion;” where he makes the following eloge of this friend in a few comprehensive words: “Is fuit qualis multi videri volunt: is vixit qualiter optimi raori cupiunt.”

, a brave and successful English admiral, son of the preceding, was born in 1656, at Rotherhithe, in Surrey. His father instructed him both in mathematics and gunnery, with a view to the navy, and entered him early into that service as a midshipman; in which station he distinguished himself, under his father, at the above-mentioned engagement between sir Edward Spragge and Van Trump, in 1673, beingt'nen no more than seventeen years old. Upon the conclusion of that war soon after, hfc engaged in the merchants’ service, and had the command of a ship two or three voyages up the Mediterranean; but his inclination lying to the navy, he did not long remain unemployed in it. He had indeed refused a lieutenant’s commission; but this was done with a view to the place of master-gunner, which was then of much greater esteem than it is at present. When his father was advanced, not long after, to the command of a yacht, he gladly accepted the offer of succeeding him in the post of gunner to the Neptune, a second-rate man of war. This happened about 1675; and, the times being peaceable, he remained in this post without any promotion till 1688. James II. having then resolved to fit out a strong fleet, to prevent the invasion from Holland, Leake had the command of the Firedrake fireship, and distinguished himself by several important services; particularly, by the relief of Londonderry in Ireland, which was chiefly effected by his means. He was in the Firedrake in the fleet under lord Dartmouth, when the prince of Orange landed; after which he joined the rest of the protestant officers in an address to the prince. The importance of rescuing Londonderry from the hands of king James raised him in the navy; and, after some removes, he had the command given him of the Eagle, a third-rate of 70 guns. In 1692, the distinguished figure he made in the famous battle off La Hogue procured him the particular friendship of Mr. (afterwards admiral) Churchill, brother to the duke of Marlborough; and he continued to behave on all occasions with great reputation till the end of the war; when, upon concluding the peace of Ryswick, his ship was paid off, Dec. 5, 1697. In 1696, on the death of his father, his friends had procured for him his father’s places of mastergunner in England, and store- keeper of Woolwich, but these he declined, being ambitious of a commissioner’s place in the navy; and perhaps he might have obtained it, had not admiral Churchill prevailed with him not to think of quitting the sea, and procured him a commission for a third-rate of 70 guns in May 1699. Afterwards, upon the prospect of a new war, he was removed to the Britannia, the finest first-rate in the navy, of which he was appointed, Jan. 1701, first captain of three under the earl of Pembroke, newly made lord high admiral of England. This was the highest station he could have as a captain, and higher than any private captain ever obtained either before or since. But, upon the earl’s removal, to make way for prince George of Denmark, soon after queen Anne’s accession to the throne, Leake’s commission under him becoming void, May 27, 1702, he accepted of the Association, a second-rate, till an opportunity offered for his farther promotion. Accordingly, upon the declaration of war against France, he received a commission, June the 24th that year, from prince George, appointing him commander in chief of the ships designed against Newfoundland. He arrived there with his squadron in August, and, destroying the French trade and settlements, restored the English to the possession of the whole island. This gave him an opportunity of enriching himself by the sale of the captures, at the same time that it gained him the favour of the nation, by doing it a signal service, without any great danger of not succeeding; for, in truth, all the real fame he acquired on this occasion arose from his extraordinary dispatch and diligence in the execution.

Upon his return home, he was appointed rear-admiral of the Blue, and vice-admiral of the same squadron; but declined the honour of knighthood, which, however, he accepted the following year, when he was engaged with admiral Rooke in taking Gibraltar. Soon after this he particularly distinguished himself in the general engagement off Malaga; and, being left with a winter-guard at Lisbon for those parts, he relieved Gibraltar in 1705, which the French had besieged by sea, and the Spaniards by land, and reduced to the last extremity. He arrived Oct. 29, and so opportunely for the besieged, that two days would, in all probability, have decided their fate; but this was prevented by sir John’s seasonable arrival. In Feb. 1705, he received a commission, appointing him vice-admiral of the white, and, in March, relieved Gibraltar a second time. On March 6 he set sail for that place; and, on the 10th, attacked five ships of the French fleet coming out of the Bay, of whom two were taken, two more run ashore, and were destroyed; and baron Pointi died soon after of the wounds he received in the battle. The rest of the French fleet, having intelligence of sir John’s coming, had left the Bay the day before his arrival there. He had no sooner anchored, but he received the letter inserted below from the prince of Hesse : his highness also presented him with a gold cup on the occasion. This blow struck a panic along the whole coast, of which sir John received the following account, in a letter from Mr. Hill, envoy to the court of Savoy: “I can tell you,” says he, “your late success against Mr. Pointi put all the French coast into a great consternation, as if you were come to scour the whole Mediterranean. All the ships of war that were in the road of Toulon were hauled into the harbour; and nothing durst look out for some days.” In short, the effect at Gibraltar was, that the enemy, in a few days, entirely raised the siege, and marched off, leaving only a detachment at some distance to observe the garrison; so that this important place was secured from any farther attempts of the enemy. There are but few instances in which the sea and land officers agreed so well together in an expedition, and sacrificed all private views and passions to a disinterested regard for the public good.

, baron of Dartmouth, an eminent naval commander, was the eldest son of colonel William Legge, groom of the bed-chamber to king Charles I. and brought up under the brave admiral sir Edward Spragge. He entered the navy at seventeen years of age, and, before he was twenty, his gallant behaviour recommended him so effectually to king Charles II. that in 1667, he promoted him to the command of the Pembroke. In 1671, he was appointed captain of the Fairfax, and the next year removed to the Royal Catharine, in which ship he obtained high reputation, by beating off the Dutch after they had boarded her, though the ship seemed on the point of sinking; and then finding the means of stopping her leaks, he carried her safe into port. In 1673, he was made governor of Portsmouth, master of the horse, and gentleman to the duke of York. Several other posts were successively conferred upon him, and in December 1682, he was created baron of Dartmouth. The port of Tangier having been attended with great expence to keep the fortifications in repair, and to maintain in it a numerous garrison to protect it from the Moors, who watched every opportunity of seizing it, the king determined to demolish the fortifications, and bring the garrison to England; but the difficulty was to perform it without the Moors having any suspicion of the design. Lord Dartmouth was appointed to manage this difficult affair, and, for that purpose, was, in 1683, made governor of Tangier, general of his majesty’s forces in Africa, and admiral of the fleet. At his arrival he prepared every thing necessary for putting his design in execution, blew up all the fortifications, and returned to England with the garrison; soon after which, the king made him a present of ten thousand pounds. When James II. ascended the throne, his lordship was created master of the horse, general of the ordnance, constable of the tower of London, captain of an independent company of foot, and one of the privy-council. That monarch placed the highest confidence in his friendship; and, on his being thoroughly convinced that the prince of Orange intended to land in England, he appointed him commander of the fleet; and, had he not been prevented by the wind and other accidents from coming up with the prince of Orange, a bloody engagement would doubtless have ensued.

lu 1762, he accompanied his general to the siege of Schweidnitz; but after the peace, he was introduced to the king of Prussia, and then resumed his literary occupations at Berlin. Though he produced many works, yet they were not the source of much profit, and, in 1769, his circumstances were so narrow, that he was obliged to sell his library for support. At this critical juncture he met with a generous patron in Leopold, heir-apparent to the duke of Brunswick, through whose means he was appointed librarian at Wolfenbuttle. One of the fruits of this very desirable situation was a periodical publication, entitled “Contributions to Literary History,” containing notices and extracts of the most remarkable Mss. The “Contributions” were made the vehicle of “Fragments of an anonymous Writer discovered in the Library at Wolfenbuttle,” which consisted of direct attacks upon the Christian revelation. They occasioned a great commotion among the German theologians, and would not have been printed but for the interference of prince Leopold with the licensers of the press. In 1778 they were suppressed. Lessing, from his rising fame, and connection with prince Leopold, with whom he went on a tour to Italy, was so distinguished among the German literati, that several potentates of that country made him offers. of an advantageous settlement. Nothing, however, could lead him to break his connection with his liberal patron the prince of Brunswick, who, by his accession in 1730 to the sovereignty, was enabled to augment his favours towards him. His latter publications were “Nathan the Wise;” a second part of the same drama, entitled “The Monk of Lebanon;” and “A Dissertation on the Education of the Human Race.” He died at Hamburgh in the month of February, 1781. Lessing had more genius than learning, and his fame, therefore, even in his own country, rests on his plays, fables, songs, and epigrams. His life was published at Berlin in 1793, and is more replete with anecdote than instruction, as may be gathered from the few circumstances we have detailed. He was a decided deist, and his morals corresponded.

, a voluminous writer of history, was born at Milan, May 29, 1630, of a family once of considerable distinction at Bologna. He was intended for the church, but was induced to make open profession of the protestant religion at Lausanne in 1657. This so pleased Guerin, an eminent physician, with whom he lodged, that he gave him his daughter for a wife; and Leti, settling at Geneva in 1660, passed nearly twenty years in that city employed on many of his publications. In 1674, the freedom of the city was presented to him, which had never before been granted to any stranger. Five years after he went to France, and in 1680, to England, where he was very graciously received by Charles II.; received a large present in money, and was promised the place of historiographer. On this he wrote his “Teatro Britannico,” a history of England; but, this work displeasing the court, he was ordered to quit the kingdom. Leti then went to Amsterdam, had the office of historiographer in that city, and died suddenly June 9, 1701, aged seventy-one. He was an indefatigable writer, and tells us in his “Belgic Theatre,” that three days in the week he spent twelve hours in writing, and six hours the other three days; whence the number of his works is prodigious. The greatest part are written in Italian; among which are, “The Nepotism of Rome,” 2 vols. 12mo; “The Universal Monarchy of Louis XIV.” 2 vols. 12mo; “The Life of Pope Sixtus V.” in Italian, Amsterdam, 1721, 3 vols. 12mo, plates; in French, 4to, or 2 vols. 12mo and in English by Farneworth. “The Life of Philip 11. king of Spain,” 6 vols. 12mo; “Of Charles V.”. Amsterdam, 1730, 4 vols. 12mo; “Of Queen Elizabeth,” Amsterdam, 1741, 2 vols. 12mo, plates; “History of Cromwell,” 1703, 2 vols. 12mo, plates; “Life of Giron, duke d'Ossone,” 3 vols. 12mo; “The French Theatre,*' 7 vols. 4to, a bad work;” The Belgic Theatre,“2 vols. 4to, equally bad;” The British Theatre, or History of England, 11 Amsterdam, 1684, 5 vols. 12mo; in which there is a capital portrait of queen Elizabeth. It was for this work that he was sent out of England. “L'ltalia regnante,” 4 vols. 12mo; “History of the Roman Empire in Germany,” 4 vols. 4to; “The Cardinalism of the Holy Church,” 3 vols. 12mo, a violent satire; “History of Geneva,” 5 vols. 12mo; “The just balance in which are weighed all the maxims of Rome, and the actions of the living cardinals,” 4 vols. 12mo; “The Historical Ceremonial,” 6 vols. 12mo; “Political Dialogues on the means used by the Italian Republics for their preservation,” 2 vols. 12mo “An Abridgment of Patriotic virtues,” 2 vols. 8vo “Fame jealous of Fortune a panegyric on Louis XIV,” 4to “A Poem on the enterprize of the Prince of Orange in England,” 1695, folio; “An Eulogy on Hunting,” 12mo; “Letters,” 1 vol. 12mo; “The Itinerary of the Court of Rome,” 3 vols. 8vo “History of the House of Saxony,” 4 vols. 4to “History of the House of Brandenburg,” 4 vols. 4to “The slaughter of the Innocent reformed,” 4to “The Ruins of the Apostolical See,” 1672, 12mo, &c. Although M. le Clerc, his son-in-law, has mentioned him with high encomiums, we know few writers of history who are less to be depended on, having debased all his productions with fable. It is impossible to give credit to him unless his facts can be supported by other authority. He, on some occasions, assumes all the dignity of conceited ignorance, and relates his fictions with all the confidence of a vain man, who thinks he cannot be contradicted. His aim indeed was to please rather than instruct, and he has, with his anecdotes, frequently amused and misled his readers. We know few more amusing works than his “Life of pope Sixtus V.” Granger, whose character of him we have partly adopted, relates that Leti being one day at Charles II.'s levee, the king said to him, “Leti, I hear you are writing the history of the court of England.” “Sir,” said he, “I have been for some time preparing materials for such a history.” “Take care,” said the king, “that your work give no offence.” “Sir,” replied Leti, “I will do what 1 can but if a man were as wise as Solomon, he would scarce be able to avoid giving some offence.” “Why then,” rejoined the king, “be as wise as Solomon, write proverbs, not tories.”

, a historical painter of great merit, was born in 1607, at Ley den, and placed under the care of Joris Van Schooten, and afterwards of Peter Lastman. Portrait was perhaps that branch of the art in which he uniformly excelled, yet some of his historical pieces are deserving of the highest praise. His,“Resurrection of Lazarus” is a work, Mr. Fuseli says, which, in sublimity of conception, leaves all attempts of other masters on the same subject far behind. His “Contiqence of Scipio,” is also celebrated in very high terms. Another of his performances, applauded by the poets as well as the artists of his time, is his “Student in his library,” the figures as large as life. This was purchased by the prince of Orange, and presented by him to Charles I. It was the means of procuring him a favourable reception at the English court, where he painted the portraits of the royal family and many of the nobility. After residing in England for three years, he went to Antwerp, and was incessantly employed. The time of his death is not specified.

, a celebrated English judge, descended of an ancient family, was the eldest son of Thomas Westcote, of the county of Devon, esq. by Elizabeth, daughter and sole-heir of Thomas Littleton or Lyttleton, of Frankley in Worcestershire, in compliance with whom she consented that the issue, or at least the eldest son, of that marriage should take the name of Lyttleton, and bear the arms of that family. He was born about the beginning of the fifteenth century at Frankley. Having laid a proper foundation of learning at one of the universities, he removed to the Inner-Temple; and, applying himself to the law, became very eminent in that profession. The first notice we have of his distinguishing himself is from his learned lectures on the statute of Westminster, “de donis conditionalibus,” “of conditional gifts.” He was afterwards made, by Henry VI. steward or judge of the court of the palace, or marshalsea of the king’s household, and, in May 1455, king’s serjeant, in which capacity he went the Northern circuit as a judge of the assize. Upon the revolution of the crown, from the house of Lancaster to that of York) in the time of Edward IV. our judge, who was now made sheriff of Worcestershire, received a pardon from that prince; was continued in his post of king’s serjeant, and also in that of justice of assi/r for the same circuit. This pardon passed in 1462, the second year of Edward IV.; and, in 1466, he was appointed one of the judges of the court of Common Pleas. The same year, he obtained a writ to the commissioners of the customs of London, Bristol, and Kingston-upon-Hull, enjoining them to pay him a hundred and ten marks annually, for the better support of his dignity; a hundred and six shillings and eleven pence farthing, to furnish him whh a furred robe; and six shillings and six-pence more, for another robe called Li num. In 1473, we find him residing near St. Sepulchre’s church, London, in a capital mansion, the property of the abbot of Leicester, which he held on lease at the yearly rent of 1 <'>.-. In 1475 he was created, among others, knight of the Hath, to grace the solemnity of conferring that order upon the king’s eldest son, then prince of Wales, afterwards Edward V. He continued to enjoy the esteem of his sovereign and the nation, on account of his profound knowledge of the laws of England, till his death, Aug. 23, 1481, the day after the date of his will. He was then said to be of a good old age, but its precise length has not been ascertained. He was honourably interred in the cathedral church of Worcester, where a marble tomb, with his statue, was erected to his memory; his picture was also placed in the church of Frankley; and another in that of Hides-Owen, where his descendants purchased a good estate. He married, and had three sons, William, Richard, and Thomas. Kichard, bred to the law, became eminent in thut profession; and it was for his use that our judge drew up his celebrated treatise on tenures or titles, which will probably hand his name down to the latest posterity. The judge’s third son, Thomas, was knighted by Henry VII. for taking Lambert Simnel, the pretended earl of Warwick. His eldest son and successor, sir William Littleton, after living many years in great splendour, at Frankley, died in 1508; and from this branch the late celebrated lord Lyttelton of Frankley co. Worcester, who was created a baron of Great Britain, Nov. 1756, derived his pedigree; but who, owing to the alteration in the spelling of the name (which, however, appears unnecessary) will occur in a future part of this work.

