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

The fame Brooke acquired by this play, which has certainly many beauties, seemed the earnest of a prosperous career, and as he thought he could now afford to wait the slow progress of events, he hired a house at Twickenham, near to Pope’s, furnished it genteelly, and sent for Mrs. Brooke and his family. But these flattering prospects were soon clouded. He was seized with an ague so violent and obstinate that his physicians, after having almost despaired of his life, advised him, as a last resource, to try his native arr. With this he complied, and obtained a complete recovery. It was then expected that he should return to London, and such was certainly his intention, but to the surprize of his friends, he determined to remain in Ireland. For a conduct so apparently inconsistent not only with his interest, but his inclination, he was long unwilling to account. It appeared afterwards, that Mrs. Brooke was alarmed at the zeal with which he espoused the cause of the opposition, and dreaded the consequences with which his next intemperate publication might be followed. She persuaded him therefore to remain in Ireland, and for so singular a measure at this favourable crisis in his history, he could assign no adequate reason without exposing her to the imputation of caprice, and himself to that of a too yielding temper.

For some years after his arrival in Ireland, little is known of his life, except that lord Chesterfield, when viceroy, conferred upon him the office of barrack-master. His pen, however, was not idle. In 1741, he contributed to Ogle’s version of Chaucer, “Constantia, or the Man of Law’s Tale;” and in 1745, according to one account, his tragedy of the “Earl of Westmoreland” was performed on the Dublin stage; but the editor of the Biographia Dramatica informs us that it was first acted at Dublin in 1741, under the title of the “Betrayer of his Country,” and again in 1754 under that of “Injured Honour.” Its fame, however, was confined to Ireland, nor was it known in England until the publication of his poetical works in 1778. A more important publication was his “Farmer’s Letters,” written in 1745, on the plan of Swift’s D rapier’s Letters, and with a view to rouse the spirit of freedom among the Irish, threatened, as they were, in common with their fellow-subjects, by rebellion and invasion.

In 1746 he wrote an epilogue on the birth-day of the duke of Cumberland, spoken by Mr. Garrick in Dublin, and a prologue to Othello. In 1747 he contributed to Moore’s volume of Fables, four of great poetical merit, viz. “The Temple of Hymen;” “The Sparrow and Dove;” “The Female Seducers,” and “Love and Vanity.” In 1748 he wrote a prologue to the Foundling, and a dramatic opera entitled “Little John and the Giants.” This was acted only one night in Dublin, being then prohibited on account of certain political allusions. On this occasion he wrote “The last speech of John Good, alias Jack the Giant Queller,” a satirical effusion, not very pointed, and mixed with political allegory, and a profusion of quotations from scripture against tyrants and tyranny. In 1749, his “Karl of Essex,” a tragedy, was performed at Dublin, and afterwards, in 1760, at Drury-lane theatre, with so much success as to he preferred to the rival plays on the same subject by Banks and Jones. At what time his other dramatic pieces were written, or acted, if acted at all, is uncertain .

His biographer informs us, that, “wearied at length with fruitless efforts to arouse the slumbering genius of his country disgusted with her ingratitude and sick of her venality, he withdrew to his paternal seat, and there, in the society of the muses, and the peaceful bosom of domestic love, consoled himself for lost advantages and disappointed hopes. An only brother, whom he tenderly loved, accompanied his retirement, with a family almost as numerous as his own; and there, for many years, they lived together with uninterrupted harmony and affection: the nephew was as dear as the son the uncle as revered as the father and the sister-in-law almost as beloved as the wife.”

In 1762, he published a pamphlet entitled “The Trial of the Roman Catholics,” the object of which was to remove the political restraints on that class, and to prove that this may be done with safety. In this attempt, however, his zeal led him so far as to question incontrovertible facts, and even to assert that the history of the Irish massacre in 1641 is nothing but an old wives fable; and upon the whole he leans more to the principles of the Roman catholic religion, than an argument professedly political, or a mere question of extended toleration, seemed to require. His next work excited more attention in England. In 1766 appeared the first volume of the “Fool of Quality, or the History of the earl of Moreland,” a novel, replete with knowledge of human life and manners, and in which there are many admirable traits of moral feeling and propriety, but mixed, as the author advances towards the close, with so much of religious discussion, and mysterious stories and opinions, as to leave it doubtful whether he inclined most to Behmenism or popery. It became, however, when completed in five volumes, 1770, a very popular novel, and has often been reprinted since.

In 1772, he published “Redemption,” a poem, in which that great mystery of our religion is explained and amplified by bolder figures than are usually hazarded. His taste was indeed evidently on the decline, and in this as well as all his later performances, he seems to have yielded to the enthusiasm of the moment, without any reserve in favour of his better judgment. In this poem, too, heappears to have lost his pronunciation of the English so far as to introduce rhymes which must be read according to the vulgar Irish. His last work was “Juliet Grenville,” a novel in three volumes, which appeared in 1774. This is very justly entitled “The History of the Human Heart,” the secret movements of which few novelists have better understood; but there is such a mixture of the most sacred doctrines of religion with the common incidents and chitchat of the modern romance, that his best friends could with difficulty discover among these ruins, some fragments which indicated what his genius had once been.

In this year (1774) we are told, that Garrick pressed him earnestly to write for the stage, and offered to enter into articles with him at the rate of a shilling per line for all he should write during life, provided that he wrote for him alone. “This Garnck,” says his biographer, “looked upon as an extraordinary compliment to Mr, Brooke’s abilities; but he could not, however, bring him over to his opinion, nor prevail with him to accept of his offer; on the contrary, he rejected it with some degree of haughtiness for which Garrick never forgave him. He was then in the full and Haltering career to fortune and to fame, and would have thought it a disgrace to hire out his talents, and tie himself down to necessity.” In this story there is enough to induce us to reject it. Brooke was so far from being at this time in the full and flattering career to fortune and to fame, that he had out-lived both. And supposing that there may be some mistake in the date of Garrick’s, proposal, and that for 1774 we should read 1764, or even 1754, the proposal itself is too ridiculous to bear examination.

Our author’s tenderness of heart and unsuspecting temper involved him in pecuniary difficulties. He was ever prone to give relief to the distressed, although the immediate consequence of his liberality was that he wanted relief himself, and at length was compelled to dispose of his property, and remove to Kildare. After living some time here, he took a farm near his former residence. Where this residence was, his biographers have not mentioned; but soon after his return, they inform us that he lost his wife, to whom he had been happily united for nearly fifty years. The shock which this calamity gave to a mind, never probably very firm, and the wreck of a family of seventeen children now reduced to two, was followed by a state of mental imbecility from which he never recovered. The confusion of his ideas, indeed, had been visible in most of his later writings, and the infirmities of age completed what his family losses and personal disappointments had begun. His last days, however, were cheered by the hopes of religion, which became brighter as he approached the hour in which they were to be fulfilled. He died Oct. 10, 1783, leaving a son, since dead, and a daughter, the child of his old age.

His poetical works were collected in 1778, in four volumes octavo, printed very incorrectly, and with the addition of some pieces which were not his. In 1792 another edition was published at Dublin, by his daughter, who procured some memoirs of her father prefixed to the first volume. In this she informs us she found many difficulties. He had lived to so advanced an age, that most of his contemporaries departed before him, and this young lady remembered nothing of him previous to his retirement from the world. Such an apology cannot be refused, while we must yet regret that miss Brooke was not able to collect information more to be depended on, and arranged with more attention to dates. The narrative, as we find it, is confused and contradictory.

From all, however, that can now be learned, Brooke was a man of a most amiable character and ingenuous temper, and perhaps few men have produced writings of the same variety, the tendency of all which is so uniformly in favour of religious and moral principle. Yet even in this there are inconsistencies which we know not how to explain, unless we attribute them to an extraordinary defect in judgment. During a great part of his life, his religious opinions approached to what are now termed methodistical, and one difficulty, in contemplating his character, is to reconcile this with his support of the stage, and his writing those trifling farces we find among his works. Perhaps it may be said that the necessities of his family made him listen to the importunity of those friends who considered the stage as a profitable resource; but by taking such advice he was certainly no great gainer. Except in the case of his “Gustavus” and “Earl of Essex,” there is no reason to think that he was successful, and the greater part of his dramas were never performed at all, or printed until 1778, when he could derive very little advantage from them. Nor can we impute it to any cause, except a total want of judgment and an ignorance of the public taste, that he intermixed the most awful doctrines of religion, and the lighter incidents and humorous sketches of vulgar or fashionable life, in his novels. He lived, however, we are told, more consistently than he wrote. No day passed in which he did not collect his family to prayer, and read and expounded the scriptures to them : Among his tenants and humble friends he was the benevolent and generous character which he had been accustomed to depict in his works, and while he had the means, he literally went about doing good.

As a poet, he delights his readers principally by occasional flights of a vivid imagination, but has in no instance given us a poem to which criticism may not suggest many reasonable objections. The greater part of his life, he lived remote from the friends of whose judgment he might have availed himself, and by whose taste his own might have been regulated. His first production, Universal Beauty, has a noble display of fancy in many parts. It is not improbable that Pope, to whom he submitted it, gave him some assistance, and he certainly repaid his instructor by adopting his manner; yet he has avoided Pope’s monotony, and would have done this with more effect, if we did not perceive a mechanical lengthening of certain lines, rather than a natural variety of movement. On the other hand, the sublimity of the subject, by which he was inspired and which he hoped to communicate, sometimes betrays him into a species of turgid declamation. Harmony appears to be consulted, and epithets multiplied to please the ear at the expence of meaning.

, late Somerset-herald, was the son of William Brooke, M. D. of Fieidhead, near Dodsworth in Yorkshire, and a gentleman by descent. He was born in 1748, and put apprentice to Mr. James Kirkby, a chemist, in Bartlett’s-buildings, London; but discovering a strong turn to heraldic pursuits, and having, by a pedigree of the Howard family, which he drew, attracted the notice of the then duke of Norfolk, he procured him a place in the college of arms, by the title of Rouge Croix pursuivant, in 1775, from which, in 1778. he was advanced to that of Somerset herald, which office he held at his death, and by the interest of the present duke of Norfolk he was also one of the lieutenants in the militia of the West Riding of Yorkshire. On Feb. 3, 1794, he was suffocated, with his friend Mr. Pingo of York, and many other persons, in attempting to get into the pit at the little theatre in the Hay market. It did not appear that he had been thrown down, but was suffocated as he stood; his countenance had the appearance of sleep, and even the colour in his cheeks remained. He was interred, with great respect, and the attendance of the principal members of the college and of the society of antiquaries, Feb. 6, in a vault under the heralds’ seat, in the church of St. Bennet, Paul’s Wharf. A mural monument, by Ashton, has since been placed over his remains by Edmund Lodge x esq. Lancaster herald.

, York herald, whose real name was Brookesworth, until he changed it to Brooke, was bred to the trade of a painter-stainer, of which company he became free, September 3, 1576, and leaving this, he became an officer at arms. He was so extremely worthless and perverse, that his whole mind seems bent to malice and wickedness: unawed by virtue or station, none were secure from his unmerited attacks. He became a disgrace to the college, a misfortune to his contemporaries, and a misery to himself. With great sense and acquirements, he sunk into disgrace and contempt. He was particularly hostile to Camden, publishing “A Discovery of Errors” found in his Britannia. Camden returned his attack partly by silence, and partly by rallying Brooke, as entirely ignorant of his own profession, incapable of translating or understanding the “Britannia,” in which he had discovered faults, offering to submit the matter in dispute to the earl Marshal, the college of heralds, the society of antir quaries, or four persons learned in these studies. Irritated still more, he wrote a “Second Discovery of Errors,” which he presented to James I. January 1, 1619-20, who, on the 4th following, prohibited its publication, but it was published by Anstis, in 1723, in 4to. In it are Camden’s supposed errors, with his objections, Camden’s reply, and his own answers. In the appendix, in two columns, are placed the objectionable passages in the edition of 1594, and the same as they stood in that of 1600. In 1622, he published a valuable work, dedicated to James I. entitled “A Catalogue and Succession of Kings, Princes, Dukes, Marquises, Earls, and Viscounts of this Realm, since the Norman Conquest, until 1619, &c.” small folio. In his address to his majesty, he says, “he had spent fifty years’ labour and experience, having served his majesty and the late queen Elizabeth, of famous memory, forty years an more.” That no doubt might be entertained of his ability, he said he had in his custody the collections of the principal heralds deceased, before and during his time, adding, without ostentation be it spoken, he held his library better furnished than the office of arms. He does not neglect to intreat James to prohibit upstarts and mountebanks from impoverishing his majesty’s poor servants, the officers of arms, who labour daily, and spend both their bodies and substance in doing their duty. He was twice suspended and imprisoned for scandalous misbehaviour: the first time, for his shameful conduct to Segar, Garter; and in 1620, a petition was exhibited against him and Creswell as disturbers of the whole body of heralds. On Oct. 15,

1621, with a view probably to expel him the college, it was solemnly argued, whether he was a herald; but the chief baron of the exchequer, Whitfield, decided in his favour. Dec. 4, he and Creswell, Somerset herald, were sentenced to the Marshaisea for having spoken contemptuously of the Earl Marshal. Cresweil was obliged to resign, but Brooke died in his office, universally despised, Oct. 15, 1625, and was buried in the church of Reculver in Kent.

, lord chief justice of the common pleas in the reign of queen Mary, and author of several books in the law, was son of Thomas Brooke of Claverly in Shropshire, by Margaret his wife, daughter of Hugh Grosvenor of Farmot in that county. He was born at Claverly, and studied in the university of Oxford, which was of great advantage to him when he studied the law in the Middle Temple, according to Mr. Wood, though Mr. Stow, in his Annals under the year 1552, says he was of Gray’s-inn. By his prodigous application and judgment he became the greatest lawyer of his time. In 1542 he was elected autumn or summer reader of the Middle Temple, and in Lent, 1550, he was chosen double reader. In 1552 he was by 'writ called to be serj ear* at law; and in 1553, which was the first of queen Mary’s reign, he was appointed lord chief justice of the common pleas, and not of the king’s bench, as some have affirmed; and about that time he received the honour of knighthood from the queen, in whose reign he was highly ^valued for his profound skill in the law, and his integrity in all points relating to the profession of it. Mr. Wood mentions a manuscript in the Ashmolean library at Oxford, which informs us, that he had likewise been common serjeant and recorder of the city of London, and speaker of the house of commons; and that he died as he was visiting his friends in the country, September 5, 1558, and was interred in the chancel of Claverly church, with a monument erected to him. In his last will, proved October 12 the same year, he remembers the church and poor of Putney near London. He left his posterity a good estate at Madeley in Shropshire, and at one or two places in Suffolk. He wrote “La Graunde Abridgement,” which contains, according to Mr. Wood, an abstract of the Yearbooks to the reign of queen Mary; and Nicolson, in his “English Historical Library,” tells us, that in this work he followed the example of Nicholas Statham, one of the barons of the exchequer in the time of Edward IV. who t abridged the larger arguments and tedious reports of the Year-books into a short system under proper heads and common places to the reign of king Henry VI.; and that our author, sir Robert Brooke, made in his “Graunde Abridgement,” an alphabetical abstract of all the choice matters in our law, as contained in such commentaries, records, readings, &c. and that this work is a general epitome of all that could be had upon the several heads’ there treated upon. It has had several editions, particularly in London in a small folio, 1573, 1576, 1586, &c. amongst which editions, says Nicolson, (as it commonly fares with the authors of that professsion) the eldest are still reckoned the best. He collected likewise the most remarkable cases adjudged in.*the court of common pleas from the sixth year of king Henry VIII. to the fourth of queen Mary, which book is entitled “Ascuns novelCases, c.” and frequently printed, particularly at London, 1578, 1604, 1625, Sac. in 8vo. He wrote also “A Reading on the Statute of Limitations 32 Henry VIII. cap. 2,” London, 1647, 8vo. Mr. Wood supposes that it had been printed likewise before that time.

, born in 1612, the son of George Brooksbank of Halifax, was entered a batler in Brazen-nose college, in Michaelmas term 1632, took a degree in arts, went into orders, and had a curacy. At length removing to London, he taught school in Fleet-street, and preached there. The time of his death is not known. He published, 1. “Breviate of Lilly’s Latin Grammar, &c.” London, 1660, 8vo. 2. “The welltuned Organ; or an exercitation, wherein this question is fully and largely discussed, Whether or no instrumental and organical music be lawful in holy public assemblies? Affirmatur,” ibid. 1660, 4to. 3. “Rebels tried and cast, in three Sermons,” ibid. 1661, 12mo.

was born in Cheshire, as is said, of very mean parents. Of the place of his birth, or the first part of his life, we have not been able to gain any intelligence. He was educated upon the foundation at Eton, and was captain of the school a whole year, without any vacancy, by which he might have obtained a scholarship at King’s college. Being by this delay, such as is said to have happened very rarely, superannuated, he was sent to St. John’s college by the contributions of his friends, where he obtained a small exhibition. At his college he lived for some time in the same chamber with the well-known Ford, by whom Dr. Johnson heard him described as a contracted scholar and a mere versifier, unacquainted with life, and unskilful in conversation. His addiction to metre was then such, that his companions familiarly called him Poet. When he had opportunities of mingling with mankind, he cleared himself, as Ford likewise owned, from great part of his scholastic rust.