, or L'Obel (Matthias de), a botanist, was born in 1538, at Lisle, in Flanders, where his father practised in the law. He bad an early taste for plants, and had good opportunities of advancing his knowledge at Montpelier, where he studied physic under the learned Rondeletius, as well as by making some botanical excursions over the south of France. At Narbonne he became acquainted with Pena, afterwards his fellow^labourer in the “Adversaria,” the first edition of which was published, at London, in 1570, small folio, and dedicated to queen Elizabeth. The few cuts dispersed through this volume are mostly original, but inferior in style and accuracy, as well as in size, to those of Clusius, with whom he was contemporary. Before the publication of the “Adversaria,” our author had extended his travels to Switzerland, the Tyrol, some parts of Germany, and Italy; had settled as a physician -at Antwerp, afterwards at Delft; and had been appointed physician to the illustrious William prince of Orange, and to the States of Holland. Dr. Pulteney has not been able to ascertain the time of Lobel’s removal to England, but justly concludes it to have been before 1570, or most probably some years earlier. The aim of the authors of the “Adversaria” was to investigate the botany and materia medica of the ancients, and especially of Dioscorides. It was reprinted at Antwerp in 1576, the dedication being, of course, there suppressed, and new titlepages were printed to help the sale of the original in 1571 and 1572. Some copies of the Antwerp impression appear to have been made up into a new edition at London in 1605, with an ample Pharmacopeia, and an appendix. This volume is dedicated to Edward lord Zouch, whom Lobel had attended on his embassy to Denmark in 1592, and he calls himself, in the title, botanist to king James I. Dr. Pulteney observes, after Haller, that this work exhibits some traces of a natural distribution of plants, but without any remarks, and with little precision. His work is much more valuable for the accounts of new plants discovered by himself in England or elsewhere, although Ray accuses him of having made several mistakes, from having trusted too much to his memory.

His next remove was to Fredericksburg, where he obtained leave to settle with his banished brethren, aad a promise not to be disturbed in the private exercises of their religion. He acquainted the brethren with this news, and spared no pains nor cost, even to the impairing of his own estate, that he might settle them there; he also supported them at his own expence. But neither did they enjoy this happiness long. The duke of Holstein-Gottorp, without whose knowledge the above permission had been granted, at the persuasion of John Reinboht, one of his chaplains, and the Lutheran superintendant, banished them both from that city, and from all his dominions. In this exigence he returned to Hamburgh, by the advice of his friends, who had also procured him the title of secretary to the king of Poland, in hopes to oblige the magistrates to let him live quietly in that city; the king of Denmark likewise interceded again for him, all which prevailed for a considerable time, but at last the magistrates sent him positive orders to remove. Before, however, he could obey this order, he had poison given him in his meat, of which he died May 18, 1675, having lamented in verse the fate of his two daughters, who fell a sacrifice to the same poison two days before . His body was buried at Altena, against all the opposition that the Lutheran ministers could make. He had obtained a retreat for his banished brethren at Manheim, in the Palatinate, that elector being a prince of latitudinarian principles in matters of religion.

The emperor Maximilian was equally solicitous with the pope, about putting a stop to the propagation of Luther’s opinions in Saxony; since the great number of his followers, and the resolution with which he defended them, made it evident beyond dispute that if he were not immediately checked he would become troublesome both to the church and empire. Maximilian therefore applied to Leo in a letter dated Aug. 5, 1518, and begged him to forbid by his authority, these useless, rash, and dangerous disputes; assuring him also that he would strictly execute in the empire whatever his holiness should enjoin. The pope on his part ordered Jerom de Genutiis, bishop of Ascula, or Ascoli, auditor of the apostolic chamber, to cite Luther to appear at Rome within sijcty days, that he might give an account of his doctrine to the auditor and master of the palace, to whom he had committed the judgment of the cause. He wrote at the same time to Frederick the elector of Saxony, to pray him not to protect Luther and let him know that he had cited him, and had given cardinal Cajetan, his legate in Germany, the necessary instructions upon that occasion. He exhorts the elector to put Luther into the hands of this legate, that he might be carried to Rome; assuring him that, if he were innocent, he would send him back absolved, and if he were guilty, would pardon him upon his repentance. This letter to Frederic was dated Aug. 23, 1518, and it was by no means unnecessary; for though Luther had nothing to trust to at first but his own personal qualities, his parts, his learning, and his courage, yet he was afterwards countenanced and supported by this elector, a prince of great personal worth. At the same time also the pope sent a brief to cardinal Cajetan, in which he ordered him to bring Luther before him as soon as possible; and to hinder the princes from being any impediment to the execution of this order, he denounced the punishments of excommunication, interdiction, and privation of goods against all who should receive Luther, and give him protection; and promised a plenary indulgence to those who should assist in delivering him up.

The elector John of Saxony (for Frederic was dead), the elector of Brandenburg, Ernest and Francisdukes of Lunenburg, the landgrave of Hesse, and the prince of Anhalt, protested against this decree of the diet. Their reasons were, 4t Ttiat they ought not to do any thing to infringe upon the determination of the former diet, which had granted liberty in religion, till the holding of the council; that that resolution, having been taken by the unanimous consent of all the members of the empire, could not be repealed but by the like consent; that, in the diet of Nuremberg, the original cause of all the differences in religion was searched into, and that, to allay them, they had offered to the pope eighty articles, to which his holiness had given no answer; that the effect of their consultations had always been, that the best way to end disputes and reform abuses was to hold a council; that they could not suffer opinions to be forced from them, which th^y judged true and agreeable to the word of God, before the council was held; that their ministers had proved, by invincible arguments taken out of Scripture, that the popish mass was contrary to the institution of Jesus Christ, and the practice of the apostles, so that they could not agree to what uas ordered in the diet; that they knew the judgment of their churches concerning the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the eucharist; but that they ought not to make a decree against those who were of a contrary opinion, because they were neither summoned nor heard: that they could indeed venture to approve of the clause about preaching the gospel according to the interpretation received in the church, since that did not determine the matter, it being yet in dispute what was the true church; that there was nothing more certain than the word of Go4 itself, which explains itself, and therefore they would take care, that nothing else should be taught but the Old and New Testament in their purity; that they are the only infallible rule, and that all human traditions are uncertain; that the decree of the former diet was made for the preservation of peace, but that this last would infallibly beget wars and troubles. For these reasons they could not approve of the decree of the diet, but yet would do nothing that should be blame- worthy, till a council, either general or national, should be held." Fourteen cities, viz. Strasburg, Nuremberg, Ulm, Constance, Retlingen, Windsheim, Memmingen, Lindow, Ketnpten, Hailbron, Isny, Weissemburg, Nortlingen, S. Gal, joined in this protestation, which was put into writing, and published the 19th of April, 1529, by an instrument, in which they appealed from all that should be done, to the emperor, a future council, either general or national, or to unsuspected judges; and accordingly they appointed deputies to send to the emperor, to* petition that this decree might be revoked. This was the famous protestation, which gave the name of Protestants to the reformers in Germany.

, a very celebrated general and mareschal of France, was a posthumous son of the famous Bouteville, who was beheaded under Louis XIII. for fighting a duel. He was born in 1628, and in 1643 was present at the battle of Rocroi, under the great Conde, whose pupil he was, and whom he followed in all his fortunes. He also resembled that great man in many of his eminent qualities, in acuteness of perception, thirst for knowledge, promptness in action, and ardour of genius. These qualities he displayed in the conquest of Franche-Comte in 1668, where he served as lieutenant-general. He served also in the Dutch campaign of 1672, took many towns, and gained some trophies in the field. He closed this expedition by a retreat more famous than his victories, which he accomplished with an awny of 20,000 men, against the opposition, of 70,000. After distinguishing himself in another expedition in Franche-Comte, he was advanced in 1675, to the dignity of mareschal of France. He fought, during the remainder of that war, with various success. In the second war of Louis XIV. against the allied powers in 1690, he gained the battle of Fleurus, and it was generally allowed that he prevailed in it chiefly by the superiority of his genius to that of his antagonist the prince of Waldeck. In the ensuing year, 1691,“he gained the battles of Leufen and Steinkirk; and, continuing to be opposed to king William of England, he was again successful, in the bloody battle of Nerwinde, where there fell on the two sides near 20,000 men. It was said in France that on this occasion they should not sing Te Deum, but De profundis, the mass for the dead. The duke of Luxembourg is said to have had an ordinary countenance and a deformed figure, in consequence of which William III. whose constant antagonist he was, is reported to have said once with some impatience,” What! shall I never beat this hump-backed fellow?“This speech being repeated to the duke,” How should he know,“said he,” the shape of my back? I am sure he never saw me turn it to him.“The last great action of the duke’s life was a second famous retreat, in the presence of superior forces, through a considerable extent of country, to Tournay. This was in 1694, and he died the following year, Jan. 4, at the age of sixty-seven. Notwithstanding the disadvantages of his person, Luxembourg is said to have been much involved in intrigues of gallantry. He had some powerful enemies, particularly the minister Louvois, who once had him confined very unjustly in the Bastille. Among other frivolous calumnies on which he was then interrogated, he was asked whether he had not made a league with the devil, to marry His son to the daughter of the marquis de Louvois. His answer was replete with the high spirit of French nobility.” When Matthew of Montmorenci,“said he,” married a queen of France, he addressed himself, not to the devil, but to the states-general; and the declaration of the states was, that in order to gain the support of the house of Montmorenci for the young king in his minority, it would be right to conclude that marriage." Idle as the accusations against him were, they cost him a confinement of fourteen months, and he had no subsequent redress.

When he returned from his continental tour, he was (May 4, 1729) made page of honour to the princess royal. He also obtained a seat in parliament, and soon distinguished himself among the most eager opponents of sir Robert Walpole, though his father, who was one of the lords of the admiralty, always voted with the court. For many years the name of George Lyttelton was seen in every account of every debate in the house of commons. Among the great leading questions, he opposed the standing army, and the excise, and supported the motion for petitioning the king to remove Walpole. The prince of Wales having, in consequence of a quarrel with the king, been obliged to leave St. James’s in 1737, kept a separate court, and opened his arms to the opponents of the ministry. Mr. Lyttelton was made his secretary, and was supposed to have great influence in the direction of his conduct. His name consequently occurs, although not very often, in Doddington’s Diary. He persuaded the prince, whose business it was now to be popular, tbat he would advance his character by patronage. Mallet was made under-secretary, with 2001. a year; and Thomson had a pension of 100l. The disposition of the two men must account for the difference in the sums. Mallet could do more political service than the honest-hearted Thomson. For Thomson, however, Mr. Lyttelton always retained his kindness, and was able at last to place him at ease. Moore courted his favour by an apologetical poem called “The Trial of Selim,” and was paid with kind words, which, as is common, says Dr. Johnson, raised great hopes, that at last were disappointed. This matter, however, is differently stated in our account of Moore.

His success in these affairs had nearly fixed him in political life, when a dispute with the cardinal changed his destination, and the circumstance does credit to his liberality. The cardinal was not only minister of state, but archbishop of Lyons, when the question was agitated respecting the marriages of protestants. The abbe wished him to view this question with the eyes of a statesman only, but the cardinal would consider it only as a prince of the Romish church, and as he persisted in this opinion, the abbe saw him no more. From this time he gave himself up to study, without making any advances to fortune, or to literary men. He always said he was more anxious to merit general esteem than to obtain it. He lived a long time on a small income of a thousand crowns, and an annuity; which last, on the death of his brother, he gave up to his relations. The court, however, struck with this disinterested act, gave him a pension of 2800 Jivres, without the solicitation or knowledge of any of his friends. Mably not only inveighed against luxury and riches, but showed by his example that he was sincere; and to these moderate desires, he joined an ardent love of independence, which he took every opportunity to evince. One day when a friend brought him an invitation to dine with a minister of state, he could not prevail on him to accept it, but at length the abbe said he would visit the gentleman with pleasure as soon as he heard that he was “out of office.” He had an equal repugnance to become a member of any of the learned societies. The marshal Richelieu pressed him much to become a candidate for the academy, and with such arguments that he could not refuse to accept the offer; but he had fio sooner quitted the marshal than he ran to his brother the abbe Condillac, and begged he would get him released, cost what it would. “Why all this obstinacy?” said his brother. “Why!” rejoined the abbe“Mably,” because, if I accept it 1 shall be obliged to praise the cardinal de Uichelieu, which is contrary to my principles, or, it I do not praise him, as I owe every thing to his nephew, I shall be accused of ingratitude.“In the same spirit, he acquired a bluntness of manner that was not very agreeable in the higher circles, where he never tailed to take the part of men of genius who were poor, against the insults of the rich and proud. His works, by which the booksellers acquired large sums of money, contributed very little to his own finances, for he demanded no return but a lew copies to give as presents to his friends. He appeared always dissatisfied with the state of public affairs, and had the credit of predicting the French revolution. Political sagacity, indeed, was that on which he chiefly rested his fame, andhaving formed his theory from certain systems which he thought might be traced to the Greeks and Romans, and even the ancient Gauls, he went as far as must of his contemporaries in undervaluing the prerogatives of the crown, and introducing a representative government. In his latter works his own mind appears to have undergone a revolution, and he pro\ed that if he was before sincere in his notions of freedom, he was now equally illiberal. After enjoying considerable reputation, and bein^ considered as one of the most popular French writers on the subjects of politics, morals, and history, he died at Paris, April 23, 1785. The abbe Barruel ranks him among the class of philosophers, who wished to be styled the Moderates, but whom Rousseau calls the Inconsistents. He adds, that” without being impious like a Voltaire or a Condorcet, even though averse to their impiety, his own tenets were extremely equivocal. At times his morality was so very disgusting, that it was necessary to suppose his language was ambiguous, and that he had been misunderstood, lest one should be obliged to throw off all esteem for his character." Such at least was the defence which Barruel heard him make, to justify himself from the censures of the Sorbonne.

Upon the abrogation of the penal laws by James II. sir George, though he had always been remarkable for his loyalty, and censured for his zeal, thought himself obliged to resign his post; being convinced that he could not discharge the duties of it at that crisis with a good conscience. He was succeeded by sir John Dalrymple, who, however, did not long continue in it; for that unfortunate prince being convinced of his error, restored sir George to his post, in which he continued until the revolution, and then resigned it. He could not agree to the measures and terms of the revolution; he hoped that the prince of Orange would have returned to his own country, when matters were adjusted between the king and his subjects; but finding that the event proved otherwise, he quitted all his employments in Scotland, and retired to England, resolving to spend the remainder of his days in the university of Oxford. He accordingly arrived there in September 1689, and prosecuted his studies in the Bodleian library, being admitted a student there by a grace passed in the congregation June 2, 1690. In the spring following he went to London, where he contracted a disorder, of which he died May 2, 1691. His body was conveyed by land to Scotland, and interred with great pomp and solemnity at Edinburgh, his funeral being attended by all the council, nobility, college of justice, college of physicians, university, clergy, gentry, and a greater concourse of people than ever was seen on any similar occasion.

Besides the moral pieces mentioned above, he wrote several works to illustrate the laws and customs of his country, to vindicate the monarchy from the restless contrivances and attacks of those whom he esteemed its enemies, and to maintain the honour and glory of Scotland. To illustrate the laws and customs of his country, he published “A Discourse upon the laws and customs of Scotland in matters criminal,” 1674, 4to. “Idea eloquentiae tbrensis hodiernae, una cum actione forensi ex unaquaque juris parte,” 1681, 8vo. “Institutions of the laws of Scotland,” 1684, 8vo. “Observations upon the acts of parliament,” 1686, folio. Besides these, several other treatises of law are inserted in his works, printed at Edinburgh, 1716, in 2 vols. folio. In vindication of monarchy, he wrote his “Jus regium; or the just and solid foundations of monarchy in general, and more especially of the monarchy of Scotland; maintained against Buchanan, Naphthali, Doleman, Milton, &c.” Lond. 16S4, 8vo. This book being dedicated and presented by the author to the university of Oxford, he received a letter of thanks from the convocation. With the same view he published his * Discovery of the fanatic plot,“printed at Edinburgh, in 1684, folio; and his” Vindication of the government of Scotland during the reign of Charles II.“Also the” Method of Proceeding against Criminals and Fanatical Covenanters,“1691, 4to. The pieces which he published in honour of his nation, were as follow:” Observations on the Laws and Customs of Nations as to Precedency, with the science of heraldry, treated as a part of the civil law of nations; wherein reasons are given for its principles, and etymologies for its harder terms,“1680, folio.” A Defence of the Antiquity of the Royal Line of Scotland; with a true account when the Scots were governed by the kings in the Isle of Britain,“1685, 8vo. This was written in answer to” An historical Account of Church-Government as it was in Great Britain and Ireland, when they first received the Christian religion,“by Lloyd, bishop of St. Asaph. Sir George’s defence was published in June 1685; but before it came out it was animadverted upon by Dr. Stillingfleet, who had seen it in manuscript in the preface to his” Origines Britannicae.“Sir George replied the year following, in a piece entitled” The Antiquity of the Royal Line of Scotland farther cleared and defended against the exceptions lately offered by Dr. Stillingfleet, in his Vindication of the Bishop of St. Asaph;" and here the controversy appears to have ended. It is remarkable, however, that sir George’s books were translated into Latin, printed at Utrecht in 1689, and then presented to William-Henry prince of Orange, who wrote two very polite letters of thanks to him for his performance. Among the instances of this author’s zeal for his country, it is necessary to mention his founding of the lawyer’s library at Edinburgh, in 1689. This, which is now known by the name of the advocate’s library, was afterwards stored with variety of manuscripts, relating particularly to the antiquities of Scotland, and with a fine collection of books, in all sciences, classed in that excellent order, which he prescribed in an elegant Latin oration, pronounced upon the opening of it, and printed among his works.

Dr. Maclaine published in 1752 a sermon on the death of the prince of Orange. In 1765 his masterly translation of Mosheim’s Ecclesiastical History made its first appearance, in 2 vols. 4to, dedicated to William Prince of Orange. It experienced a most favourable reception, and was reprinted, 1758, in six vols. 8vo, in which form it has had several subsequent editions, particularly one published in 1811, withvaluable additions by Dr. Coote, the editor, and the Rev. Dr. Gleig, of Stirling. Few publications, on their first appearance, having been more generally read than Mr. Soame Jenyns’s “View of the internal Evidence of the Christian Religion,” Dr. Maclaine addressed to that gentleman a series of letters, 1777, in 12 mo, written to serve the best purposes of Christianity, on a due consideration of the distinguished eminence of Mr. Jenyns as a writer, of the singular mixture of piety, wit, error, wisdom, and paradox, exhibited in his publication, and of his defence of Christianity on principles which would lead men to enthusiasm or to scepticism, according to their different dispositions. His only publications since were two fast sermons, 1793 and 1797, and a volume of sermons preached at the Hague. He was interred in the abbey church of Bath, where a monument has been since erected to his memory by his friend Henry Hope, esq.

, a celebrated preacher and writer, was the son of Martin Madan, esq. of Hertingfordbury near Hertford, member of parliament for Wootton Basset, and groom of the bedchamber to Frederick prince of Wales. His mother was daughter of Spencer Cowper, esq. and niece of the lord chancellor Cowper, an accomplished lady, and author of several poems of considerable merit. He was born in 1726, and was bred originally to the law, and had been called to the bar; but being fond of the study of theology, well versed in Hebrew, and becoming intimate with Mr. Jones and Mr. Romaine, two clergymen of great popularity at that time, by their advice he left the law for the pulpit, and was admitted into orders. His first sermon is said to have been preached in the church of Allhallows, Lombard -street, and to have attracted immediate attention and applause. Being appointed chaplain to the Lock-hospital, his zeal led him to attend diligently, and to preach to the unfortunate patients assembled in the parlour: his fame also brought many others thither, till the rooms and avenues were crowded. This led to a proposal for a chapel, which was finished in 176.1, and opened with a sermon from the chaplain. He subjected himself to much obloquy, about the year 1767, by the advice he gave to his friend Mr. Havveis, to retain the rectory of Aldwincle, and several pamphlets were written on the subject; but lord Apsley (afterwards Bathurst) did not seem to consider the affair in an unfavourable light, as he afterwards appointed him his chaplain. Mr. Madan became an author in 1761, when he published, 1. “A sermon on Justification by Works.” 2. “A small treatise on the Christian Faith,” 1761, 12mo. 3. “Sermon at the opening of the Lock Hospital, 1762.” 4. “Answer to the capital errors of W. Law,” 1763, 8vo. 5. “Answer to the narrative of facts respecting the rectory of Aldwinckle,” 1767, 8vo. 6. “A comment on the Thirty-nine Articles,” 1772, 8vo. 7.“Thelyphthora,” 1780, 2 vols. -&vo. In this book the author justifies polygamy, upon the notion that the first cohabitation with a woman is a virtual marriage; and supports his doctrine by many acute arguments. The intention of the work was to lessen or remove the causes of seduction; but it met with much opposition, many very severe animadversions, and cost the author his reputation among the religious world. He, however, was not discouraged; and in 1781, published a third volume, after which the work sunk into oblivion, a fate to which the masterly criticism on it in the Monthly Review, by the rev. Mr. Badcock, very greatly contributed. It is somewhat remarkable that Mrs. Manley in the “Atalantis” speaks of lord chancellor Cowper, as maintaining the same tenets on polygamy. Mr. Madan next produced, 8. “Letters to Dr. Priestley,” 1787, 12mo. 9. A literal version of “Juvenal and Persius,” with notes, 1789, 2 vols. 8vo: and some controversial tracts on the subject of his Thelyphthora. Mr. Madan died at Epsom in May, 1790, at the age of 64, after a short illness, and was buried at Kensington. The late Dr. Spencer Madan, bishop of Peterborough, was brother to our author.

, duke of Lauderdale, grandson of the preceding, was a statesman of great power and authority, but of most inconsistent character. On the breaking out of the wars in Scotland in the reign of Charles I. he was a zealous covenanter; and in Jan. 1644-5, one of the commissioners at the treaty of Uxbridge, during which, upon the death of his father the earl of Lauderdale, he succeeded to his titles and estate. He took an active but not very useful part in the above treaty; “being,” says lord Clarendon, “a young man, not accustomed to an orderly and decent way of speaking, and having no gracious pronunciation., and full of passion, he made every thing much more difficult than it was before.” In April 1647, he came with the earl of Dumfermling to London, with a commission to join with the parliament commissioners in persuading the king to sign the covenant and propositions offered to him; and in the latter end of the same year, he, in conjunction with the earl of Loudon, chancellor of Scotland, and the earl of Lanerick, conducted a private treaty with his majesty at Hampton court, which was renewed and signed by him on Dec. 26 at Carisbrook castle. By this, among other very remarkable concessions, the king engaged himself to employ the Scots equally with the English in all foreign employments and negociations; and that a third part of all the offices and places about the king, queen, and prince, should be conferred upon persons of that nation; and that the king and prince, or one of them, should frequently reside in Scotland. In August the year following, the earl of Lauderdale was sent by the committee of estates of Scotland to the prince of Wales, with a letter, in which, next to his father’s restraint, they bewailed his highness’s long absence from that kingdom; and since their forces were again marched into England, they desired his presence to countenance their endeavours for religion and his father’s re-establishment. In 1649, he opposed with great vehemence the propositions made by the marquis of Montrose to king Charles II.; and in 1651 attended his majesty in his expedition into England, but was taken prisoner after the battle of Worcester in September the same year, and confined in the Tower of London, Portland-castle, and other prisons, till the 3d of March, 1659-60, when he was released from his imprisonment in Windsor-castle.

Soon after the exhibition of “Eurydice,” Mr. Mallet published his poem on “Verbal Criticism,” a subject which he either did not understand, or willingly misrepresented. “There is’in this poem,” says Dr. Johnson, “more pertness than wit, and more confidence than knowledge. The versification is tolerable, nor can criticism allow it a, higher praise.” It was written to pay court to Pope, who soon after introduced him, we may add, “in an evil hour” to lord Bolingbroke. The ruin of Pope’s reputation might have been dated from this hour, if the joint malignity of Bolingbroke and Mallet could have effected it. Mallet was now in the way to promotion. When the prince of Wales, at variance with his father, placed himself at the head of the opposition, and kept a separate court, he endeavoured to increase his popularity by the patronage of literature; and Mallet being recommended to him, his royal highness appointed him his under-secretary, with a salary of 200l. a year.

While in this employment, he published in 1739, “Mustapha,” a tragedy, dedicated to his royal patron. Thomson’s “Edward and Eleonora” had been excluded the stage, because the licenser discovered in it a formidable attack on the minister, yet Mallet’s “Mustapha,” which was thought, and was no doubt intended, to glance both at the king and sir Robert Walpole, in the characters of Solyman the Magnificent, and Rustan his visier, was allowed to be acted, and was acted with great applause. The language of this tragedy is more easy and natural than that of “Eurydice,” but its success was much owing to its political allusions. On the first night of its exhibition, the heads of the opposition were all assembled, and many speeches were applied by the audience to the supposed grievances of the times, and to persons and characters. In the following year, Thomson and Mallet were commanded by the prince of Wales to write the masque of “Alfred,” in honour of the birth-day of lady Augusta, his eldest daughter (the late duchess of Brunswick), which was twice acted in the gardens of Clifden by some of the London performers. After the death of Thomson in 1748, Mallet re-wrote the Masque of Alfred, under the influence and by the encouragement of lord Bolingbroke; and with the assistance of music and gorgeous scenery; it was acted with some, but no great success.

Manicheism, as we have seen, is a. great deal older than Manes. The Gnostics, the Cordonians, the Marcionites, and several other sectaries, who introduced this doctrine into Christianity before Manes occasioned any contest about it, were by no means its inventors, but found it in the books of the heathen philosophers. In truth, the Manicheau doctrine was a system of philosophy rather than of religion. They made use of amulets, in imitation of the Basilidians; and are said to have made profession of astronomy and astrology. They denied that Jesus Christ, who was only God, assumed a true human body, and maintained it was only imaginary; and, therefore, they denied his incarnation, death, &c. They pretended that the law of Moses did not come from God, or the good principle, but from the evil one; and that for this reason it was abrogated. They rejected almost all the sacred books, in which Christians look for the sublime truths of their holy religion. They affirmed that the Old Testament was not the work of God, but of the prince of darkness, who was substituted by the Jews in the place of the true God. They abstained entirely from eating the flesh of any animal; following herein the doctrine of the ancient Pythagoreans: they also condemned marriage. The rest of their errors may be seen in St. Epiplianius and St. Augustin; which last, having been of their sect, may be presumed to have been thoroughly acquainted with them.

, the elder of three justly celebrated printers, was born about 1447, at Bassiano, a small town in the duchy of Sermonetta, He was educated at Rome, under Caspar of Verona and Domitius Calderinus, both of whom he has mentioned in several of his prefaces, as men of talents and erudition. Having acquired a knowledge of the Latin language from them, he went to Ferrara to study Greek under Baptist Guarini, and, probably after his own studies were completed, became the preceptor of the prince of Carpi, a nephew of the celebrated Picus of Mirandula. In 1482, Ferrara being closely besieged by a Venetian army, he retired to Mirandula, and spent some time in the society of Picus, who, though not quite twenty years of age, was already a consummate master of almost all learning. From Mirandula, Aldus went, some time after, to reside with his pupil, who, though only twelve years of age, had made such advances in learning, that he was already qualified to take a part in the serious conversations, and the designs of his uncle and his preceptor; and it is believed to have been at this time, that Aldus conceived the project of his subsequent printing establishment at Venice, to the expences of which, Picus and his pupil probably contributed. He began, however, to print, at Venice, in 1488, with an edition of the small Greek poem of Musseus, in quarto, with a Latin translation, but without date. In 1494 he published the Gre*k grammar of Lascaris, and in 1495, in one collection, the grammatical treatises of Theodore Gaza, Apollonius, and Herodian.

In the necessary pains upon these works, Aldus had the assistance of some of the best and most learned among his contemporaries. His house became a sort of new academy. The learned in Venice began, about 1500, to assemble there on fixed days of frequent recurrence, for conversation on interesting literary topics: and their meetings were continued for several years subsequent. The topics on which they conversed were, usually, what books were fittest to be printed, what manuscripts might be consulted with the greatest advantage, what readings, out of a diversity, for any one passage, ought to be preferred. Among those who attended these conversations, were, besides Aldus himself, the famous A. Navagerus, P. Bembo the celebrated cardinal, Erasmus, when he was at Venice, P. Alcionius, M. Musurus, Marc-Ant. Cocch. Sabellicus, Albertus Pius, prince of Carpi, and others, whose names, though they were then eminent, are not now equally in remembrance. Among those who assisted Aldus in the correction of the press, were men not less eminent than Demetrius Chalcondylas, Aleander, afterwards famous as a cardinal, and even Erasmus.

Sir Patrick having by such means eluded all the exertions of government to have him seized, after the failure of the duke of Argyle’s attempt, escaped to France, and travelled through that country, as a physician, to Bourcleaux, from whence he embarked for Holland, where he attached himself to the prince of Orange, looking up to him, as many others both at home and in Holland did, as the best resource against the threatened destruction of every thing most dear to British subjects.

, a once celebrated Italian poet, was born at Naples in 1569; and made so great a progress in his juvenile studies, that he was thought qualified for that of the civil law at thirteen. His father, who was a lawyer, intended him for that profession, as the properest means of advancing him; but Marini had already contracted a taste for poetry, and was so far from relishing the science to which he was put, that he sold his law-books, in order to purchase books of polite literature. This so much irritated his father, that he turned him out of doors, and obliged him to seek for protectors and supporters abroad. Having acquired a reputation for poetry, he happily found in Inico de Guevara, duke of Bovino, a friend who conceived an affection for him, and supported him for three years in his house. The prince of Conca, grand admiral of the kingdom of Naples, next took him into his service, in quality of secretary; and in this situation he continued five or six years; but having assisted a friend in a very delicate intrigue, he was thrown into prison, and very hardly escaped with his life. Thence he retired to Rome, where, after some time spent in suspense and poverty, he became known to Melchior Crescendo, a prelate of great distinction, who patronized him, and provided him with every thing he wanted.

, seigneur du Mont, sainte Aldegonde, by which last name he is recorded by some biographers, was born in 1538, at Brussels, of noble parents, who were originally of Savoy. He was Calvin’s disciple at Geneva, and appointed ecclesiastical counsellor to Charles Louis, elector palatine; but William, prince of Orange, invited him back again some time after, and employed him usefully in affairs of the utmost importance. Sainte Aldegonde was afterwards consul at Antwerp, which city he defended against the duke of Parma, in 1584, and died at Leyden, December 15, 1598, aged sixty, while he was employed in a Flemish version of the Bible. He left “Controversial Theses,” Antwerp, 1580, 8vo; “Circular Epistles to the Protestants;” “Apologies;” a “Portrait of different Religions,” in which he ridicules the church of Rome, Leyden, 1603, and 1605, 2 vols. 8vo; and other works. Sainte Aldegonde drew up the form of the celebrated confederacy, by which several lords of the Netherlands engaged to oppose the odious tribunal of the inquisition, in 1566.

Marot, according to an expression of the sieur de Vauprivas, was the poet of the princes, and the prince of poets, during his time in France. It is agreed on all hands, not only that the French poetry had never before appeared with the charms and beauties with which he adorned it, but that, even during the sixteenth century, there appeared nothing that could be compared with the happy turn, the native graces, and the wit, that was every-where scattered through his works, and which compose what is called the Marotic style. This has had many imitators, particularly La Fontaine and Rousseau. We find, by the judgments which have been collected upon Marot, that the French poets are obliged to him for the rondeau; and that to him they likewise owe, in same measure, the modern form of the sonnet and madrigal, and of some other of the smaller forms of poetry. His works, however, are highly censureable on the score of indecency. The wonder is, that, with such libertine propensities, he should employ his genius on a translation of the Psalms. Of these he first translated thirty, which he obtained a privilege to publish, about 1540, and dedicated them to Francis I. His translation was censured by the faculty of divinity at Paris, who carried matters so far as to make remonstrances and complaints to that monarch. The king, who had a great value for Marot on account of his genius, put them off with delays, testifying how acceptable this specimen was to him, and desiring to see the whole finished. However, after several remonstrances had been made to the king, the publication of them was prohibited; which, as usually happens in such cases, made them sell faster than the printers could work them off. After he had retired to Geneva, he translated twenty more Psalms, which in 1543 were printed there with the other thirty; together with a preface written by Calvin. Marot’s works have been collected and printed several times, and in various beautiful forms. Two of the best editions are those of the Hague, 1700, 2 vols. 12mo; and 1731, 4 vols. 4to.