He appeared early in the world as a translator of the Iliads into prose, in conjunction with Ozell and Oldisworth. How their several parts were distributed is not known. This is the translation of which Ozell boasted as superior, in Toland’s opinion, to that of Pope: it has long since vanished, and is now in no danger from the critics. He was introduced to Mr. Pope, who was then visiting sir John Cotton at Madingley, near Cambridge, and gained so much of his esteem, that he was employed to make extracts from Eustathius for the notes to the translation of the Iliad; and in the volumes of poetry published by Lintot, commonly called Pope’s Miscellanies, many of his early pieces were inserted. Pope and Broome were to be yet more closely connected. When the success of the Iliad gave encouragement to a version of the Odyssey, Pope, weary of the toil, called Fenton and Broome to his assistance; and, taking only half the work upon himself, divided the other half between his partners, giving four books to Fenton, and eight to Broome. Fenton’s books are enumerated in Dr. Johnson’s Life of him. To the lot of Brooine fell the 2d, 6th, 8th, llth, 12th, 16th, 18th, and 23d; together with the burthen of writing all the notes. The price at which Pope purchased this assistance was three hundred pounds paid to Fenton, and five hundred to Broome, with as many copies as he wanted for his friends, which amounted to one hundred more. The payment made to Fenton is known only by hearsay; Broome’s is very distinctly told by Pope, in the notes to the Dunciad. It is evident that, according to Pope’s own estimate, Broome was unkindly treated. If four books could merit three hundred pounds, eight, and all the notes, equivalent at least to four, had certainly a right to more than six. Broome probably considered himself as injured, and there was for some time more than coldness between him and his employer. He always spoke of Pope as too much a lover of money, and Pope pursued him with avowed hostility, for he not only named him disrespectfully in the “Dunciad,” but quoted him more than once in the Bathos, as a proficient in the Art of Sinking; and in his enumeration of the different kinds of poets distinguished for the profound, he reckons Broome among “the parrots who repeat another’s words in such a hoarse odd tone as makes them seem their own.” It has been said that they were afterwards reconciled; but we are afraid their peace was without friendship. He afterwards published a Miscellany of poems, and never rose to very high dignity in the church. He was some time rector of Sturston in Suffolk, where he married a wealthy widow; and afterwards, when the king visited Cambridge, 1728, became LL, D. He was, 1733, presented by the crown to the rectory of Pulham in Norfolk, which he held with Oakley Magna in Suffolk, given him by the lord Cornwallis, to whom he was chaplain, and who added the vicarage of Eye in Suffolk; he then resigned Pulham, and retained the other two. Towards the close of his life he grew again poetical, and amused himself with translating odes of Anacreon, which he published in the Gentleman’s Magazine, under the name of Chester. He died at Bath, Nov. 16, 1745, and was buried in the abbey church.

Of Broome, says Dr. Johnson, though it cannot be said that he was a great poet, it would be unjust to deny that he was an excellent versifier; his lines are smooth and sonorous, and his diction is select and elegant. His rhymes are sometimes unsuitable, but such faults occur but seldom, and he had such power of words and numbers as fitted him for translation; but in his original works, recollection seems to have been his business more than invention. His imitations are so apparent, that it is a part of his reader’s employment to recall the verses of some former poet. What he takes, however, he seldom makes worse; and he cannot be justly thought a mean man, whom Pope chose for an associate, and whose co-operation was considered by Pope’s enemies as so important, that he was attacked by Henley with this ludicrous distich:

, better known under the name of Farinello, was born the 24th of January, 1705, at Andria, in the kingdom of Naples, of a family noble, though poor. From the patent of his knighthood of the order of Calatrava, it appears that he was indebted for the lasting agreeableness of his voice, not to a voluntary mutilation from the thirst of gain, but that he was obliged to undergo the cruel operation on account of a dangerous hurt he received in his youth, by a fall from a horse. He owed the first rudiments of the singing art to his father Salvatore Brosco, and his farther formation to the famous Porpora. At, that time there flourished at Naples three wealthy brothers of the name of Farina, whose family is now extinct. These persons vouchsafed him their distinguished patronage, and bestowed on him the name of Farinello. For some time his fame was confined to the convivial concerts of his patrons, till it happened that the count of Schrautenbach, nephew of the then viceroy, came to Naples. To celebrate his arrival, -the viceroy and his familiar friend Antonio Caracciolo, prince della Torella, caused the opera of “Angelica and Medoro” to be represented, in which Metastasio and Farinello plucked the first laurels of their immortal fame.

Thus fortune united the two greatest luminaries that have appeared on the theatre in modern times, at the entrance on their career. Metastasio was then not more than eighteen, and Farinello not above fifteen years of age. This circumstance gave birth to an intimacy between them, which at length was improved into a cordial friendship, supported and confirmed, as long as they lived, by a regular intercourse of epistolary correspondence.

Soon after Farinello was called to the principal theatres in Italy, and every where richly rewarded. Between the years 1722 and 1784, he gave proofs of his powers at Naples, Rome, Venice, and most of the cities of Italy; and indeed more than once in almost all these places; six times at Rome, and at Venice seven. The report of his talents at length found its way across the Alps. Lord Essex, the English ambassador at Turin, received a commission to invite him to London; where, for six months performance, he was paid 1500l. At Rome, during the run of a favourite opera, there was a struggle every night between him and a famous player on the trumpet, in a song accompanied by that instrument; this, at first, seemed amicable, and merely sportive, till the audience began to interest themselves in the contest, and to take different sides. After severally swelling out a note, in which each manifested the power of his lungs, and tried to rival the other in brilliancy and force, they had both a swell and a shake together, by thirds, which was continued so long, while the audience eagerly waited the event, that both seemed to be exhausted; and, in fact, the trumpeter wholly spent, gave it up, thinking however his antagonist as much tired as himself, and that it would be a drawn battle; when Farinello, with a smile on his countenance, shewing he had only been sporting with him all this time, broke out all at once in the same breath, with fresh vigour, and not only swelled and shook the note, but ran the most rapid and difficult divisions, and was at last silenced only by the acclamations of the audience. From this period may be dated that superiority which he ever maintained over all his contemporaries.

Scarcely ever had any singer a like capacity of perpetually giving new accessions of force to his voice, and always with pleasure; and when it had attained to the highest degree of energy, to keep it for a long time at that pitch which the Italians call mezza di voce. While he sung at London, in the year 1734, in an opera composed by his brother Riccardo, at another theatre they were performing an opera set to music by Handel, wherein Senesini, Carestini, and the no less celebrated Cuzzoni, had parts. Farinello from the very beginning was acknowledged to have the superiority by a mezza di voce, though the rival theatre was favoured by the king and the princess of Orange, of whom the latter had been Handel’s scholar. By this inferiority it fell into a debt of nine thousand pounds.

The desire of exciting admiration, and of captivating the ear more than the mind of an auditor, still adhered to him, but his good fortune provided him with an opportunity of discovering and correcting this error. During his youth he was three times at Vienna. In the year 1732 he was there declared chamber-singer to his imperial majesty. The emperor Charles V I. shewed him great affection, partly on account of his excellency as a singer, and partly also because he spoke the Neapolitan dialect with great formality and drollery. The emperor was a nice judge of singing, and would frequently accompany him on the harpsichord. One day he entered into a friendly conversation with him on music, and praued indeed his wonderful force and dexterity in this art, but blamed the too great affectation of an excellence which does not touch the heart. “Choose,” said he, “a simpler and easier method; and be sure that, with the gifts wherewith you are so richly endowed by nature, you will captivate every hearer.” This advice had uch an effect on Farinello, thai, from that hour he struck out into a different manner. He confessed, himself, to Dr. Burney, that the emperor’s gracious advice had had more effect upon him than all the lessons of his teachers, and all the examples of his brother artists. Whoever is desirous of knowing more concerning the perfection he had reached in the art he professed, will get all the satisfaction he can require on that head, by perusing the “Riflessioni sopra il canto figurato” of Giovanni Baptista Mancini.