, a late eminent anatomist and physician, was born in Fifeshire, in 1742, at Park-hill, a large farm on the side of the Tay, near Newburgh, held by his father, Mr. John Marshal, of the earl of Rothes. His lather had received a classical education himself; and being desirous that his son should enjoy a similar advantage, sent him first to the grammar-school at Newburgh, and afterwards tothat of Abernethy, then the most celebrated place of education among the Seceders, of which religious sect he was a most zealous member. Here he was regarded as a quick and apt scholar. From his childhood he had taken great delight in rural scenery. One day, while under the influence of feelings of this kind, being then about fourteen years old, he told his father that he wished to leave school, and be a farmer, but he soon shewed that it had not arisen from any fondness for ordinary country labours. In the following harvest-time, for instance, having been appointed to follow the reapers, and bind up the cut corn into sheaves, he would frequently lay himself down in some shady part of the field, and taking a book from his pocket, begin to read, -utterly forgetful of his task. About two years after, however, he resumed his studies, with the intention of becoming a minister: and soon after, he was admitted a student of philosophy at Abernethy; and next became a student of divinity. In his nineteenth year he went to Glasgow, and divided his ­time between teaching a school, and attending lectures in the university. The branches of learning which he chiefly cultivated were Greek and morals. At the end of two years passed in this way, he became (through the interest of the celebrated Dr. Reid, to whom his talents and diligence had recommended him), tutor in a gentleman’s family, of the name of Campbell, in the Island of Islay. He remained here four years, and removed to the university of Edinburgh, with Mr. -Campbell’s son, whom the following year he carried back to his father. Having surrendered his charge, he returned to Edinburgh, where he subsisted himself by reading Greek and Latin privately with students of the university; in the mean time taking no recreation, but giving up all his leisure to the acquisition of knowledge. He still considered himself a student of divinity, in which capacity he delivered two discourses in the divinity-hall; and from motives of curiosity began in 1769 to attend lectures on medicine. While thus employed, he was chosen1 member of the Speculative society, where, in the beginning of 1772, he became acquainted with lord Balgonie, who was so much pleased with the display which he made of genius and learning in that society, that he requested they“should read together; and in the autumn of the following year made a proposal for their going to the Continent, which was readily accepted. They travelled slowly through Flanders to Paris, where they stayed a month, and then proceeded to Tours, where they resided eight months, in the house of a man of letters, under whose tuition they strove to acquire a correct knowledge of the French language and government. They became acquainted here with several persons of rank, among whom were a prince of Rohan, and the dukes of Clioiseul and Aguilon, at whose seats in the neighbourhood they were sometimes received as gnests. An acquaintance with such people would make Marshal feel pain on account of his want of external accomplishments; and this, probably, was the reason of his labouring” to learn to dance and to fence while he was at Tours, though he was then more than thirty years old. He returned to England in the summer of 1774; and proceeded soon after to Edinburgh, where he resumed the employment of reading Latin and Greek with young men. Hitherto he seems to have formed no settled plan of life, but to have bounded his views almost entirely to the acquisition of knowledge, and a present subsistence. His friends, however, had been induced to hope that he would at some time be advanced to a professor’s cl; ir and it is possible that he entertained the same hope himself. In the spring of 1775, this hope appeared to be strengthened by his being requested by Mr. Stewart, the professor of humanity at Edinburgh, to officiate for him, as he was then unwell: Marshal complied, but soon after appears to have given up all hopes of a professorship, and studied medicine with a determination to practise it. In the spring of 1777, he was enabled by the assistance of a friend, Mr. John Campbell of Edinburgh, to come to London for professional improvement; and studied anatomy under Dr. W. Hunter, and surgery under Mr. J, Hunter. After he had been here a twelvemonth, he was appointed surgeon to the S3rd, or Glasgow regiment, through the interest of the earl of Leverv, the father of his late pupil, lord Balgonie. The first year after was passed with his regiment, in Scotland. In the following he accompanied it to Jersey, where he remained with it almost constantly till the conclusion of the war in the beginning of 1783, when it was disbanded. In this situation he enjoyed, almost for the first time, the pleasures best suited to a man of independent mind. His income was more than sufficient for his support; his industry and knowledge rendered him useful; and his character for integrity and honour procured him general esteem. From Jersey he came to London, seeking for a settlement, and was advised by Dr. D. Pitcairn (with whom he had formed a friendship while a student at Glasgow) to practise surgery here, though he had taken the degree of doctor of physic the preceding year at Edinburgh; and to teach anatomy at St. Bartholomew’s hospital, it being at the same time proposed, that the physicians to that hospital (of whom Dr. Pitcairn was one) should lecture on other branches of medical learning. He took a house, in consequence, in the neighbourhood of the hospital; and proceeded to prepare for the execution of his part of the scheme. This proving abortive, he began to teach anatomy, the following year, at his own house; and at length succeeded in procuring annually a considerable number of pupils, attracted to him solely by the reputation of his being a most diligent and able teacher. In 1788 he quitted the practice of surgery, and commenced that of medicine, having previously become a member of the London college oF physicians. In the ensuing year a dispute arose between John Hunter and him, which it is proper to relate, as it had influence on his after-life. When Marshal returned to London, he renewed his acquaintance with Mr. Hunter, who thought so well of him, that he requested his attendance at a committee of his friends, to whose correction he submitted his work on the venereal disease, before it was published. He became also a member of a small society, instituted by Dr. Fordyce and Mr. Hunter, for the improvement of medical and surgical knowledge. Having mentioned at a meeting of this society, that, in the dissection of those who had died insane, he had always found marks of disease in the head, Mr. Hunter denied the truth of this in very coarse language. The other members interfering, Mr. Hunter agreed to say, that his expressions did not refer to Dr. Marshal’s veracity, but to the accuracy of his observation. Marshal, not being satisfied with this declaration, at the next meeting of the society demanded a.i ample apology; but Mr. Hunter, instead of making one, repeated the offensive expressions; on which Marshal poured some water over his head out of a bottle which had stood near them. A scuffle ensued, which was immediately stopped by the other members, and no father personal contention between them ever occurred. But Marshal, conceiving that their common friends in the society had, from the superior rank of Mr. Hunter, favoured him more in this matter than justice permitted, soon after estranged himself from them. He continued the teaching of anatomy till 1800, in which year, during a tedious illness, the favourable termination of which appeared doubtful to him, he resolved, rather suddenly, to give it up. While he taught anatomy, almost the whole of the fore-part of the day, during eight months in the year, was spent by him in his dissecting and lecture rooms. He had, therefore, but little time for seeing sick persons, except at hours frequently inconvenient to them; and was by this means prevented from enjoying much medical practice; but as soon as he had recovered his health, after ceasing to lecture, his practice began to increase. The following year it was so far increased as to render it proper that he should keep a carriage. From this time to within a few months of his death, an interval of twelve years, his life flowed on in nearly an equable stream. He had business enough in the way he conducted it to give him employment during the greater part of the day; and his professional profits were sufficient to enable him to live in the manner he chose, and provide for the wants of sickness and old age. After having appeared somewhat feeble for two or three years, he made known, for the first time, in the beginning of last November, that he laboured under a disease of his bladder, though he must then have been several years affected with it. His ailment was incurable, and scarcely admitted of palliation. For several months he was almost constantly in great pain, which he bore manfully. At length, exhausted by his sufferings, he died on the 2nd of April, 1813, at his house in Bartlett’s buildings, Holborn, being then in the seventy-first year of his age. Agreeably to his own desire, his body was interred in the church-yard of the parish of St. Pancras. His fortune, amounting to about bOOO/. was, for the most part, bequeathed to sisters and nephews.

, an Italian, famous for letters as well as arms, was descended from an ancient and noble family, and born at Bologna in 1658. He was educated with great care, and instructed in all the arts and sciences by the best masters in Italy; learning mathematics of Borelli, anatomy of Malpighi, &c. He went to Constantinople in 167S); and, as he had destined himself for the military profession, he contrived to take a view of the Ottoman forces, and made other observations of a like nature. He examined at the same time, as a philosopher, the Thracian Bosphorus, and its currents. He returned to Italy in 1680; and, the Turks soon after threatening an irruption into Hungary, he went to Vienna, to offer his service to the emperor Leopold II. which was readily accepted. Discovering great knowledge in fortifications and in the science of war, he had the command of a company conferred on him in 1683; and the same year, after a very sharp action, fell unfortunately into the hands of the Tartars. He was sold by them to two Turks, with whom he suffered great hardships; but at length, conveying intelligence of his situation to his friends, who had believed him dead, he was redeemed, and returned to Bologna towards the latter end of 1684. He went again into Germany, was employed by the emperor in several military expeditions, and made a colonel in 1639. A reverse of fortune afterwards overtook him. In the general war which broke out in 1701, on account of the Spanish, succession, the important fortress of Brisac surrendered to the duke of Burgundy, Sept. 6, 1703, thirteen days after the trenches were open: and it being judged that the place was capable of holding out much longer, the consequence was, that count d‘Arco, who commanded, lost his head; and Marsigli, who was then advanced to be a marshal, was stripped of all his honours and commissions, and had his sword broken over him. This sentence was executed on Feb. 18 following. He afterwards attempted to justify the surrender before the emperor; but, not being able to get admittance, he published a memorial, the purport of which was to shew, that long before the siege of Brisac, it had been represented and proved, that the place could not be defended for any long time. It was in fact the geneEfd opinion that d’Arco and he had been sacrificed, to exculpate the prince of Baden, who had posted a numerous artillery in a bad situation, and with a very weak garrison. When Marsigli went afterwards into France, and appeared at court without a sword, the king presented him with that which he himself wore, and assured him cf his favour.

He continued at Oxford till queen Mary came to the throne; when he was suffered to depart the kingdom, and passed undiscovered through Brabant, and other popish territories, to Strasburg; though it is said, not without considerable risk. Thence he went to Zurich, upon an honourable invitation from the magistrates of that place, to be their divinity professor; and was accompanied thither by Jewel, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, who was then an exile for his religion. At Zurich Martyr lived seven years in high esteem with the inhabitants of the place, and in great friendship with Bullinger, and other learned men. He was afterwards invited to Geneva, to be pastor of the Italian church there; and in queen Elizabeth’s reign, when protestantism was re-established in England, bishop Jewel endeavoured to prevail on him to return, but in vain; he continued at Zurich to the time of his death, Nov. 12, 1562, in his sixty-third year. The year before he died, however, he was prevailed upon by letters from the queenmother of France, the king of Navarre, the prince of Conde", and other peers of that realm, to go over into France to the solemn conference at Poissy, where he disputed against the papists, with Beza and others. Not long after his arrival at Zurich, he took a second wife, who was recommended to him from the Italian church at Geneva, where she lived an exile for religion. He had two children by her, who both died very young, and before him; and he left her with child of a third, which proved a daughter.

King Edward her brother dying the 6th of July, 1553, she was proclaimed queen the same month, and crowned in October, by Stephen Gardiner, bishop of Winchester. In July 1754, she was married to Philip prince of Spain, eldest son of the emperor Charles the Fifth; and now began that persecution against the Protestants, for which her reign is so justly infamous. Until her marriage with that tyrant, she appears to have been merciful and humane, for Holinshed tells us, that when she appointed sir Richard Morgan chief justice of the Common Pleas, she told him, “that notwithstanding the old error, which did not admit any witness to speak, or any other matter to be heard, (her majesty being party,) her pleasure was, that whatsoever could be brought in favour of the subject should be admitted to be heard; and moreover, that the justices should not persuade themselves to put in judgment otherwise for her highness than for her subject.” Hence some have carried their good opinion of her so far, as to suppose that most of those barbarities were transacted by her bishops, without her knowledge or privity; but as this was impossible, it would be a better defence, if she must be defended, to plead that a strict adherence to a false religion, and a conscientious observance of its pernicious and cruel dictates, overruled and got the better of that goodness of temper, which was natural to her. Yet neither this can be reasonably admitted when we consider her unkind and inhuman treatment of her sister, the lady Elizabeth; her admitting a council for the taking up and burning of her father’s body; her most ungrateful and perfidious breach of promise with the Suffolk men; her ungenerous and barbarous treatment of judge Hales, who had strenuously defended her right of succession to the crown; and of archbishop Cranmer, who in reality had saved her life. These actions were entirely her own; her treatment of Cranmer becomes aggravated by the obligations she had been under to him. Burnet says, “that her firm adherence to her mother’s cause and interest, and her backwardness in submitting to the king her father, were thought crimes of such a nature by his majesty, that he came to a resolution, to put her openly to death; and that, when all others were unwilling to run any risk in saving her, Cranmer alone ventured upon it. In his gentle way he told the king, That she was young and indiscreet, and therefore it was no wonder if she obstinately adhered to that which her mother and all about her had been infusing into her for many years; but that it would appear strange, if he should for this cause so far forget the father, as to proceed to extremities with his own child; that, if she were separated from her mother and her people, in a little time there might be ground gained on her; but that to take away her life, would raise horror through all Europe against him;” by which means he preserved her. Queen Catharine, hearing of the king’s bloody intention, wrote a long letter to her daughter, in which she encouraged her to suffer cheerfully, to trust to God, and keep her heart clean. She charged her in all things to obey the king’s commands, except in the matters of religion. She sent her two Latin books; the one, “De vita Christi, with the Declaration of the Gospels;” the other, “St. Jerome’s Episles to Paula and Eustochium.” This letter of Catharine may be seen in the Appendix to Burnet’s second volume of the “History of the Reformation.” She fell a sacrifice, however, at last to disappointed expectations, both of a public and domestic kind, and especially the absence and unkindness of Philip; which are supposed, by deeply affecting her spirits, to have brought on that fever of which she died, Nov. 7, 1558, after a reign of five years, four months, and eleven days. “It is not necessary,” says Hume, “to employ many words in drawing the character of this princess. She possessed few qualities either estimable or amiable, and her person was as little engaging, as her behaviour and address. Obstinacy, bigotry, violence, cruelty, malignity, revenge, tyranny; every circumstance of her character took a tincture from her bad temper and narrow understanding. And amidst that complication of vices, which entered into her composition, we shall scarcely find any virtue but sincerity; a quality which she seems to have maintained throughout her whole life; except in the beginning of her reign, when the necessity of her affairs obliged her to make some promises to the Protestants which she certainly never intended to perform. But in these cases a weak bigoted woman, under the government of priests, easily finds casuistry sufficient to justify to herself the violation of a promise. She appears also, as well as her father, to have been susceptible of some attachments of friendship; and even without the caprice and inconstancy which were so remarkable in the conduct of that monarch. To which we may add, that in many circumstances of her life she gave indications of resolution and vigour of mind, a quality which seems to have been inherent in her family.”

, queen of England, and wife of William III. with whom she reigned jointly, was born at the royal palace of St. James’s, Westminster, the 30th of April, 1662. She was the daughter of James the Second, by a daughter of lord Clarendon, whom that prince married secretly, during the exile of the royal family. She proved a lady of most uncommon qualities: she had beauty, wit, good-nature, virtue, and piety, all in an eminent degree; and she shone superior to all about her, as well at the ball and the masque, as in the presence and the drawing-room. When she was fifteen, William prince of Orange, and afterwards king of England, made his addresses to her in person, and married her. Many suppose that the prince was so sagacious as to foresee all which afterwards came to pass; as that Charles II. would leave no children; that the duke of York, when he came to the throne, would, through his bigoted attachment to popery, be unable to keep possession of it; and that himself, having married the eldest daughter of England, would naturally be recurred to, as its preserver and deliverer in such a time of danger. If he had really any motives of policy, he had art enough to conceal them; for, having communicated his intentions to sir William Temple, then ambassador at the Hague, he frankly expressed his whole sentiments of marriage in the following terms; namely, that “the greatest things he considered were the person and disposition of the young lady; for, though it would not pass in the world for a prince to seem concerned in those particulars, yet for himself without affectation he declared that he was so, and in such a degree, tljat no circumstances of fortune or interest could engage him, without those of the person, especially those of humour or disposition: that he might, perhaps, be not very easy for a wife to live with; he was sure he should not be so to such wives as were generallj 7 in the courts of this age; that if he should meet with one to give him trouble at home, it was what he should not be able to bear, who was likely to have enough abroad in the course of his life; and that, after the manner he was resolved to live with a wife, which should be the best he could, he would have one that he thought likely to live well with him, which he thought chiefly depended upon their disposition and education.”

They were married at St. James’s, Nov. 4, 1677; and, after receiving the proper congratulations from those who were concerned to pay them, embarked for Holland about a fortnight after, and made their entrance into the Hague with the utmost pomp and magnificence. Here she lived with her consort, practising every virtue and every duty; till, upon a solemn invitation from the states of England, she followed him thither, and arrived at Whitehall, Feb. 12, 1689. The prince of Orange had arrived Nov. 5 preceding; and the occasion of their coming was to deliver the kingdom from that popery and slavery which were just ready to oppress it. King James abdicated the crown; and it was put on their heads, as next heirs, April 11, 1689. They reigned jointly till Dec. 28, 1694, when the queen died of the small-pox at her palace of Kensington. It would lead to an excursion of too much extent, to describe the many virtues and excellences of this amiable princess; a picture of her, however, may be seen in Burnet’s Essay on her memory, printed in 1695, which contains a delineation of every female virtue, and of every female grace. He represents her saying, that she looked upon idleness as the great corrupter of human nature, and as believing, that if the mind had no employment given it, it would create some of the worst to itself: and she thought that any thing which might amuse and divert, without leaving a dreg and impression behind it, ought to fill up those vacant hours that were not claimed by devotion or business. When her eyes, adds the bishop, were endangered by reading too much, she found out the amusement of work; and in all those hours that were not given to better employments, she wrought with her own hands, and that sometimes with so constant a diligence, as if she had been to earn her bread by it. It is said by another writer, that when reflections were once made before queen Mary of the sharpness of some historians who had left heavy imputations on the memory of certain princes, she answered, “that if these princes were truly such as the historians represented them, they had well deserved that treatment and others who tread their steps might look for the same for truth would be told at last.” This excellent princess was so composed upon her deathbed, that when archbishop Tillotson, who assisted her in her last moments, stopped, with tears in his eyes, on coming to the commendatory prayer in the office for the sick, she said to him, “My lord, why do you not go on? I am not afraid to die.”

, baron of Albone, first physician to their Britannic majesties James I. and Charles I. was the son of Louis de Mayerne, author of a “General History of Spain,” and of the “Monarchic aristo-democratique,” dedicated to the States-general. His mother was Louisa, the daughter of Antoine le Masson, treasurer of the army to Francis I. and Henry II. in Piedmont. Louis de Mayerne retired to Geneva about the end of 1572, after having had two houses at Lyons pulled down on account of his religion. On Sept. 28, 1573, his son Theodore was born, and had for his godfather Theodore Beza. He learnt polite literature in his own country, and he was thence sent to Heidelberg, where he stayed some years; after which, as he had made choice of physic for his profession, he went to Montpellier, and there he took the degree of bachelor in 1596, and of doctor in 1597. Thence he went to Paris, where, by way of introducing himself into practice, he gave lectures in anatomy to the young surgeons, and in pharmacy to the apothecaries. He acquired reputation by his prescriptions, and became known to Riverius, first physician to Henry IV. who recommended him so effectually to the king, that he made him one of his physicians in ordinary; and, in 1600, appointed him to attend Henry duke of Rohan, in his embassies from France to the princes of Germany and Italy. Upon his return, he acquitted himself in the exercise of his office very much to his credit, and was in high favour with the king, who promised to do great things for him, provided he would change his religion; and, it is said, notwithstanding that obstacle, would have appointed him his first physician, if the Jesuits, who were aware of it, had not prevented him by the means of queen Mary de Medicis. Of this circumstance and intended favour, Mayerne knew nothing till he learnt it, in 1642, in England, from Caesar duke of Vendosme, a natural son of France. In 1607, he had under his care an Englishman of quality, who after his recovery carried him into England, where he had a private conference with king James. He then returned to Paris, and remained there till after the assassination of Henry IV. in May 1610. In the following year, the king of England caused him to be invited by his ambassador, to serve in quality of first physician to himself and his queen, and gave him a patent, sealed with the great seal of England; in which office he served the whole royal family with great honour and approbation, till the day of his death. He was admitted to the degree of doctor in both universities, and into the college of physicians, and treated with the greatest respect by these learned bodies. He incurred some obloquy on account of the fatal sickness of Henry prince of Wales, in October 1612; in the treatment of which he differed in opinion from the other physicians, with respect to the use of blood-letting. But his conduct obtained the approbation of the king and council, of which certificates, couched in the most satisfactory terms, were given him. He received the honour of knighthood from James, in 1624; and on the accession of Charles I. he was appointed first physician to him and his queen, and rose to high favour, particularly with the latter. During the civil commotions he still adhered to the royal party, for he was appointed first physician to Charles II. after the death of his father, although the office was not merely nominal. Thus he enjoyed the extraordinary honour of serving four kings successively in his medical capacity; and during all this period he -was most extensively employed by persons of the first rank in this kingdom, by which he accumulated a large fortune. He made an exact collection of his prescriptions. He composed a very curious dispensatory of medicines, galenical and chemical but never published any of his works, except an “Apology” for himself, against the faculty of physic at Paris, who had attacked him for his application to the practice of chemistry, which was greatly cried down by the physicians of that place. Guy Patin has given an account of this dispute; in which he has shewn himself greatly prejudiced against Mayerne, and calls him a quack, on account of his pretensions to chemistry. He died March 15, 1655, at Chelsea, of the effects of bad wine, a slow, which, says Granger, the weakness of old age rendered a quick poison. He foretold the time of his death to his friends, with whom he had been moderately drinking at a tavern in the Strand; and it happened according to his prediction. He was buried at St. Martin’s-in-the-tields. He left behind him one only daughter, who brought her great fortune in marriage to the marquis de Montpouvillan, grandson of the marshal duke de la Force; but she died in childbed at the Hague, in 1661.

In 1661 he was chosen member of parliament for Beralston in Devonshire, and soon after, disliking the measures of the king’s ministers, engaged in opposition to them. He appears also to have sat, either for Beralston or Plymouth, in every parliament until the revolution. In 1679-80, he was one of the committee appointed to manage the evidence against William Viscount Stafford, impeached of high treason for being concerned in the popish plot. He was afterwards a member of the convention which brought about the revolution, and was active in promoting that event, ably supporting the parliamentary vote that the king had abdicated, and that the throne was thereby vacant.“He was now about eighty-seven years old, yet possessed his original vigour of understanding. Burnet has recorded a bon mot of his, on his first waiting on the prince of Orange, afterwards William III. which has been often repeated to his praise. On the prince noticing his great age, and that he had outlived all the men of the law of his time, Sir John Maynard replied, that” he had like to have out-lived the law itself, if his highness had not come over." The old serjeant had forgot that he had once seen the law as near its dissolution as ever it was in king James’s time.

Dr. Mead was admitted fellow of the college of physicians, April 9, 1716; and executed the office of censor in 1716, 1719, and 1724. In 1719, on an alarm confirmed by the fatal plague at Marseilles, the lords of the regency directed Mr. Craggs, then secretary of state, to apply to Dr. Mead, to give the best directions for preventing the importation of the plague, or stopping its progress. His opinion was approved; and quarantine directed to be performed. Of his “Discourse concerning Pestilential Contagion,” no less than seven editions were printed in 1720; the eighth, which appeared in 1722, and again in 1743, was enlarged with many new observations, and translated into Latin by professor Ward, as the first edition had been by Mr. Maittaire. This discourse is said to have greatly hurt his practice, fora time at least, not for medical, but political reasons, as it was suspected to be intended to prepare the way for barracks, &c. at a time when the nation was extremely jealous of a standing army. By order of the prince of Wales, Dr. Mead assisted, Aug. 10, 1721, at the inoculation of some condemned criminals; and the experiment succeeding, the two young princesses, Amelia and Caroline, were inoculated April 17, 1722, and had the distemper favourably.

, was a prince of the Russian empire, deeply concerned in the politics of his time. The general opinion of the origin of Menzikoff is, that his father was a peasant, who had placed him at Moscow with a pastry-cook, and that he carried little pies about the streets, singing as he went. In this situation, he was seen by the emperor Peter, who, pleased with the wit and liveliness which on examination he found in him, took him about his person, and thus opened the way to his fortune. Others, however, say, that his father was an officer in the service of the czar Alexis Michaelowitz, and that, as it was not extraordinary for gentlemen to serve in the stables of the czar, Menzikoff was there employed as one of the head grooms, and that in this situation his talents were noticed by the czar, and his advancement begun. Whatever may in this respect be true, it is certain that when he had begun to attend the emperor, he soon made himself agreeable, and finally necessary to that prince, whose projects he seconded with great address; and, having studied several languages, was able to be useful in various situations. Being appointed to the government of Ingria, his services in that situation obtained him the rank of prince, with the title of major-general in the army. He signalized himself in Poland in 1708 and 1709; but in 1713, he was accused of peculation, and condemned to pay a fine of three hundred thousand crowns. The czar, however, remitted the fine, and having received him again into his favour, sent him with a command into the Ukraine in 1719, and ambassador to Poland in 1722. When the czar died, in 1725, Menzikoff had already contrived the means of continuing and increasing his own power. He was aware of the design of Peter, to give his throne to his empress Catherine, and therefore to secure her gratitude, MenzikofF prepared all parties to acquiesce in this arrangement. Catherine was not insensible of her obligations to him, and agreed that her son, afterwards Peter II. should marry the daughter of Menzikoff, which she made an article in her will. At her death in 1727, the prince being then under twelve years, Menzikoff was also one of the regency appointed by her will, and the most active member in it.

, viscount Molesworth of Swordes in Ireland, an eminent statesman and polite writer, was descended from a family, anciently seated in the counties of Northampton and Bedford in England; but his father having served in the civil wars in Ireland, settled afterwards in Dublin, where he became an eminent merchant, and died in 1656, leaving his wife pregnant with this only child, who raised his family to the honours they now enjoy. He was born in Dec. at Dublin, and bred in the college there; and engaged early in a marriage with a sister of Richard earl of Bellamont, who brought him a daughter in 1677. When the prince of Orange entered England in 1688, he distinguished himself by an early and zealous appearance for the revolution, which rendered him so obnoxious to king James, that he was attainted, and his estate sequestered by that king’s parliament, May 2, 1689. But when king William was settled on the throne, he called this sufferer, for whom he had a particular esteem, into his privy council; and, in 1692, sent him envoy extraordinary to the court of Denmark. Here he resided above three years, till, some particulars in his conduct disobliging his Danish majesty, he was forbidden the court. Pretending business in Flanders, he retired thither without any audience of leave, and came from thence home: where he was no sooner arrived, than he drew up “An Account of Denmark;” in which he represented the government of that country as arbitrary and tyrannical. This piece was greatly resented by prince George of Denmark, consort to the princess, afterwards queen Anne; and Scheel, the Danish envoy, first presented a memorial to king William, complaining of it, and then furnished materials for an answer, which was executed by Dr. William King. From King’s account it appears, that Molesworth’s offence in Denmark was, his boldly pretending to some privileges, which, by the custom of the country, are denied to every body but the king; as travelling the king’s road, and hunting the king’s game: which being done, as is represented, in defiance of opposition, occasioned the rupture between the envoy and that count. If this allegation have any truth, the fault lay certainly altogether on the side "of Molesworth whose disregard of the customs: of the country to which he was sent, cannot be defended.

, the celebrated comic writer of France, whose original name was Pocquelin, was born at Paris about 1620. He was both son and grandson to valets de chambres on one side, and tapissiers on the other, to Louis XIII. and was designed for the latter business, that of a domestic upholsterer, whose duty was to take care of the furniture of the royal apartments. But the grandfather being very fond of the boy, and at the same time a great lover of plays, used to take him often with him to the hotel de Bourgogne; which presently roused up Moliere’s natural genius and taste for dramatic representations, and created in him such a disgust to his intended employment, that at last his father consented to let him study under the Jesuits, at the college of Clermont. During the five years that he resided here, he made a rapid progress in the study of philosophy and polite literature, and, if we mistake not, acquired even now much insight into the varieties of human character. He had here also an opportunity of contracting an intimate friendship with Chapelle, Bernier, and Cyrano. Chapelle, with whom Bernier was an associate in his studies, had the famous Gassendi for his tutor, who willingly admitted Moliere to his lectures, as he afterwards also admitted Cyrano. When Louis XIII. went to Narbonne, in 1641, his studies were interrupted: for his infirm father, not being able to attend the court, Moliere was obliged to go there to supply his place. This, however, he quitted on his fathers death; and his passion for the stage, which had induced him first to study, revived more strongly than ever. Some have said, that he for a time studied the law, and was admitted an advocate. This seems doubtful, but, if true, he soon yielded to those more lively pursuits which made him the restorer of comedy in France, and the coadjutor of Corneille, who had rescued the tragic Muse from barbarism. The taste, indeed, for the drama, was much improved in France, after cardinal de Richelieu granted a peculiar protection to dramatic poets. Many little societies now made it a diversion to act plays in their own houses; in one of which, known by the name of “The illustrious Theatre,” Moliere entered himself; and it was then, in conformity to the example of the actors of that time, that he changed his name of Pocquelin for that of Moliere, which he retained ever after. What became of him from 1648 to 1652 we know not, this interval being the time of the civil wars, which caused disturbances in Paris; but it is probable, that he was employed in composing some of those pieces which were afterwards exhibited to the public. La Bejart, an actress of Champagne, waiting, as well as he, for a favourable time to display her talents, Moliere was particularly kind to her; and as their interests became mutual, they formed a company together, and went to Lyons in 1653, where Moliere produced his first play, called “L'Etourdi,” or the Blunderer, and appeared in the double character of author and actor. I his drew almo_st all the spectators from the other company of comedians, which was settled in that town; some of which company joined with Moliere, and followed him to Beziers in Languedoc, where he offered his services to the prince of Co'nti, who gladly accepted them, as he had known him at college, and was among the first to predict his brilliant career on the stage. He now received him as a friend; and not satisfied with confiding to him the management of the entertainments which he gave, he offered to make him his secretary, which the latter declined, saying, “I am a tolerable author, but I should make a very bad secretary.” About the latter end of 1657, Moliere departed with his company for Grenoble, and continued there during the carnival of 1658. After this he went and settled at Rouen, where he staid all the summer; and having made some journeys to Paris privately, he had the good fortune to please the king’s brother, who, granting him his protection, and making his company his own, introduced him in that quality to the king and queen-mother. That company began to appear before their majesties and the whole court, in Oct. 1658, upon a stage erected on purpose, in the hall of the guards of the Old Louvre; and “were so well approved, that his majesty gave orders for their settlement at Paris. The hall of the Petit Bourbon was granted them, to act by turns with the Italian players. In 1663, Moliere obtained a pension of a thousand livres: and, in 1665, his company was altogether in his majesty’s service. He continued all the remaining part of his life to give new plays, which were very much and very justly applauded: and if we consider the number of works which he composed in about the space of twenty years, while he was himself all the while an actor, and interrupted, as he must be, by perpetual avocations of one kind or other, we cannot fail to admire the quickness, as well as fertility of his genius; and we shall rather be apt to think with Boileau,” that rhime came to him,“than give credit to some others, who say he” wrote very slowly."

* This comedy was suppressed by prince of Conde, his wonder at the difthe hverest of 'he ecclesiastics, afier rent fates of these two pieces, and

, son of the above, was born at Chester in July 1689, and educated with great care by his father, according to the plan laid down by Locke upon that subject. When his father died, he was committed to the care of his uncle Dr. Thomas Molyneux, an excellent scholar and physician at Dublin, and also an intimate friend of Mr. Locke;“who executed his trust so well, that Mr. Molyneux became afterwards a most polite and accomplished gentleman, and was made secretary to his late majesty George II. when he was prince of Wales. Astronomy and optics being his favourite study, as they had been his father’s, he projected many schemes for the advancement of them, and was particularly employed, in the years 1723, 1724, and 1725, in perfecting the method of making telescopes; one of which, of his own making, he had presented to John V. king of Portugal. In the midst of these thoughts, being appointed a commissioner of the admiralty, he became so engaged in public affairs, that he had not leisure to pursue these inquiries any farther; and gave his papers, to Dr. Robert Smith, professor of astronomy at Cambridge, whom he invited to make use of his house and apparatus of instruments, in order to finish what he had left imperfect. Mr. Molyneux dying soon after, in the flower of his age, Dr. Smith lost the opportunity; yet, supplying what was wanting from Mr. Huygens and others, he published the whole in his” Complete Treatise of Optics."