From the moral failings to which theatrical performers are commonly addicted, he was either totally free, or indulged them with moderation. At first he was fond of gaming, but after some time he forsook it entirely. He behaved with sigular probity to the managers of the opera. As they paid him richly, he made it a point of honour to promote their interest as far as it depended on him. For this reason he carefully avoided every thing that might be a hindrance to him in the fulfilling of his engagements. He even set himself a strict regimen, and moderated himself in his amusements. He was so conscientious on this head, that he would not for any consideration be prevailed on to let a song be heard from him out of the theatre; and, during Jus three years stay in England, he constantly passed the spring season in the country, for the sake of invigorating his lungs, by breathing a free and wholesome air. In his xpences he was fond of elegance, yet he indulged it without extravagance; so'that even before he left Italy, he had already laid out a capital upon interest at Naples, and had purchased a country-house, with lands about it, situated at the distance of half ah Italian mile from Bologna. By degrees he rebuilt the mansion in a sumptuous style, in hopes of making it a comfortable retreat for his declining years: and there he afterwards ended his life.

In the year 1737, when he had reached the summit of fame, he appeared for the last time on the stage at London; from whence he departed for the court of Spain, whither he was invited through the solicitations of queen Elizabeth, vho had known his excellence at Parma. Her design was, by the ravishing notes of this great master, to wean her spouse king Philip V. from his passion for the chace, to which his strength was no longer adequate. On his way to Madrid, he had the honour to give a specimen of his talents before the French king at Paris; and we are told by Riccoboni, that all the audience were so astonished at hearing him, that the French, who otherwise detested the Italian music, began from that time to waver in their notions. He had scarcely set his foot in Madrid, but the king hastened to hear him; and was so much taken with the agreeableness of his song, that he immediately settled on him, by a royal edict, a salary equal to what he had received in England, together with an exemption from all public taxes, as a person destined to his familiar converse; and granted him, besides, the court equipages and livery, free of all expence. He could not pass a day without him; not only on account of his vocal abilities, but more on account of the agreeable talents he possessed for conversation. He spoke French and Italian elegantly, had some knowledge of the English and German, and in a short time learnt the Castilian. By his courtesy and discretion he gained the affection of every one. In his converse he was sincere to an uncommon degree, even towards the royal personages who honoured him with their intimacy; and it was jchiefly this that induced the monarch to set so high a value on him. His first words, when he waked in the morning, were regularly these: “Let Farinello be told that I expect him this evening at the usual hour.” Towards midnight Farinello appeared, and was -never dismissed till break of day, when he betook himself to rest, in the apartments assigned him in the palace, though he had likewise a house in the city. To the king he never sung more than two or three pieces; and, what will seem almost incredible, they were every evening the same. Excepting when the king was to go to the holy sacrament on the following day, Farinello was never at liberty to get a whole night’s sleep.

Farinello had as great an affection for the king, as that prince had for him; and had nothing more at heart than to cheer and enliven his spirits: and indeed herein he had the happy talent of succeeding to admiration, though himself was inclined to melancholy. Under Ferdinand, Philip’s successor, he had an ampler field for the display of his genius and skill. This monarch had a good ear for music, and knew how to judge properly of it; as he had studied under Domenico Scarlatti, who had likewise been tutor to queen Barbara, whose taste in music was exquisite. As king Philip had given Farinello the charge of selecting recreations and amusements suitable to his calm and gentle disposition, a variety of new institutions were set on foot through his means at court. Operas were only used to be performed on very solemn and extraordinary occasions; the nation at large was contented with comedies. They now began to grow more common; and Farinello, though he played no part in them, had the management of the whole. He possessed all the qualities that were requisite for the direction of an opera. For, with a perfect knowledge of music, he had great skill in painting, and made drawings with a pen. He was fruitful in inventions, particularly of such machines as represent thunder, lightning, rain, hail, and the like. The celebrated machinist Jacob Bonavera formed himself under his direction. In regard to the morality of the theatre he was very conscientious. Under his direction all went on at the king’s expence; and none but persons in the service of the royal family, the ministers from foreign potentates, the nobility, with the principal officers of state, and a few others, by particular favour, had admittance. In his country-house near Bologna are to be seen, among other paintings, those from whence Francis Battagliuoli copied the scenes in the operas Niteti, Didone, and Armida.

Besides the choice and arrangement of the royal amusements, Farinello was employed in various other matters that required a delicate taste. Queen Barbara having resolved on an institution for the education of young ladies, our singer was pitched upon not only to plan and direct the erection of the convent, and the proper retirade for the queen adjoining, but he gave orders for the making of the furniture suitable to the structure; and the church vessels, which he caused to be executed with incredible alacrity, at Naples, Bologna, and Milan. He himself made a donation to this establishment of a picture, by the hand of the celebrated Moriglio, of St. John de Dio, founder of the brethren of mercy, carrying a sick man on his back. He was likewise inspector of the music of the royal chapel; which he provided with the most noted spiritual compositions, by which the chapel of his holiness at Rome is distinguished above all others. King Ferdinand had purposed all along to reward the ingenuity and attachment of Farinello by splendid promotions. He had already offered him several posts of honour, and at length pressed him to accent of a place in the royal council of finance. But, on his refusing them all, the king privately found means to get from Naples the attestations of his nobility, that he might honour him with the order of Calatrava. One day, holding up to him the cross of the order, he said to him, “Let us see then whether thou wilt persevere in refusing every thing that comes from our hand. 7 ' Farinello fell on his knee before the king, and begged him graciously to withhold this honour, at least till he could have the proofs of the genuine nobility of his blood fie prove del sangue) transmitted him from home.” I have already performed the part of a surgeon,“returned the king,” and have found that thy blood is good;" and then with his own hand fixed the cross upon his breast. He afterwards received the order with all due formality from the grand master, in the convent of the ladies of Comthury of Calatrava, among the archives whereof the originals of it are preserved.

The world were not a little surprised at the elevation of Farinello. But to those who looked narrowly into his moral character it was no wonder at all; and they rejoiced at it. He had nothing in. him of what are called the airs of a courtier. He enjoyed the favour of the monarch more in being serviceable to others, than in turning it to his own emolument. When right and equity spoke in behalf of any one, that person might be sure of his interest with the king; but, if the case was reversed, he was immoveable as a rock. One of the great men applied to him once for his recommendation to be appointed viceroy of Peru, and offered him a present of 400,000 piastres by way of inducement. Another sent him a_ casket filled with gold, desiring no other return than his friendship. He generously spurned at the proposals of both. General Montemar had brought with him from Italy a great number of musicians and other artists, who, on the disgrace of that officer, were all left destitute of bread. Farinello took them into his protection, and furnished them with the means of gaining a livelihood. Among them was Jacob Campana Bonavera, whom he placed as assistant to the machinist Pavia, and afterwards promoted him to the inspectorship of the royal theatre. Theresa Castellini of Milan, the singer who had been called by queen Barbara to Madrid, and who at that time had a greater disposition than qualification for the art, he took under his instruction, and completed her for her employment In the dreadful distresses that ensued upon the earthquake at Lisbon, when the vocal performers and dancers implored his assistance, to the collection he made for them from the royal family and his friends, he added two thousand doubloons from his own private purse. Disposed as he was to be liberal in his bounty towards others, he found it no less difficult to ask for any thing that had reference to himself. It was not by his recommendation, but by his own deserts, that his brother Riccardo was promoted to the office of commissary at war for the marine department. This Riccardo died in 1756, in the flower of his age. He had been master of the band in the service of the duke of Wurtemberg; and a musical work printed at London is a proof of his force and skill in composition.

He was also grateful and generous towards every one that had shewn him any kindness. Never was he heard to speak ill of any man; and when he was injured, he magnanimously overlooked it. There are even examples of his heaping favours on some that shewed themselves envious and malignant towards him. To a Spanish nobleman who murmured that the king testified so much munificence to a castrato, he made no other return than by procuring for his son a place he applied for in the army, and delivering to him himself the king’s order for his appointment. He was in general extremely circumspect not to distinguish himself by any thing by which he might excite the envy and jealousy of the nation against him. Hence it was, that he constantly declined accepting the comthury of the order of Calatrava, which the king had so frequently offered him; beseeching him rather to bestow it on one of his deserving subjects. His generous way of thinking was not unnoticed by the Spaniards. Every one courted his friendship. The grandees of the kingdom, the foreign and domestic ministers, vouchsafed him their visits, and he was never wanting in due respect for their civilities. Towards persons of inferior stations he was always condescending and friendly .