In 1685, he wrote some verses on the death of king Charles, which made such an impression on the earl of Dorset, that he was invited to town, and introduced by that universal patron to the other wits. In 1687, he joined with. Prior in “The City Mouse and the Country Mouse,” one of his best compositions, which was intended as a burlesque of Dryden’s “Hind and Panther.” Commencing his political career, he signed the invitation to the prince of Orajge, and sat in the convention. He about the same time married the countess dowager of Manchester, and intended to have taken orders; but afterwards altering his purpose, he purchased for 1500l. the place of one of the clerks of the council.

, senior member of the academy of sciences of France, was born July 16, 1714, at Angouleme. His family had been a long time rendered illustrious in arms by An. re* De Montalembert, count d'Esse“, lieutenant-general to the king, commander of his armies in Scotland, governor of Terouane near St. Omers, and who died on the breach, the 12th of June 1553. In 1732 the young Montalembert entered into the army, and distinguished himself at the sieges of Kehl and Philipsburg in 1736. He was afterwards captain of the guards to the prince of Conti. In peace he studied the mathematics and natural philosophy: he read a memoir to the academy of sciences, upon the evaporation of the water in the salt works at Turcheim, in the palatinate, which he had examined, and was made a member in 1747. There are in the volumes in the academy some memoirs from him upon the rotation of bullets, upon the substitution of stoves for fire-places, and upon a pool, in which were found pike purblind, and others wholly without sight. From 1750 to 1755 he established the forges at Angoumoisand Perigord. and there founded cannon for the navy. In 1777 three volumes were printed of the correspondence which he held with the generals and ministers, whilst he was employed by his country in the Swedish and Russian armies during the campaigns of 1757 and 1761, and afterwards in Britanny and the isle of Oleron, when fortifying it. He fortified also Stralsund, in Pomerania, against the Prussian troops, and gave an account to his court of the military operations in which it was concerned; and this in a manner which renders it an interesting part of the History of the Seven-years War. In 1776 he printed the first volume of an immense work upon Perpendicular Fortification, and the art of Defence; demonstrating the inconveniences of the old system, for which he substitutes that of casemates, which admit of such a kind of firing, that a place fortified after his manner appears to be impregnable. His system has been, however, uot always approved or adopted. His treatise was extended to ten volumes in quarto, with a great number of plates; the last volume was published in 1792, and will doubtless carry his name to posterity as an author as well as a general. He married, in 1770, Marie de Comarieu, who was an actress, and the owner of a theatre, for whom the general sometimes composed a dramatic piece. In 1784 and 1786 he printed three operatical pieces, set to music by Cambini and Tomeoni: they were,” La Statue,“” La Bergere qualite,“and” La Bohemienne." Alarmed at the progress of the revolution, he repaired to England in 1789 or 1790, and leaving his wife there, procured a divorce, and afterwards married Rosalie Louise Cadet, to whom he was under great obligation during the Robespierrian terror, and by whom he had a daughter born in July 1796. In his memoir published in 1790, it may be seen that he had been arbitrarily dispossessed of his iron forges, and that having a claim for six millions of livres clue to him, he was reduced to a pension, but ill paid, and was at last obliged to sell his estate at Maumer, in Angoumois, for which he was paid in assignats, and which were insufficient to take him out of that distress which accompanied him throughout his life. He was sometimes almost disposed to put an end to his existence, but had the courage to resume his former studies, and engaged a person to assist him in compleating some new models. His last public appearance was in the institute, where he read a new memoir upon the mountings (affect) of ship-guns. On this occasion he was received with veneration by the society, and attended to with religious silence: a man of eighty-six years of age had never been heard to read with so strong a voice. His memoir was thought of so much importance, that the institute wrote to the minister of marine, who sent orders to Brest for the adoption of the suggested change. He was upon the list for a place in the institute, and was even proposed as the first member for the section of mechanics, but learning that Bonaparte was spoken of for the institute, he wrote a letter, in which he expressed his desire to see the young conqueror of Italy honoured with this new crown. His strength of mind he possessed to the last, for not above a month before his death he wrote reflections upon the siege of St. John d'Acre, which contained further proofs of the solidity of his defensive system, but at last he fell ill of a catarrh, which degenerated into a dropsy, and carried him off March 22, 1802.

, a very celebrated Austrian general, was born in 1608, of a distinguished family in the Modenese. Ernest Montecuculi, his uncle, who was general of artillery in the imperial troops, made him pass through aJl the military ranks, before he was raised to that of commander. The young man’s first exploit was in 1634, when at the head of 2000 horse, he surprised 10,000 Swedes who were besieging Nemeslaw, in Silesia, and took their baggage and artillery; but he was shortly after defeated and made prisoner by general Bannier. Having obtained his liberty at the end of two years, he joined his forces to those of J. de Wert, in Bohemia, and conquered general Wrangel, who was killed in the battle. In 1627, the emperor appointed Montecuculi marechal de camp general, and sent him to assist John Casimir, king of Poland. He defeated Razolzi, prince of Transylvania, drove out the Swedes, and distinguished himself greatly against the Turks in Transylvania, and in Hungary, by gaining the battle of St. Gothard, in 1664. Montecuculi commanded the imperial forces against France in 1673, and acquired great honour from the capture of Bonn, which was preceded by a march, conducted with many stratagems to deceive M. Turenne. The command of this army was nevertheless taken from him the year following, but he received it again in 1675, that he might oppose the great Turenne, on the Rhine. Montecuculi had soon to bewail the death of this formidable enemy, on whom he bestowed the highest encomiums: “I lament,” said he, “and I can never too much lament, the loss of a man who appeared more than man; one who did honour to human nature.” The great prince of Cond6 was the only person who ould contest with Montecuculi, the superiority which M. de Turenne’s death gave him. That prince was therefore sent to the Rhine, and stopped the imperial general’s progress, who nevertheless considered this last campaign as his most glorious one; not because he was a conqueror, but because he was not conquered by two such opponents as Turenne and Conde. He spent the remainder of his life at the emperor’s court, devoting himself to the belles lettres; and the academy of naturalists owes its establishment to him. He died October 16, 1680, at Linez, aged seventy-two. This great general left some very excellent “Memoires” on the military art; the best French edition of which is that of Strasburg, 1735; to which that of Paris, 1746, 12mo, is similar.

, a celebrated mathematician, was born at Lyons in the year 1725, and giving early indications of a love of learning, was placed under the instructions of the Jesuits, with whom he acquired an intimate acquaintance with the ancient and modern languages, and some knowledge of the mathematics. At the age of sixteen he went to Toulouse to study the law, and was admitted an advocate, though without much intention of practising at the bar. Having completed his studies, he went to Paris, cultivated an acquaintance with the most distinguished literary characters, and it was owing to his intercourse with them, that he was induced to undertake his “History of the Mathematical Sciences.” But in the interim he published new editions, with additions and improvements, of several mathematical treatises which were already held in the highest estimation. The first of these was “Mathematical Recreations,” by M. Ozanam, which has been since translated into English, and published in London, in 4 vols. 8vo. To all the works which he edited, after Ozanam’s, he gave the initials of his name. He also contributed his assistance for some years to “The French Gazette;” and in 1755 he was elected a member of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Berlin. In the following year, when the experiment of inoculation was about to be tried on the first prince of the blood, Montucla translated from the English an account of all the recent cases of that practice, which had been sent from Constantinople, by lady Mary Wortley Montague. This translation he added to the memoir of De la Condamine on the subject. Previously to this publication, he had given to the world his “History of Inquiries relative to the Quadrature of the Circle.” The encouragement which this met with from very able judges of its merit, afforded him great encouragement to apply with ardour to his grand design, “The History of the Mathematics;” and in 1758 he published this “History,” in two volumes, 4to, which terminates with the close of the 17th century. It answered the expectations of all his friends, and of men of science in all countries, and the author was instantly elevated to a high rank in the learned world. His fame was widely diffused, and he was pressed from all quarters to proceed with the mathematical history of the 18th century, which he had announced for the subject of a third volume, and for which he had made considerable preparations; but he was diverted from his design, by receiving the appointment of secretary to the Intendance at Grenoble. Here he spent his leisure hours chiefly in retirement, and in scientific pursuits. In 1764, Turgot, being appointed to establish a colony at Cayenne, took Montucla with him as his “secretary,” to which was added the title of “astronomer to the king,” and although he returned without attaining any particular object with regard to the astronomical observations, for which he went out, he had an opportunity of collecting some valuable tropical plants, with which he enriched the king’s hothouses at Versailles. Soon after his return, he was appointed chief clerk in an official department, similar to that known in this country by the name of the “Board of Works,” which he retained till the place was abolished in 1792, when he was reduced to considerable pecuniary embarrassments. Under the pressure of these circumstances, he began to prepare a new and much enlarged edition of his “History,” which he presented to the world in 1799, in two volumes, quarto. In this edition are many important improvements; and many facts, which were barely announced in the former impression, are largely detailed and illustrated in this. After the publication of these two volumes, the author proceeded with the printing of the third; but death terminated his labours, when he had arrived at the 336th page. The remainder of the volume, and the whole of the fourth, were printed under the inspection of Lalande. Montucla had been a member of the National Institute from its original establishment. He had obtained various employments under the revolutionary government, though he was but meanly paid for his labour, and had to struggle with many difficulties to furnish his family with the bare necessaries of life. At length he was reduced to seek the scanty means of support by keeping a lottery-office, till the death of Saussure put him in the possession of a pension of about one hundred pounds per annum, which he enjoyed only four months. He died in December 1799, in the 75th year of his age. He was a man of great modesty, and distinguished by acts of generosity and liberality, when it was in his power. He was also friendly, cheerful, and of very amiable manners.

, earl of Peterborough, was the son of John lord Mordaunt, of Reygate, in Surrey, and lord viscount Avalon, in the county of Somerset, by Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Carey, second son of Robert, earl of Monmouth. He was born about 1658; and, in 1675, succeeded his father in honours and estate. In his youth he served under the admirals Torrington and Narborough in the Mediterranean, during the war with the state of Algiers; and, in June 1680, embarked for Africa with the earl of Plymouth, and distinguished himself at Tangier, when it was besieged by the Moors. In the reign of James II. he was one of those lords who manifested their zeal against the repeal of the test-act; and, disliking the measures and designs of the court, obtained leave to go over into Holland, to accept the command of a Dutch squadron in the West-Indies. On his arrival, he pressed the prince of Orange to undertake an expedition into England, representing the matter as extremely easy; but, his scheme appearing too romantic, his highness only promised him in general, that he should have an eye on the affairs of England, and endeavour to put those of Holland in so good a posture as to be ready to act when it should be necessary: assuring him at the same time, that if the king should proceed to change the established religion, or to wrong the princess in her right, or to raise forged plots to destroy his friends, he would try what could possibly be done. The reason why the prince would not seem to enter too hastily into lord MordauntV ideas seems to have been, because, as Burnet* observes, his lordship was “a man of much heat, many notions, and full of discourse; and, tjiough brave and generous, had not true judgment, his thoughts being crude and indigested, and his secrets soon known.” However, he was one of those whom the prince chiefly trusted, and on whose advice he governed all his motions.

, an able classical scholar and editor, was born at Eton in Buckinghamshire, March 18, 1703. His father’s name was Thomas, and his mother, probably after the decease of her husband, kept a boardjng-house in the college. At the age of twelve he was admitted on the foundation at Eton-school, and was elected thence to King’s college, Cambridge, Aug. 3, 1722. He took his first degree in 1726, became M. A. in 1730, and D. D. in 1743. In 1731 he was appointed to the curacy of Kew, in Surrey, and was some time also curate of Twickenham. In July 1733 he was admitted ad eundem at Oxford; and in 1737 became a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, having just been instituted, on the presentation of his college, to the rectory of Buckland in Hertfordshire, the only preferment he ever obtained. In 1775, indeed, we find him appointed chaplain to the garrison at Portsmouth, and he for several years preached Mr. Fairchild’s Botanical Sermon on Whit-Tuesday, at St. Leonard’s Shoreditch; but these scarcely deserve the name of preferments. As he rendered many important services to literature, it is rather singular that he never met with a patron who might have rendered him independent; but he knew little of the world, and found so much pleasure in his studies, as to neglect the common observances of polite life. He was probably contented; but he was always poor, and frequently in debt. He was warm in his attachments, and was a cheerful and entertaining companion. He was extremely fond of music, and in early life associated much with its professors. Mr. Cole thinks this did him no service, and informs us that at one time his chief dependance was on a Mons. Desnoyers, a dancing master, who had some interest with Frederick prince of Wales, but Desnoyers died before he could obtain any thing for him. Those who feel for the character of the age would not have been pleased to record that a divine and a scholar attained preferment through such a medium. He died Feb. 19, 1784, and was buried at Chiswick. In 1738 he married Anne, daughter of Henry Barker, esq. of Chiswick, by whom he had no issue.

He was an early contributor to the Gentleman’s Magazine; assisted Hogarth in his “Analysis of Beauty,” and published some occasional sermons. His other publications followed in this order, 1. “The Life of Dr. Edward Littleton,” prefixed to the first volume of his sermons, in 1735. 2. “Poems on Divine Subjects; original and translated from the Latin of Marcus Hieronymus Vida, with large annotations, more particularly concerning the being and attributes of God,” Loud. 1732, 8vo, reprinted 1736. 3. “The Canterbury Tales of Chaucer, in the original, from the most authentic Mss. and as they are turned into modern language by the most eminent hands,” ibid. 1737. 4. “A copy of English congratulatory verses on the maryiage of the prince of Orange with the princess Anne,” 1737. 5. “Philalethes and Theophanes; or a summary view of the last controversy occasioned by a book entitled The Moral Philosopher,' parti.” Lond. 1739, 8vo, reprinted 1740. 6. “The Christian’s Epinikion, or Song of Triumph; a paraphrase on I Cor. xv. attempted in blank Terse; with annotations, explanatory and critical,” ibid. 1743, 4to. 7. “Hope, a poetical essay, in blank verse, on that Christian grace, in three books,” 1745. 8. “Spenser’s Works,” by subscription, 1747. 9. “Euripidis Hecnba, Orestes, et Phenissce, cum scholiis antiquis, &c.” 1748, 2 vols. 8vo. This is a reprint of King’s edition, with the Alcestes added by himself. In 1749, Dr. Morell published the “Hecuba,” translated from the Greek, with annotations. 10. A speciaien of his “Thesaurus,” 1757. 11. “Philoctetes,” 1757, 8vo. 12. “Thesaurus Graecse Poeseos, sive Lexicon Grreco-prosodiacum,” &c. 4to, with Hogarth’s portrait of the author. The value of this work has been so long and so often acknowledged, that it is only necessary to add that a much improved edition is now in the hands of an eminent scholar, and nearly ready for publication. 13. The “Prometheus” of jschylus/&e. 1767, 8vo; 1774, 4to. 14. “A Dissertation on the Corbridge altar now in the British Museum,” &c. in a Latin letter to the hon. Daines Barrington,“1774, printed in the Archasologia, vol. III. 15.” Sacred Annals; or the Life of Christ, as recorded by the Four Evangelists,“&c. 1776, 4to. He also published a corrected edition of Hederick’s Lexicon, and three editions of Ainsworth’s Dictionary; and compiled the words for Handel’s Oratorios. After his death was published a translation of” Seneca’s Epistles,“with annotations, 1786, 2 vols. 4to. This is a correct and faithful translation, but never attracted much public attention. In 1794 also was published” Notes and Annotations on Locke on the Human Understanding, written by order of the queen (Caroline), corresponding in section and page to the edition of 1793," 8vo. This, which was written by the author while in the prime of life, does great credit to his talents as a metaphysician, and has been judged a very necessary aid in the perusal of Locke.