To put away all suspicion of self-interested views, he made it a condition in the disbursements for the entertainments of the king and queen, that all accounts should pass through the hands of a treasurer appointed for that purpose, which were always with the utmost exactitude en-.­tered in a book. He was zealously devoted to the Roman catholic religion. He kept his domestic chaplain at London, as he had obtained a permission from Benedict XIV. to have a portable altar during his residence there, and to have mass celebrated at it in the chapel in his house. To this ecclesiastic he always gave precedence on all occasions. Indeed, while in England, he ate flesh on Fridays and Saturdays; but then he had a licence for it from Rome. Who would have thought that so brilliant a success would be brought to an end in the course of a very short period? King Ferdinand and queen Barbara were both of them in the flower of their age; both healthy and strong. Yet death carried them off in a short space, one after the other. The queen went first, and left Farinello her collection of music and her harpsichords, as a token of regard. The king, who loved her tenderly, fell into a deep dejection of spirits. To get away from the doleful sounds of the death-bells, he retired to the pleasure-house of villa Viciosa, where his excessive melancholy, after a space of fourteen days, laid him on the bed of sickness. Farinello was called to him the day after his departure from Madrid, and never quitted him till he was no more. He died the 10th of August, 1759, of a rapid decline, in. the 46th year of his age, after a sickness of eleven months from the death of the queen.

The loss of such a friend, and the consequences of it, were extremely distressing to Farinello. The king had hardly closed his eyes, but the favourite’s apartments were as solitary as a desert. Friends and acquaintance, whom he had loaded with benefits, now turned their backs upon him, and a general revolution took place in his affairs. Two days after the king’s death he returned to Madrid, and there remained till the arrival of king Charles from Italy. He went as far as Saragossa to ineet him, to thank him for the assurance he had given him of continuing his appointment. The king received him very graciously, and confirmed the promise he had already made him the foregoing year, at the same time adding, that he was induced to this by his moderation and discretion, and that he was thoroughly convinced that he had never abused the king’s partiality for him. After a stay of three weeks at Saragossa, he bent his course towards Italy, without returning to Madrid, where he had commissioned a friend to send his baggage after him. In Italy his first care was to wait upon don Philippo duke of Parma, and the king of Naples, who gave him a very gracious reception. The joy which his old friends and patrons testified on his retarn to Naples is not to be described. After remaining here six months, he repaired to Naples by the way of Bologna, where he passed the rest of his days in tranquillity.

In the year 1769, when the emperor Joseph II. was travelling through Bologna, though his stay was to be but short in that place, one of the first questions he asked was, where Farinello had taken up his abode? and on being told that he dwelt just without the city, he testified some displeasure; and added, that a man who possessed so great a force of genius, had never injured any one, but had done all the good that lay in his power to mankind, was worthy of every token of respect that could be paid him. But the emperor on his return stopped longer at Bologna, and Farinello had the honour of conversing with him often for a length of time, and quite alone.

In the very lap of ease, rest was a stranger to Farinello’s bosom. As some veteran mariner, long accustomed to great and perilous voyages, cannot endure the tediousness of abiding in harbour, so it was with Farinello' s active mind. He fell the effects of that melancholy to which he was disposed by nature, growing on him from day to day, and which was nourished and augmented by the continual sight of the portraits of his distant and for the most part deceased friends, with which his apartments were adorned. His voice continued clear and melodious to the last. He still sung frequently, and he alone perceived the depredations of time, while his friends who heard him observed no defect. During the three last weeks of his life, like what is fabled of the dying swan, he sung almost every day. He died the 16th of September, 1782, of a fever, in the 78th year of his age, without the least abatement of his intellectual powers throughout his illness. He left no wealth behind him; as ivhile he was in Spain he had always lived up to his annual income, and what remained over to him while in Italy, he shared among his relations and friends and the necessitous, during his life-time. His land, his pleasure-house at Bologna, and all the rest of his property, among which were several harpsichords of great value, and the music he had inherited from the queen, he left to his eldest sister, who was married to Giovanni Domenicq Pisani, a Neapolitan. His corpse was interred in the church of the Capuchins, which stands on a hill before Bologna. He was of a very large stature, strong built, of a fair complexion, and a lively aspect. His picture, which is to be seen among the portraits and works of the famous vocal artists collected by father Martini, in the library of the minorites at Bologna, is a perfect likeness.

, an eminent French musician, born in 1660, in the former part 'of his life had been prebendary and chapel-master of the cathedral church of Strasburgh, but afterwards became grand chaplain and chapel-master in the cathedral of Meaux. He published a work entitled “Prodromus Musicalis, on elevations et motets a voix seule, avec une Basse continue,” 2 vols. fol. the second edition in 1702; but his most useful book was his “Dictionnaire de Musique,” Amst. 1703, fol. at the end of which is a catalogue of authors, ancient and modern, to the amount of nine hundred, who have written on music, divided into classes, with many curious observations relating to the history of music, which have been of great service to musical writers and historians. Grassineau’s Dictionary, published in 1740, is not much more than a translation of Brossard' s work; it was also of great service to Rousseau, whose eloquence has certainly furnished us with a more ^pleasant book, yet Rousseau is acknowledged to be most correct where he most closely copies Brossard. Brossard died in 1730. He had a numerous library of music, which he presented to Louis XIV. who gave himself a pension of 1200 livres, and the same sum to hfs niece.

, physician in ordinary to Louis XIII. obtained from that king, in 1626, letters patent for the establishment of the royal garden of medicinal plants, of which he was the first director. He immediately set about preparing the ground, and then furnished it with upwards of 2000 plants. The list of them may be seen in his “Description du jardin royale,” 1636, 4to. Richelieu, Seguier, and Bullion, contributed afterwards to enrich itHe composed a treatise on the virtues of plants, 1628, 8vo, and before this, in 1623, one on the plague. He died in 1641.

, a French writer of great learning, was born at Dijon, in 1709, and became a counsellor of parliament, in 1730, and president a worker in 1742. During the leisure which his public employments afforded, he cultivated most of the sciences, and was allowed to be well acquainted with all. Voltaire only has attacked his literary reputation, and this his countrymen ascribe to the malice which that writer was seldom anxious to conceal. Buffon, on the contrary, regarded him as a scholar of the first rank, an acute philosopher, and an original and valuable writer; nor was he less estimable in private life. In 1774 he was appointed president of the parliament of Burgundy, but died soon after, at Paris, in 1777, whither he had come to visit his married daughter. He was a member of the academy of Dijon, of the inscriptions and belles lettres, and other learned societies. He wrote: 1. “Lettres sur la Decouverte de la ville d'Herculaneum,” 1750, 8vo. 2. “Histoire des Navigations aux Terres Australes,” 1756, 2 vols. 4to, in which he endeavoured to prove the existence of a southern continent, which subsequent navigators have disproved. 3. “Du culte des dieux Fetiches, ou parallele de l'ancienne idolatrie avec celle des peuples de Nigritie,” 1760, 12mo, a piece which has been improperly attributed to Voltaire. 4. “Traite de la formation mecanique des Langues,” 1765, 2 vols. 12mo, in which he attempts a general etymological system founded on the mechanical formation of articulate sounds; but his countrymen allow that he leans too much to paradox, which certainly has long been an extensive branch of French philosophy. 5. “Histoire de la Republique Romaine dans la cours du VII siecle, par Salluste,” Dijon, 3 vols. 4to. This may be accounted his principal work, and was long his principal employment. He was so sensible of the loss of Sal lust’s principal work, that he resolved to collect his fragments with greater care than had ever been employed before; and by the most accurate arrangement to trace out as near as possible the plan and chief features of that work, and then to connect these fragments in the manner of Freinshemius in his “Fragmenta Livii.” But as De Brosses soon became sensible of the difficulty of assimilating his Latin diction to that of Sallust, he changed his first design, and resolved on translating both the fragments and his author’s histories of the Catilinarian and Jugurthine wars into French, and to attempt to supply the lost work from other ancient writers. The first volume opens with a preface containing remarks on the various methods of writing history, and some information concerning Roman names, ranks, magistracies, and elections. The body of the work itself begins with a translation of, and commentary on, Sallust’s Jugurthine war. The notes subjoined to this part treat chiefly of the geography and population of Africa, and the text is illustrated by a map of Africa, a plan of Meteilus’s march against Jugurtha, and its illustration by a military connoisseur. After this follows the restoration of Sallust’s five books, continued in vol. II. comprizing the war with Mithridates: a description of the Pontus Euxinus, with the adjacent countries; the Gladiatorian war, raised by Spartacus, and the war of Greta. The third volume contains a translation of the Catilinarian war, with its sequel, illustrated with historical and political notes; Sallust’s two letters to Caesar, commonly styled “Orat. de Rep. ordinanda,” which De Brosses considers as genuine; a very minute collection of all the notices of Sallust’s life, writings, gardens, buildings, and even of the remains discovered in later times. The whole concludes with the abb Cassagne’s “Essay on the Art of composing History, and on the works of Sailust.‘-’ Industrious as M. de Brosses has been in this work, we believe that in the life of Sailust, at least, he has been improved upon by Henry Stuart, esq. in his late elaborate publication,” The works of Sailust,“1806, 2 vols. 4to, Besides these, De Brosses contributed many learned papers to the Paris and Dijon memoirs, but his family disown 3 vols. of” Lettres historiques et critiques sur l'Italie," published in 1799 in his name.