, an eminent physician, was born in the county of Suffolk; and became a commoner in Magdalen-hall, Oxford, afterwards one of the chaplains of New college, and M. A. On leaving the university, where he took orders, he was for some time chaplain in the family of Foley, in Worcestershire. Having, however, adopted the principles of the nonconformists, he found it necessary, after tue restoration of Charles II. to abandon the profession of theology, and adopted that of medicine. He accordingly was admitted to the degree of doctor in this faculty in 1670, having in that year accompanied the prince of Orange to Oxford, as physician to his person. He afterwards settled in London, became a fellow of the college of physicians, and obtained a large share of city practice. He died at his house in Surrey, in 1698. The works of Dr. Morton had a considerable, reputation, but they lean too much to the humoral pathology, which was prevalent in that age; and his method of treatment in acute diseases, is now generally discarded. His first publication was entitled “Phthisioiogia, seu Exercitationes de Phthisi,” 1689, 8vo, and was translated into English in 1694. In this attempt to arrange the varieties of consumption, the distinctions, both in the classification and the indications of cure, are complicated and obscure. His “Pyretologia, seu Exercitationes de Morbis universalibus acutis,” published in 1691—1694, 2 vols. 8vo, of which some account is given in the Philos. Transactions, No. 199, contains his humoral doctrines of fermentation and the agitations of the animal spirits; and his practice was an unusual extension of the cordial and stimulant treatment of all fevers, and a more general introduction of the Peruvian bark, by which he probably contributed to prolong the reign of that prejudicial system. His works have been printed collectively at Amsterdam, 2 vols. 8vo, and at Geneva, Leyden, Venice, and Lyons, in 4to.

, a dramatic and miscellaneous writer, was the son of colonel Mottley, who was a great favourite with king James II. and followed the fortunes of that prince into France. James, not being able himself to provide for him so well as he desired, procured for him, by his interest, the command of a regiment in the service of Louis XIV. at the head of which he lost his life in the battle of Turin, in 1706. The colonel married a daughter of John Guise, esq. of Abload’s Court, in Gloucestershire, with whom, by the death of a brother, who left her his whole estate, he had a very considerable fortune. The family of the Guises, however, being of principles diametrically opposite to those of the colonel, and zealous friends to the revolution, Mrs. Mottley, notwithstanding the tenderest affection for her husband, and repeated invitations from the king and queen, then at St. Germains, preferred living at home on the scanty remains of what he had left behind. The colonel was sent over to England three or four years after the revolution, on a secret commission from king James; and during his stay our author was born, in 1692. Mr. Mottley received the first rudiments of his education at St. Martin’s library-school, founded by archbishop Tenison; but was placed in the excise-office at sixteen years of age, under the comptroller, lord viscount Howe, whose brother and sister were both related by marriage to his mother. This situation he retained till 1720, when, in consequence of an unhappy contract he had made, probably in pursuit of some of the bubbles of that infatuated year, he was obliged to resign it. Soon after the accession of George I. Mr. Mottley had been promised by the lord Halifax, at that time first lord of the treasury, the place of one of the commissioners of the wine-licence office; but when the day came that his name should have been inserted in the patent, a more powerful interest, to his great surprize, had stepped in between him and the preferment, of which he had so positive a promise. This, however, was not the only disappointment of that kind which this gentleman met with; for, at the period above mentioned, when he parted with his place in the excise, he had one in the exchequer absolutely given to him by sir Robert Walpole, to whom he lay under many other obligations; but in this case as well as the preceding, he found that the minister had made a prior promise of it to another, and he was obliged to relinquish it. Other domestic embarrassments induced him to employ his pen, which had hitherto been only his amusement, for the means of immediate support; and he wrote his first play, “The Imperial Captives,” which met witU tolerable success. From that time he depended chiefly on his literary abilities for a maintenance, and wrote five dramatic pieces, with various success. He had also a hand in the composition of that many-fathered piece, “The Devil to Pay.” He published in 1739 a “Life of the great Czar Peter,” 3 vols. 8vo, by subscription, in which he met with the I sanction of some of the royal family, and great numbers of the nobility and gentry; and, on occasion of one of his benefits, which happened Nov. 3, queen Caroline, on the 30th of the preceding month (being the prince of Wales’s birth-day), did the author the singular honour of disposing of a great number of his tickets, with her own hand, in the drawing-room, most of which were paid for in gold, into the hands of colonel Schutz, his royal highness’s privypurse, from whom Mr. Mottley received it, with the addition of a very liberal present from the prince himself. Jn 1744 he published in 2 vols. 8vo, “The History of the Life and Reign of the empress Catherine of Russia.” Both this and the preceding are compilations from the journals and annals of the day, but are now valuable from the scarcity of those authorities. He died Oct. 30, 1750. It has been surmised, with some appearance of reason, that Mr. Mottley was the compiler of the lives of the dramatic writers, published at the end of Whincop’s “Scanderbeg.” It is certain that the life of Mr. Mottley, in that work, is rendered one of the most important in it, and is particularized by such a number of various incidents, as it seems improbable should be known by any but either himself or some one nearly related to him. Among others he relates the following humourous anecdote. When colonel Mottley, our author’s father, came over, as has been before related, on a secret commission from the abdicated monarch, the government, who had by some means intelligence of it, were very diligent in their endeavours to have him seized. The colonel, however, was happy enough to elude their search; but several other persons were, at different times, seized through mistake for him. Among the rest, it being very well known that he frequently supped at the Blue Posts tavern, in the Hay-Market, with one Mr. Tredenhatn, a Cornish gentleman, particular directions were given for searching that house. Colonel Mottley, however, happening not to be there, the messengers found Mr. Tredenham alone, and with a heap of papers before him, which being a suspicious circumstance, they immediately seized, and carried him before the earl of Nottingham, then secretary of state. His lordship, who, however, could not avoid knowing him, as he was a member of the House of Commons, and nephew to the famous sir Edward Seymour, asked him what all those papers contained. Mr. Tredenham made answer, that they were only the several scenes of a play, which he had been scribbling for the amusement of a few leisure-hours. Lord Nottingham then only desired leave just to look over them, which having done for some little time, he returned them again to the author, assuring him that he was perfectly satisfied; “for, upon my word,” said he, “I can find no plot in them,”

His printed works are these 1 “Eight sets of Lessons for the Harpsichord dedicated to the right honourable Willoughby earl of Abingdon printed in 1748, reprinted in 1757.” 2. “Five Lessons for the Harpsichord, with a sonata in score for the harpsichord or organ; dedicated to the right honourable the countess of Carlisle;” published in 1758 or 1759. 3. “A set of easy Lessons for the Harpsichord,” three in number; with a dedication to the public, signed J. N. 4. “A Treatise on Singing,” small size. 5. “II Principio” or “.A regular introductionto playing on the Harpsichord or Organ.” This was the first set of progressive lessons published on a regular plan. 6. “The Royal Pastoral, a dramatic ode; dedicated to his royal highness the prince of Wales; printed in score, with an overture and choruses. 7.” Catches, Canons, and Glees; dedicated to the late lord Mornington.“8.” Six Fugues, with introductory voluntaries forMhe Organ or Harpsichord.“9.” A concise and easy treatise on Singing, with a set of English Duets for beginners;“- a different work from the former small treatise. 10.” Twenty Anthems, in score, for one, two, three, four, and rive voices composed for the use of his majesty’s chapels royal,“1778. 11.” Six, easy Anthems, with a favourite Morning and Evening Service,“left for publication at his death, and published in 1738, with a portrait and a concise account of the author. Of these compositions the following short character is given by an eminent musician, to whom they are all well known.” The Lessons are composed in a masterly and pleasing style; free from those tricks and unmeaning successions of semitones, to which a good ear and sound judgment never can be reconciled. The treatises on singing contain duets composed for the use of the children of the royal chapels, superior to any thing yet published and such as every teacher ought to peruse. His catches, canons, and glees, are natural and pleasing especially the glee to all Lovers of Harmony, which gained the prize-medal at the catch-club in 1770. The Royal Pastoral is composed throughout in a very masterly manner; particularly the choruses, with which each part concludes. This ode, containing 108 pages, was written, and all the vocal and instrumental parts transcribed for performing, within twelve days. The six fugues, with introductory voluntaries for the organ, contain the strongest proofs of ingenuity and judgment; few, if any, have ever been written that can be preferred to them. In both sets of the anthems, the same characteristics appear; and the service in the latter very justly acquired the title of favourite; nor can there be any doubt that the works of this author will be admired as long as a taste for music shall subsist."

He was a man of excellent natural parts, and acquitted himself so well, both in word and writing, that many joined the society through his ministry. He came to London towards the beginning of 1655, in which city a meeting of Quakers had been established by the ministry of Edward Burrough and Francis Howgill, two eminent Quakers from Westmorland. Here Nayler preached with so much applause, that the distinction which he acquired occasioned his fall; for, some inconsiderate women setting him up in their esteem above Howgill and Burrough, went so far as to disturb them in their public preaching. These men giving to the women a deserved reproof, two of them complained of it to Nayler, who, although at the first he was backward to pass censure on his brethren, yet, at length, suffering himself to be wrought upon by the reiterated and passionate complaints of one Martha Simmons (the chief engine of the mischief), he became estranged from them, and gave ear to the flatteries of his unadvised adherents. In 1656, he suffered imprisonment at Exeter and about this time several deluded persons addressed him by letter in terms of great extravagance. He was called “the everlasting Son of Righteousness, Prince of Peace, the only begotten Son of God, the Fairest of Ten Thousand;” and during his confinement in Exeter gaol some women knelt before him and kissed his feet. About this time George Fox returning out of the West, where he had himself suffered a rigorous imprisonment, called on James Nayler in the prison at Exeter, and gave him some reproof for his defection and extravagance. This Nayler slighted, but nevertheless would have saluted Fox with a kiss; but George rejected his salutation, alleging that “he had turned against the power of God.”

After the appointment of lord Keith to the command of the Mediterranean fleet, lord Nelson made preparations to return, and proceeding in company with sir William and lady Hamilton, to Trieste, he travelled through Germany to Hamburgh, every where received with distinguished honours. He embarked at Cuxhaven, and landed at Yarmouth on the sixth of November 1800, after an absence from his native country of three years. In the following January he received orders to embark again, and it was during this short interval that he formally separated from lady Nelson. Some of his last words to her were, “I call God to witness, that there is nothing in you, or your conduct, that I wish otherwise.” He was now raised to the rank of vice-admiral of the blue, and soon after hoisted his flag on board the San Josef of 112 guns, his own prize at the battle of cape St. Vincent. About this time the emperor Paul of Russia had renewed the northern confederacy, the express and avowed object of which was to set limits to the naval supremacy of England. A resolution being taken by the English cabinet to attempt its dissolution, a formidable fleet was fitted out for the North Seas, under sir Hyde Parker, in which lord Nelson consented to go second in command. Having shifted his flag to the St. George of 98 guns, he sailed with the fleet in the month of March, and on the 30th of that same month he led the way through the Sound, which was passed without any loss. But the battle of Copenhagen gave occasion for an equal display of lord Nelson’s talents as that of the Nile. The Danes were well prepared for defence. Upwards of two hundred pieces of cannon were mounted upon the crown batteries at the entrance of the harbour, and a line of twenty-five two-deckers, frigates, and floating batteries, was moored across its mouth. An attack being determined upon, the conduct of it was entrusted to lord Nelson; the action was fought on the second of April; Nelson had with him twelve ships of the line, with all the frigates and small craft, the remainder of the fleet was with the commander in chief, about four miles off. The combat which succeeded was one of the most terrible on record. Nelson himself said, that of all the engagements in which he had borne a part, it was the most terrible. It began at ten in the morning, and at one victory had not declared itself. A shot through the main-mast knocked a few splinters about the admiral “It is warm work,” said he, “and this may be the last day to any of us in a moment; but, mark you, I would not be elsewhere for thousands.” Just at this moment sir Hyde Parker made signal for the action to cease. It was reported to him, but he continued pacing the deck, and appeared to take no notice of it. The signal-lieutenant asked if he should repeat it. “No,” replied Nelson, “acknowledge it.” Presently he called to know if the signal for close action was still hoisted, and being answered in the affirmative, he said, “Mind you keep it so.” About two o'clock, great part of the Danish line had ceased to fire, and the victory was complete, yet it was difficult to take possession of the vanquished ships, on account of the fire from the shore, which was still kept up. At this critical period, with great presence of mind, he sent the following note to the crown prince of Denmark “Lord Nelson has directions to spare Denmark when no longer resisting but, if the firing is continued on the part of Denmark, lord Nelson must be obliged to set on fire all the floating-batteries he has taken, without having the power of saving the brave Danes who had defended them.” This immediately produced a treaty, which ended the dispute, and annihilated the northern confederacy. For this service lord Nelson was raised to the rank of a viscount. His last effort, in this war, was an attack on the preparations making at Boulogne, for the invasion of England; but, after the loss of many brave men on our side, the enterprize proved unsuccessful, from the situation of the harbour.

About this time he was induced by Mrs. Anne Deanes Devenish, an acquaintance whose friendship proved afterwards of great importance to him, to superintend an edition of Mr. Jlowe’s works, who had been her first husband. This edition was executed at the request of the Prince of Wales, who was very partial to that poet, and who honoured Mrs. Devenish with his friendship; and it was the means of JMr. Newton’s being made known to his royal highness. Nor was this the only obligation he owed to the good services of Mrs. Devenish, as she first introduced him ito the acquaintance of Mr. Pulteney, who, when lord Bath, appointed him his chaplain. Mr. Newton, in his life, gives a curious detail of that famous political revolution which occasionedthe resignation of sir Robert Walpole. This he appears to have written at the time, and it is no small proof of the authenticity of the facts, that Mr. Coxe, in his excellent Life of sir R. Walpole, seems disposed to admit it. It is indeed written with every internal mark of candour and honesty.

, a Greek historian, was born about the close of the thirteenth century, and flourished in the fourteenth, under the emperors Andronicus, John Palacologus, and John Cantacuzenus. He was a great favourite of the elder Andronicus, who made him librarian of the church of Constantinople, and sent him ambassador to the prince of Servia. He accompanied Andronicus in his misfortunes, and attended at his death; after which he repaired to the court of the younger Andronicus, where he appears to have been well received; and it is certain, that, by his influence over the Greeks, that church was prevailed on to reject any conference with the legates of pope John XXII. But, in the dispute which arose between Barlaam and Palamos, happening to take the part of the former, he maintained it so zealously in the council that was held at Constantinople in 1351, that he was cast into prison, and continued there till the return of John Palseologus, who released him; after which he held a disputation with Palamos, in the presence of that emperor. He compiled the Byzantine history in a barbarous style, and very inaccurately, from 1204, when Constantinople was taken by the French, to the death of Andronicus the younger, in 1341. Besides this work, he is the author of some others. His history, with a Latin translation by Jerome Wolf, was printed at Basil in 1562, and again at Geneva in 1615. We have also a new version of it, and a new edition more correct than any of the preceding, printed at the Louvre in 1702, by Boivin the younger, the French king’s librarian, 2 vols. fol. This edition contains, in the first volume, the thirty-eight books of Gregoras, which end with the year 1341; and in the second are the thirteen following, which contain a history of ten years. There are still fourteen remaining to be published; as also fourteen other pieces of Gregoras. Gregoras also wrote Scholia upon “Synesius de Insomniis,” published by Turnebus in 1553; the version of which, by John Pichon, is printed among the works of the same Synesius.

, whom Mr. Headley considers as a poet of great elegance and imagination, and one of the ornaments of the reign of Elizabeth, was born in London, of genteel parents, in 1584. In 1602 he entered a student of Magdalen college, Oxford, whence, after a short time, he removed to Magdalen hall, and took the degree of B. A. in 1606. After remaining at the university some years, and being esteemed among the most ingenious men of his day, according to Wood, he quitted Oxford for London, where he “obtained an employment suitable to his faculty.” What this employment was, we are left to conjecture. The time of his death is also uncertain, but he appears to have been alive at least in 1616, and was then but young. The most material of his works are his additions to “The Mirror for Magistrates,” a book most popular in its time (see Higgins), containing a series of pieces by Sackville, Baldwyne, Ferrers, Churchyard, Phayer, Higgins, Drayton. It was ultimately completed, and its contents new arranged by Nichols, whose supplement to the edition of 1610 is entitled “A Winter Night’s Vision,” To this likewise is improperly subjoined “England’s Eliza; or the victorious and triumphant reigneof that virgin Empress, &c. Elizabeth, queen of England,” &c. His other writings are, “The Cuckow, a Poem,” London, 1607; “Monodia, or Waltham’s complaint upon the death of the most vertuous and noble lady, late deceased, the lady Honor Hay,” ibid. 1615; a play called “TheTwynnes Tragedye” is attributed to him in the Biog. Dram.; but we can, on better authority, add “London’s Artillery, briefly containing the noble practice of that worthie Society,” &c. &c. 1616, 4to; “The Three Sisters’ Tears, shed at the late solernne Funerals of the royal Henry, prince of Wales,” &c. 1613, 4to; and “The Furies, with Vertue’s encomium, &c. in two books of epigrammes, satirical and encomiastic,” 1614, 8vo. Ample specimens of his poetry are given in Headley’s “Beauties,” and the “Bibliographer.”