, of France, was born at Lyons in 1671. He was at first a Jesuit, but afterwards an advocate, a member of the academy of Lyons, and librarian of the public library there. In 1716, he published the works of Boileau, in 2 vols. 4to, with historical illustrations: and, after that, the works of Regnier. He reformed the text of both these authors from the errors of the preceding editions, and seasoned his notes with many useful and curious anecdotes of men and things. His only fault, the fault of almost all commentators, is, that he did not use the collections he had made with sufficient sobriety and judgment; and has inserted many things, no ways necessary to illustrate his authors, and some that are even frivolous. He wrote also “L'Histoire abrege*e de la ville de Lyon,” with elegance and precision, 1711, 4to; and died there in 1746. He had a friendship and correspondence with many of the literati, and particularly with Rousseau the poet, and Voltaire. The latter used to tell him, that he “resembled Atticus. who kept terms, and even cultivated friendship, at the same time with Caesar and Pompey.” The enmity between Rousseau and Voltaire is well known.

, an eminent classical scholar and editor, was born at Tanay, a small village of the Nivernois, in 1722, and died at Paris, Feb. 12, 1789, at the age of 67. In his youth he made it his practice to write notes in every book that he read; and the margins of severaHn his library were entirely filled with them. Until his last moment he pursued the same 'method of study. All these he arranged wonderfully in his memory; and if it had been possible after his death to have put his papers in that order which he alone knew, they would have furnished materials for several curious volumes. With this method, and continued labour for twelve hours a day, the abbé Brotier acquired an immense stock of various knowledge. Except the mathematics, to which it appears he gave little application, he was acquainted with every thing; natural history, chemistry, and even medicine. It was his rule to read Hippocrates and Solomon once every year in their original languages. These he said were the best books for curing the diseases of the body and the mind. But the belles lettres were his grand pursuit. He had a good knowledge of all the dead languages, but particularly the Latin, of which he was perfectly master: he was besides acquainted with most, of the languages of Europe. This knowledge, however extensive, was not the only part in which he excelled. He was well versed in ancient and modern history, in chronology, coins, medals, inscriptions, and the customs of antiquity, which had always been objects of his study. He had collected, a considerable quantity of materials for writing a new history of France, and it is much to be regretted that he was prevented from undertaking that work. The akl>6 Brotier recalls to our remembrance those laborious writers, distinguished for their learning, Petau, Sirmond, Labbu, Cossart, Hardouin, Souciet, &c. who have done so much honour to the college of Louis XIV. in which he himself was educated, and where fre lived several years as librarian; and his countrymen say he is the last link of that chain of illustrious men, who have succeeded one another without interruption, for near two centuries. On the dissolution of the order of Jesuits, the abbe Brotier found an asylum equally peaceful and agreeable in the house of Mr. de la Tour, a printer, eminent in his business, who has gained from all connoisseurs a just tribute of praise for those works which have come from his press. It was in this friendly retirement that the abbe Brotier spent the last twenty-six years of his life, and that he experienced a happiness, the value of which he knew how to appreciate, which arose from the care, attention, and testimonies of respect, bestowed upon him both by Mr. and Mrs. de la Tour. It was there also that he published those works which will render his name immortal; an edition of Tacitus, enriched not only with notes and learned dissertations, but also with supplements, which sometimes leave the reader in a doubt, whether the modern writer is not a successful rival of the ancient: this was first published in 1771, 4 vols. 4to, and reprinted in 1776, in 7 vols. fcvo. He published also in 1779, 6 vols. 12mo, an edition of Pliny the naturalist, which is only a' short abridgment of what he had prepared to correct and enlarge the edition of Hardouin, and to give an historical series of all the new discoveries made since the beginning of this century; an immense labour, which bespeaks the most extensive erudition. To these two editions, which procured the abbe Brotier the applauses of all the literati in Europe, he added in 1778, 8vo, an edition of Rapin on gardens, at the end of which he has subjoined a history of gardens, written in Latin with admirable elegance, and abounding in the most delightful imagery: for the abbe was not one of those pedants, according to the expression of the poet, “herisses de Grec & de Latin;” he possessed a lively imagination, and a fine taste, with clearness and perspicuity; and above all, a sound judgment, which never suffered him to adopt in writing any thing that was not solid, beautiful, and true. His other works are, 1. “Examen de PApologie de M. I 7 Abbe de Prades,” 1753, 8vo. 2. “Conclusiones ex universa Theologia,” 1754, 4to. 3. “Traite des Monnoies Romanies, Grecques, et Hebr. compares avec les Monnoies de France, pour l'intelligencederEcriture Sainte, et de tous les auteurs Grecs, et Remains,” 1760, 4to. 4. “Prospectus d'une edit. Lat. de Tacite,” 1761,5 vols. 4to. 5, “Supplementa, lib. 7. loAnnal. Taciti,” 17 v 55, 8vo. 6.“Cl. viri de la Caille vita”7 1763, 4to. 7. “Phaedri Fabularum, lib. v. cum notis et suppl. access. Parallela J. de la Fontaine Fabulse,” 1785, 12mo. 8. “Memoire du Levant” 1780, and an edition of“Brumoy’s Theatre,” 1785, 13 vols. 8vo. In 1790 his nephew published his “Parolles Memorables,” a work of which Mr. Seward has made great use in his “Anecdotes.”

We shall conclude this account of the amiable abbe with his character as drawn by his friend the abbe de Fontenay. “That intimate and sincere friendship,” says he, “which united me to the abbe Brotier, gratitude, for the services which he did me, his talents and his virtues, will always endear his memory tome; and I may justly say, that his death, though lamented by many good men, was lamented by none more deeply than by me. However great may have been the merit of this learned man, not less conspicuously eminent for the qualities of his heart than for those of his head, one must have been intimate with him to form a just and true idea of his character. As often as my avocations would permit, I indulged myself in the pleasure of his company, and many delightful hours I have spent with him. Humble and unassuming, modest, and even to a degree of timidity that caused him to blush when the least encomium was passed upon him; good-tempered, plain in his manner, and giving himself up to society with the smiles and simplicity of a child, his conversation was engaging, and always instructive when it turned upon subjects of literature or science. Widely differing in this respect from those men of letters who are misers, if we may say so, of their knowledge, and who seem to hoard it only for themselves, or to make an ostentatious display of it in some publication, the abbe* Brotier readily replied to the questions of those who sought information from him, and instructed those around him with the utmost affability and condescension. I confess,” continues the abbe Fontenay, “that need of consulting him induced me often to visit him; and I can declare that whatever questions I put to him, I never found him in one instance wrong. He either satisfied me immediately respecting my queries, or pointed out those books in which I found what I wanted to know. He left a nephew of the same name, who is in the church. He is pursuing his uncle’s steps in the same departments of erudition, and has already published works which sufficiently evince the progress he has made.”

, a divine of great eminence for his extensive knowledge in Hebrew and rabbinical learning, was descended from an ancient family, and born in 1549, at Oldbury, in the county of Salop. Dr. Lightfoot says, that it is uncertain in what school he was instructed in grammar, but, according to the writers of the life of Bernard Gilpin, he was brought up in the school founded by that excellent man at Houghton, and by him sent to Cambridge. Gilpin is said to have become acquainted with him by accident, when he was a poor boy travelling on the Oxford road, and finding him a good scholar, took the charge of his farther education. The biographer of Gilpin adds, apparently upon slender foundation, that Broughton acted with ingratitude to Gilpin, when the latter was old and infirm, and persuaded the bishop of Durham to give him a living intended for Gilpin.

In 1588, he published a piece, entitled “The Consent of Scriptures.” This was a work in which he was employed several years; and which, therefore, he used to call his “little book of grest pains.” It is a kind of scripture chronology, and scripture genealogies, and appears to have been compiled with great labour. It was dedicated to queen Elizabeth, to whom it was presented by himself, on her inauguration day, Nov. 17, 1589 . He appears to have had some assistance in it from Speed, who overlooked the press, and compiled those genealogies which are prefixed to the old Bibles; but Broughton certainly directed and digested them. Speed is said to have owed many obligations to Broughton, and had a vast number of his manuscripts, which, for whatever reason, he burnt. But, to return to the “Consent of Scripture;” it excited much attention at its first publication, but was strongly opposed by Dr. Reynolds at Oxford. This gave great offc-nce to Mr. Broughton, who had a very earnest and absurd desire to have the dispute between him and Dr. Reynolds, concerning the scripture chronology, settled by public authority. He addressed on this subject queen Elizabeth, Dr. Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury, and Dr. Aylmer, bishop of London. His work was opposed, not only at Oxford, but at Cambridge, where Mr. Lively, a professor, read publicly against it. He was, therefore, induced to read lectures in defence of his performance, which he did first in St. Paul’s, at the east end of the church, and afterwards in a large room in Cheapside, and in Mark-lane .