That he deserved more attention, will appear from the following list of his useful publications. 1. “An Answer to an Heretical Book called `The naked Gospel,' which was condemned and ordered to be publicly burnt by the Convocation of the University of Oxon, Aug. 19, 1690, with some Reflections on Dr. Bury’s new edition of that book,” 1691, 4to. 2. “A short History of Socinianism,” printed with the answer before-mentioned; and dedicated to his patron the earl of Montague. 3, “A Practical Essay on the Contempt of the World,” 1694, 8vo, inscribed to “sir John Trevor, master of the rolls,” to whom the author acknowledges his obligations for “a considerable preferment, bestowed in a most obliging and generous manner.” 4. “The Advantages of a learned Education,” a sermon preached at a school-feast, 1698, 4to. 5. “The Duty of Inferiors towards their Superiors, in five practical discourses; shewing, I. The Duty of Subjects to their Princes. II. The Duty of Children to their Parents. III. The Duty of Servants to their Masters. IV. The Duty of Wives to their Husbands. V. The Duty of Parishioners and the Laity to their Pastors and Clergy. To which is prefixed a dissertation concerning the divine right of Princes,” 1701, 8vo. 6. “An Introduction to a Devout Life, by Francis Sales, bishop and prince of Geneva; translated and reformed from the Errors of the Romish edition. To which is prefixed, a Discourse of the Rise and Progress of the Spiritual Books in the Romish. Church,” 1701, 8vo. 7. “A Treatise of Consolation to Parents for the Death of theirChildren written upon the occasion of the Death of the Duke of Gloucester and addressed to the most illustrious Princess Anue of Denmark,” 1701, 8vo. 8. “God’s Blessing on Mineral Waters;” a Sermon preached at the chapel at Tunbridge Wells,“1702, 4to. 9.” A Conference with a Theist, in five parts; dedicated to the Queen’s most excellent Majesty,“1703, 8vo; of which a third edition, with the addition of two Conferences, the one with a Machiavelian, the other with an Atheist, all carefully revised and prepared for the pres$ by the author, was published in 1723, 2 vols. 8vo. This was particularly designed, says Leland, by the learned and ingenious author, in opposition to the” Oracles of Reason,“published by Blount; and he has not left any material part of that work unanswered. 10.” A Practical Essayon the Contempt of the World; to which is prefixed, a Preface to the Deists and vicious Libertines of the Age,“1704, 2d edit. 8vo. 11.” The Religion of a Princes shewing that the Precepts of the Holy Scriptures are the best maxims of Government,“1704, 8vo, in opposition to Machiavel, Hobbes, c. and written when the queen gave up the tenths and first fruits to the inferior clergy. 12.” Defensio Ecclesiae Anglicanae,“1707, 12mo. 13.” A Paraphrase on the Common Prayer, with Notes on the Sundays and Holidays,“1708, 8vo. 14.” Afflictions the lot of God’s children, a Sermon on the Death of Prince George,“1709, 8vo. 15.” A Comment on the Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments,“&c. 1710, folio. This volume has the royal licence prefixed, and a list of more than 900 subscribers. In his dedication to the queen, he notices, as what never happened before, that all the copies were bespoke or paid for before the day of publication. It still continues to be printed in 8vo. The late sir James Stonhouse, in a letter to the rev. Thomas Stedman, dated 1793, says of this work,” I would have you recommend it to every family in your parish as it will shew them the use of the common prayer and psalms, as read in our churches, and be a standard book from father to son.“16.” A Supplement to the Commentary on the Book of Common Prayer,“1711, folio. In the preface to this supplement, Dr. Nichols mentions” a long fit of illness with which God had pleased to visit him, and a very unestablished state of health both before and after it.“This illness appears soon to have ended in his death. 17.” Historic Sacroe Libri VII. Ex Antonii Cocceii Sabellici Eneadibus concinnatum, in usum Scholarurn et Juventutis Christianae,“1711, 12mo. 18” A Commentary on the first fifteen, and part of the sixteenth Articles of the Church of England,“1712, fol. 39.” A Defence of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England; first written in Latin, for the use of foreigners, by William Nichols, D. D. and translated into English by himself,“1715, 12mo. Dr. Nichols was reckoned a very excellent scholar, and was known abroad as well as at home by the learned correspondence he kept with foreigners of eminence. A volume of such correspondence with JaUlonski, Osterwald, Wetstein, &c. was presented by his widow Catharine Nichols to the archbishop of Canterbury, Oct. 28,* 1712, to be deposited either in Lambeth or St. Martin’s library, and is now among the valuable Mss. at Lambeth, No. 676. He died in the end of April 1712, and was buried in St. Swithin’s church May 5. It may not be improper to distinguish this pious divine from his name-sake William Nichols, M. A. and rector of Stockport, in Cheshire, who was a student of Christ church, Oxford, and. published, 1.” De Literis jnventis Libri sex ad illustrissinuum Principem Thomam, Herbertum, Pembrokiae Comitem,“&c. 1711, 8vo. 2.” Oratio corarn venerabili Spcietate promovenda Religione Christiana habita Londini, Dec. 29, 171.&,“12mo; and, 3.” Περι Αρχων Libri Septem. Accedunt Liturgica," 1717, 12mo.

After a short tour into France, he returned to college, and completed his degree of M. A. July 23, 1679, and in the. same year was elected and admitted fellow of Queen’s college. He received deacon’s orders in December. In 1680, he furnished an account of the kingdoms of Poland, Denmark, Norway, and Iceland, for the first volume of Pitt’s English Atlas, and he compiled also the principal part, if 'not the whole, of the second and third volumes. In February of the same year, he was sent by the vicechancellor to wait on George Lewis., prince of Brunswick, afterwards George I. who was then at Tetsworth, in his way to the university, where next day his highness was complimented with the degree of LL. D. In Sept. 1681, Mr. Nicolson was ordained priest, and was in that year collated by bishop Rainbow to a vacant prebend in the cathedral church of Carlisle, and also to the vicarage of Torpenhow, and in the year following to the archdeaconry of Carlisle, vacant by the resignation of Mr. Thomas Musgrave. His attachment to the study of antiquities began to appear early, and although we cannot minutely trace the progress of his studies at Oxford, it is evident from his correspondence, that in addition to the ordinary pursuits of classical, philosophical, and theological information, he had accumulated a great stock of various learning. He had, among other branches, studied botany with much attention, and had paid particular attention to the natural history of the earth, the effects of the deluge, the authority of the scripture account of that event, and other subjects connected with it, which at that time were agitated by Dr. Woodward and his contemporaries. He made also great proficiency in ancient northern literature; and in matters of antiquarian research, had a great portion of that enthusiasm, without which no man can form an accomplished or successful antiquary. In one place we find him, speaking of a journey to Scotland, where “he met with a most ravishing Runic monument;” and it indeed appears that he spared neither labour or expence in investigating the remains of antiquity wherever they could be found. In 1685 he wrote a letter to Mr. Obadiah Walker, master of University college, Oxford, concerning a Runic inscription at Bewcastle in Cumberland, which is printed in the Philosophical Transactions, No. 178, and in Hutch inson’s Hist. of Cumberland, with the opinions of subsequent antiquaries. He likewise sent a letter to sir William Dugdale, printed in the same number of the Transactions, concerning a Runic inscription on the font in the church of Bride-kirk. Dr. Hickes, in the preface to his “Thesaurus,” acknowledges the able, polite, and prompt aid he received from Mr. Nicolson in preparing that great work. In 1696 he published the first part of his “English Historical Library,” a work intended to point out the sources whence all information respecting English history and aniiqu ties,- whether printed or in manuscript, was to be derived. The whole, in three parrs, was completed in 1699, and was followed by a similar “Library” for Scotland, in 1702; and for Ireland in 1724. These were published together in folio, and more recently in what, if not the best, is the most convenient edition, in 1776, 4-to, by T. Evans. Of the controversy which arose from this work, some notice will be taken hereafter.

When the war broke out between England and Spain, count Danneskiold-Samsoe proposed to the king, that several of his officers of his majesty’s navy should go as volunteers into the service of the powers at war; and chose Norden in particular, to accompany his own nephew, count Ulric Adolphus, then a captain of a man of war, in such expeditions as should be undertaken by the English. On their arrival in London, Norden, whose fame had preceded him, was received with distinguished favour; several of the most considerable men at court, and even the prince of Wales, hearing of the designs he made in Egypt, were curious to see them, and shewed him great kindness. The following summer, he accompanied the count on an expedition under sir John Norris; and, in 1740, he again went on-board the fleet destined to America, under the command of sir Chaloner Ogle, with a design to reinforce admiral Vernon. After this, Norden spent about one year in London in great esteem, and was admitted a member of the Royal Society. On this occasion he gave the public an idea of some ruins and colossal statues, entitled, tf Drawings of some Ruins and Colossal Statues, at Thebes of Egypt; with an account of the same, in a Letter to the Royal Society,“1741. This essay, with the plates belonging to it, heightened the desire which men of curiosity had before conceived of seeing that work entire, of which this made only a small part. About this time he found his health declining; and proposed to the count to take a tour to France, and to visit the coasts and ports of that kingdom, in hopes a change of climate might have been a means of recovering his health: but he died at Paris in 1742, much regretted as a person who had done honour to his country, and from whom the world had great expectations. His” Travels" were translated from the Danish into French by Des Roches de Parthenais, and published at Copenhagen in 1755, 2 vois. fol. This was followed by an English translation, both in fol. and 8vo, by Dr. Peter Templeman. This edition was decorated with the original plates, which are extremely numerous, and were procured by Mr. Lockyer Davis.

, an industrious topographer, classed by Wai pole and Strutt among engravers, seems to have been horn in Wiltshire about 1548, and admitted of Hartball, Oxford, in 1564. He proceeded A. M. in 1573. He bad patronage, but little else, from the great Burleigh; and in his old age obtained jointly with his son the place of surveyor to the prince of Wales. He lived in narrow circumstances at Fulham and Hendon, and died about 1626. Wood ascribes to him fifteen devotional pieces, though he doubts if they were really written by him, and Granger, who describes a print of him, thinks they must have been his father’s. As a topographer, however, we are more certain of his productions. He surveyed the county of Essex in 1584, and Hertfordsire and Middlesex in 1593; and besides these, he executed the maps of Cornwall, Hampshire, Surrey, and Sussex, all which, except those of Herts and Hants, were copied, with additions, into “Speed’s Theatre.” He was the first that inserted the roads. His map of Surrey was much larger and more exact than any of his others. Among his published works are, “England; an intended guyde for English travailers, &c.” Lond. 1625, 4to; “Speculum Britanniae, a topographical and historical description of Cornwall,” 1728, 4to. It was published from a very old ms. in the British Museum, Mss. Karl. 6252. Mr. Gough says that the better part of this most finished of Norden’s works is a mere transcript of Carew; from the other parts very little of moment is to be learned; and no stress is to be laid on his drawings. Norden wrote also an account of the estate of the dutchy of Cornwall, the right by which the duke holds his estates, and many of the customs of the manors; which was once deposited in the duchy office. Another of his publications, is “Speculum Britanniae, or an historical and chorographical description of Middlesex and Hertfordshire,” 1573, 4to, reprinted 1637. and 1723. The Middlesex part was the first of his labours there is a copy of it among the Harleian Mss. No. 570, supposed to be in Norden’s own writing, which differs from the printed books both in the arrangement and the additions made to it. The last of this kind was his “Speculum Brit, pars altera, or a delineation of Northamptonshire,” Lond. 1720, 8vo. This is the most superficial of all his surveys, except in a few towns; nor were the map and plans of Peterborough and Northampton referred to in it ever engraved. Norden was not only a practical surveyor, but wrote a good treatise on the subject, entitled “The Surveyor’s Dialogue, &c.” 1607, 4to. Of this an account, with extracts, is given in the Cens. Lit. vol. I. There are some Mss. by Norden in the British Museum and other public libraries.

, son of the preceding, had a learned education in the university of Cambridge. He had been made knight of the Bath as early as 1616, at the creation of Charles prince of Wales, and had stood as the eldest son of a peer, at the state in the house of lords, at sixty-three, and was an eminent instance of filial duty to his father, before whom he would not put on his hat, or sit down, unless enjoined to do it. He was bred in the best manner; for besides the court, and choicest company at home, he was sent to travel, and then into the army, and served as a captain under sir Francis Vere. He sat in many parliaments, until secluded by that which condemned the king. After this he lived privately in the country, at Tostock, in Suffolk; and towards the latter end of his life, entertained himself with justice-business, books, and (as a very numerous issue required) oeconomy. He published a little tract on that subject, entitled “Observations and advices Œconomical,” Lond. 1669, 12mo. Afterwards he published another tract, entitled “Passages relating to the Long Parliament,” with an apologetic, or rather recantation preface; for he had at first been active against the King. He wrote also the “History of the Life of Edward Lord North, the first Baron,” Lord Orford says, “sensibly, and in a very good style,” though this critic seems to think he fails in impressing the reader with much respect for his ancestor. After his death appeared a volume of essays, entitled “Light in the way to Paradise; with other occasionals,” Lond. 1682, 8vo. These essays shew that he was steadfast in his religion, that of the established church, and led an exemplary life. He outlived his father ten years, and died June 24, 1677. By his wife Anne, daughter and co-heir to sir Charles Montagu, he had a numerous family, of which six sons and four daughters lived to maturity. Three of his sons form the subject of the ensuing articles.

, a nobleman of poetical celebrity, was a descendant from the Nugents of Carlanstown, in the county of Westmeath, and was a younger son of Michael Nugent, by Mary, daughter of Robert lord Trimleston. He was chosen M. P. for St. Mawes, in Cornwall, in 1741; appointed comptroller of the household of Frederick, prince of Wales, in 1747; a lord of the treasury in 1754; one of the vice-treasurers of Ireland in 1759; and a lord of trade in 1766. In 1767 he was created baron Nugent and viscount Clare, and in 1776 earl Nugent, with remainder to his son-in-law, the late marquis of Buckingham. His lordship was thrice married; his second wife was Anne, sister and heiress to secretary Craggs, the friend of Pope and Addison, by whom he acquired a large fortune. She was at the time of her marriage to him, in 1736, in her second widowhood, having

Earl Nugent cultivated literature not unsuccessfully, had agreeable talents for poetry, but never rose to great eminence as a politician. Yet he was a steady friend to his country (Ireland), and always a powerful pleader for her interests. This he evinced rather whimsically on one occasion in 1775, by addressing “Verses to the Queen, with a New Year’s Gift of Irish Manufacture,” a 4to poem, accompanied by a present of Irish grogram. The wits of the time asserted that her majesty was graciously pleased to thank the noble author for both his pieces of stuff. Lord Orford says that Earl Nugent “was one of those men of parts whose dawn was the brightest moment of a long life; and who, though possessed of different talents, employed them in depreciating his own fame, and destroying all opinion of his judgment, except in the point of raising bimself to honours. He was first known by the noble ode on his own conversion from popery; yet, strong as was the energy and reasoning in it, his arguments operated but temporary conviction on himself, for he died a member of the church he had exposed so severely.” So much was this ode admired that, as he was known to associate with the wits of Pope’s circle, and those who adorned the court of Frederick prince of Wales, he was supposed to have been assisted by some of them; but for this there seems no reasonable ground. Many of his poetical productions are good, and he was certainly known to be capable of the best of them, while he could at the same time descend to the worst, inconscious of their inferiority. A volume of his poems was published anonymously by Dodsley, and entitled “Odes and Epistles,” Lond. 1739, 8vo, 2d. edit. This contains the ode above mentioned on his religion, which is addressed to William Pulteney, esq. There are also other pieces by him in Dodsley’s collection, and the *' New Foundling Hospital for Wit.“His” Verses to the Queen,“and his” Faith, a poem," were the only ones published separately, the latter in 1774, and the former in 1775. The latter was a strange attempt to overturn the Epicurean doctrine by that of the Trinity, and was certainly one of those productions by which, as lord Orford observes, he depreciated his own fame.