He continued several years in London, where he procured many friends. One of these was Mr. William Cotton, whose son Rowland, who was afterwards knighted, he instructed in the Hebrew tongue. In 1589 Mr. Broughton went over into Germany, accompanied by Mr. Alexander Top, a young gentleman who had put himself under his care, and travelled with him, that he might continually receive the benefit of his instructions. He was some time at Frankfort, where he had a long dispute in the Jewish synagogue, with rabbi Elias, on the truth of the Christian religion. He appears to have been very solicitous for the conversion of the Jews, and his taste for rabbinical and Hebrew studies naturally led him to take pleasure in the conversation of those learned Jews whom he occasionally met with. In the course of his travels, he had also disputes with the papists; but in hig contests both with them and with the Jews, he was not very attentive to the rules either of prudence or politeness. It appears, that in 1590 he was at Worms; but in what other places is not mentioned. In 1591 he returned again to England, and met at London with his antagonist Dr. Reynolds; and they referred the -decision of the controversy between them, occasioned by his “Consent of Scripture,” to Dr. Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury, and Dr. Aylmer, bishop of London. Another piece which he published, entitled “An Explication of the article of Christ’s Descent to Hell,” was a source of much controversy, though his opinion on this subject is now generally received. Two of his opponents in this controversy were archbishop Whitgift and bishop Bilson. He addressed on this subject “An Oration to the Geneveans,” which was first published in Greek, at Mentz, by Albinus. In this piece he treats the celebrated Beza with much severity. In 1592 he was in Germany again, and published a piece called “The Sinai Sight,” which he dedicated to the earl of Essex, and had the odd whim of having it engraved on brass, at a considerable expence. About the year 1596, rabbi Abraham Reuben wrote an epistle from Constantinople to Mr. Broughton, which was directed to him in London; but he was then in Germany. He appears to have continued abroad till the death of queen Elizabeth; and during his residence in foreign countries, cultivated an acquaintance with Scaliger, Raphelengius, Junius, Pistorius, Serrarius, and other eminent and learned men. He was treated with particular favour by the archbishop of Mentz, to whom he dedicated his translation of the Prophets into Greek. He was also offered a cardinal’s hat, if he wo<;ld have embraced the Romish religion. But that offer he retused to accept, and returned again to England, soon after the accession of king James I. In 1603 he preached before prince Henry, at Oatlands, upon the Lord!s Prayer. In 1607 the new translation of the Bible was begun; and Mr. Broughton’s friends expressed much surprize that he was not employed in that work. It might probably be disgust on this account, which again occasioned him to go abroad; and during his stay there, he was for some time puncher to the English at Middleburgh. But finding his health decline, 'having a consumptive disorder, which he found to increase, he returned again to England in November, 1611. He lodged in London, during the winter, at a friend’s house in Cannon-street; but in the spring he was removed, for the benefit of the air, to the house of another friend, at Tottenham High-cross, where he died of a pulmonary consumption on the 4th of August, 1612, in the sixty-third year of his age. During his illness he made such occasional discourses and exhortations to his friends, as his strength would enable him; and he appears to have had many friends and admirers’ even to the last. His corpse was brought to London, attended by great numbers of people, many of whom had put themselves in mourning for him; and interred in St. Amholin’s church, where his funeral sermon was preached by the rev. James Speght, B. D. afterwards D. D. minister of the church in Milkstreet, London. Lightfoot mentions it as a report, that the bishops would not suffer this sermon to be published; but it was afterwards printed at the end of his works.

His person was comely and graceful, and his countenance expressive of studiousness and gravity. His indefatigable attention to his studies, gave him an air of austerity; and, at times, there appears to have been no inconsiderable degree of moroseness in his deportment: notwithstanding which, he is represented as behaving in a very kind and affable manner to his friends, and as being very pleasant in conversation with them, especially at his meals. He would also be free and communicative to any persons who desired to learn of him, but very angry with scholars, if they did not readily comprehend his meaning. Open impiety and profaneness were always opposed by him with great zeal and courage. He was much dissatisfied, as appears from several passages in his works, that his great learning had not procured him more encouragement, and he evidently thought that he had a just claim to some considerable preferment. He was unquestionably a man of very uncommon erudition, but -extremely deficient in taste and judgment. He was also of a testy and choleric temper, had a high opinion of his own learning and abilities, was extremely dogmatical, and treated those who differed from him in opinion with much rudeness and scurrility; though some allowance must be made for the age in which he lived, in which that mode of writing was much more common among divines and scholars than it is at present. From the general tenor of his life and of his works, and the opinion formed of him by those who were the best acquainted with him, it seems equitable to conclude, that, with all his failings, he meant well; nor do we apprehend that there is any sufficient ground for the extreme severity with which the late Mr. Gilpin has treated him in his “Lite of Bernard Gilpin.” He translated the Prophetical writings into Greek, and the Apocalypse into Hebrew. He was desirous of translating the whole New Testament into Hebrew, which he thought would have contributed much to the conversion of the Jews, if he had met with proper encouragement. And he relates, that a learned Jew with whom he conversed, once said to him, “O that you would set over all your New Testament into such Hebrew as you speak to me, you should turn all our nation.” Most of his works were collected together, and printed at London in 1662, under the following title: “The Works of the great Albionean divine, renowned in many nations for rare skill in Salems and Athens tongues, and familiar acquaintance with all Rabbinical learning, Mr. Hugh Broughton.” This edition o'f his works, though bound in one large volume, folio, is divided into four tomes. Dr. Lightfoot, who was himself a great rmister of Hebrew and rabbinical learning, says, that in the writings of Broughton, “the serious and impartial student of them will find these two things. First, as much light given in scripture, especially in the difficultest things thereof, as is to be found in any one author whatsoever; nay, it may be, in all authors together. And, secondly, a winning and enticing enforcement to read the scriptures with a seriousness and searching more than ordinary. Amongst those that have studied his books, multitudes might be named that have thereby grown proficients so far, as that they have attained to a most singular, and almost incredible skill and readiness, in his way, in the understanding of the Bible, though otherwise unlearned men. Nay, some such, that, by the mere excitation of his books, have set to the study of the Hebrew tongue, and come to a very great measure of knowledge in it; nay, a woman might be named that hath done it. This author’s writings do carry with them, I know not what, a kind of holy and happy fascination, that the serious reader of them is won upon, by a sweet violence, to look in the scripture with all possible scrulinousness, and cannot choose. Let any one but set to read him in good earnest, and, if he find not, that he sees much more in scripture than ever he could see before, and that he is stirred up 'to search much more narrowly into the scripture than ever he was before, he misseth of that which was never missed of before by any that took that course, if multitude of experiences may have any credit.” It will justly be thought in the present age, that Dr. Lightfoot formed'too high an opinion of the value of Broughton’s writings; but in whatever estimation they may now be held, the celebrity of Broughton in his own time, and his extraordinary learning, gave him a reasonable claim to some memorial in a work of this kind. Many of his theological Mss. are preserved in the British Museum, of which a list is given in Ayscough’s catalogue.

, a popish ecclesiastical historian, was born at Great Stukely in Huntingdonshire, and studied for some time at Oxford, but it does not appear that he entered any college, and only seems to have resided there for the purpose of consulting the public library. He received his regular education at the English college at Rheims, and took priest’s orders in 1593. He was afterwards sent into England as a missionary, and promoted the popish interest as far as lay in his power, without giving public offence. He died in 1634, and was buried in the church of Great Stukely. His principal works were, “An Ecclesiastical History of Great Britain; from the Nativity to the conversion of the Saxons,” Doway, 1633, fol. replete with legendary matter;“A True Memorial of the ancient, most holy, and religious state of Great Britain, &c. in the time of the Britons, and primitive church of the Saxons,” 1650, 8vo; and, “Monasticon Britannicum,” 1655, 8vo.

, a learned divine, and one of the original writers of the Biographia Britannica, was born at London, July 5, 1704, in the parish of St. Andrew, Holborn; of which parish his father was minister. At an early age he was sent to Eton-school, where he soon distinguished himself by the acuteness of his genius and the studiousness of his disposition. Being superannuated on this foundation, he removed, about 1722, to the university of Cambridge; and, for the sake of a scholarship, entered himself of Gonville and Caius college. Here two of the principal objects of his attention were, the acquisition of the knowledge of the modern languages, and the study of the mathematics under the famous professor Sanderson. May 28, 1727, Mr. Broughton, after taking the degree of B. A. was admitted to deacon’s orders. In the succeeding year, Sept. 22, he was ordained priest, and proceeded to the degree of M. A. At this time he removed from the university to the curacy of Offley in Hertfordshire. In 1739, he was instituted to the rectory of Stepington, otherwise Stibmgton, in the county of Huntingdon, on the presentation of John duke of Bedford, and was appointed one of that nobleman’s chaplains. Soon after, he was chosen reader to the Temple, by which means he became known to bishop Sherlock, then master of it, who conceived so high an opinion of our author’s merit, that, in 1744, this eminent prelate presented Mr. Broughton to the valuable vicarage of Bedminster, near Bristol, together with the chapels of St. Mary Redcliff, St. Thomas, and Abbot’s Leigh, annexed. Some short time after, he was collated, by the same patron, to the prebend of Bedminster and Redcliff, in the cathedral of Salisbury. Upon receiving this preferment, he removed from London to Bristol, where he married the daughter of Thomas Harris, clerk of that city, by whom he had seven children, six of whom survived him. He resided on his living till his death, which happened Dec. 21, 1774, in the 71st year of his age. He was interred in the church of St. Mary RedclifF.

From the time of Mr. Broughton’s quitting the university, till he was considerably advanced in life, he was engaged in a variety of publications; and some little time before his death, composed “A short view of the principles upon which Christian churches require, of their respective clergy, Subscription to established Articles of Religion;” but this work never appeared in print. He possessed, likewise, no inconsiderable talent for poetry, as is evident from many little fugitive pieces in manuscript, found among his papers; and particularly, from two unfinished tragedies, both written at the age of seventeen. During his residence in London, he enjoyed the esteem and friendship of most of the literary men of his time. He was a great lover of music, particularly the ancient; which introduced him to the knowledge and acquaintance of Mr. Handel, whom he furnished with the words for many of his compositions. In his public character, Mr. Brougbton was distinguished by an active zeal for the Christian cause, joined with moderation. In private life, he was devoted to the interests and happiness of his family; and was of a mild, cheerful, and liberal temper. This disposition, which is not always united with eminent literary abilities, attended him "to his grave. In 1778, a posthumous volume of sermons, on select subjects, was published by his son, the rev. Thomas Broughton, M. A. of Wadham college, Oxford, and vicar of Tiverton, near Bath.

, viscount Brouncker, of Castle Lyons in Ireland, son of sir William Brouncker, afterwards made viscount in 1645, was born about 1620; and, having received an excellent education, discovered an early genius for mathematics, in which he afterwards became very eminent. He was created M. D. at Oxford, June 23, 1646. In 1657 and 1658, he was engaged in a correspondence on mathematical subjects with Dr. John Wallis, who published the letters in his “Commercium. Epistoiicum,” Oxford, 1658, 4to. He, with others of the nobility and gentry who had adhered to king Charles I. in and about London, signed the remarkable declaration published in April 1660. After the restoration, he was made chancellor to the queen consort, and a commissioner of the navy. He was one of those great men who first formed the royal society, and, by the charter of July 15, 1662, and that of April 22, 1663, was appointed the first president of it: which office he held with great advantage to the society, and honour to himself, till the anniversary election, Nov. 30, 1677. Besides the offices mentioned already, he was master of St. Ratherine’s near the Tower of London; his right to which post, after a long contest between him and sir Robert &tkyns, one of the judges, was determined in his favour, Nov. 1681. He died at his house in St. James’s street, Westminster, April 5, 1684; and was succeeded in his honours by his younger brother Harry, who died Jan. 1687. Of his works, notwithstanding his activity in promoting literature and science, there are few extant. These are: “Experiments on the recoiling of Guns,” published in Dr. Sprat’s History of the Royal Society; “An algebraical paper upon the squaring of the Hyperbola,” published in the Philosophical Transactions. (See Lowthorp’s Abr. vol. I. p. 10, &c.); “Several Letters to Dr. James Usher, archbishop of Armagh,” annexed to that primate’s life by Dr. Parr; and “A translation of the Treatise of Des Cartes, entitled Musicae Compendium,” published without his name, but enriched with a variety of observations, which shew that he was deeply skilled in the theory of the science of music. Although he agrees with his author almost throughout the book, he asserts that the geometrical is to be preferred to the arithmetical division; and with a view, as it is presumed, to the farther improvement of the “Systema Participato,” he proposes a division of the diapason by sixteen mean proportionals into seventeen equal semitones; the method of which division is exhibited by him in an algebraic process, and also in logarithms. The “Systema Participato,” which is mentioned by Bontempi, consisted in the division of the diapason, or octave, into twelve equal semitones, by eleven mean proportionals. Descartes, we are informed, rejected this division for reasons which are far from being satisfactory. Mr. Park, in his edition of lord Orford’s “Royal and Noble Authors,” to which we are frequently indebted, points out an original commission, among the Sloanian Mss. from Charles II. dated Whitehall, Dec. 15, 1674, appointing lord Brouncker and others to inquire into, and to report their opinions of a method of finding the longitude, devised by Sieur de St. Pierre.

, a French Protestant and martyr, was born at Nismes, in 1647, He was an advocate, and distinguished by his 'pleadings at Castres and Toulouse; and it was at his house that the deputies of the Protestant churches assembled in 1683: where they took a resolution to continue to assemble, although their churches were demolished. The execution of this project occasioned violent conflicts, seditions, executions, and massacres, which ended at length in an amnesty on the part of Lewis XIV. Brousson retired then to Nismes; but, fearing to be apprehended with the principal authors of this project, who do not seem to have been comprised within the amnesty, he became a refugee at Geneva first, and thence at Lausanne. He shifted afterwards from town to town, and kingdom to kingdom, to solicit the compassion of Protestant princes towards his suffering brethren in France. Returning to his own country, he travelled through several provinces, exercised some time the ministry in the Cevennes, appeared at Orange, and passed to Berne, in order to escape his pursuers. He was at length taken at Oleron, in 1698, and removed to Montpellier; where, being convicted of having formerly held secret correspondence with the enemies of the state, and of having preached in defiance of the edicts, he was broke upon the wheel the same year. He was a man of great eloquence as well as zeal, greatly esteemed among strangers, and regarded as a martyr by those of his own persuasion. The states of Holland added six hundred florins, as a pension for his widow, to four hundred which had been allowed to her husband. His writings being principally those which, arose out of the circumstances in which the reformed church were then placed, we shall refer to Moreri for the exact titles and dates, and give only the subjects, namely: 1. “The state of the reformed in France.” 2. “Letters to the French clergy in favour of the reformed religion.” 3. “Letters from the Protestants in France to all other Protestants,” printed and circulated at the expence of the elector of Brandenburg. 4. “Letters to the Roman Catholics.” 5. “A summary relation of the wonders, wrought by God in the Cevennes and Lower Languedoc, for the consolation of his church.” 6. A volume of Sermons. 7. “Remarks on Amelotte’s translation of the New Testament;” and some religious tracts, which he published for circulation in France.

, an eminent French naturalist, was born at Montpellier, Feb. 28, 1761, where his father was a reputable schoolmaster, and soon discovered in him an insatiable thirst of knowledge, which we may conclude he assisted him in gratifying. At the early age of eighteen he was appointed by the university of Montpellier to fill a professor’s chair, and six years after he was admitted a member of the academy of sciences by an unanimous vote, a case which had not occurred from the foundation of that learned body, but their choice appeared amply justified by the several dissertations on natural history, botany, and medicine, which he published. It was his earnest wish to establish the system of Linnæus more extensively in France. With this view, as well as for his own improvement, he went to Paris, and examined the collections and museums, but not finding sufficient materials for his purpose, he determined to visit the most celebrated foreign collections, and came first to England, where he was admitted an honorary member of the royal society, and where he began his labours on the celebrated work on fishes. On his return to Paris, he was appointed perpetual secretary of the society of agriculture, which the intendant Berthier de Sauvigny resigned for him. In 1789 he was appointed a member of the electoral college of Paris, and like the other electors, was to supply such vacancies as were occasioned by any interruptions in the exercise of the office of magistracy; and the day it was his turn to go to the Hotel de Ville, he saw his friend and protector, Berthier, barbarously murdered by the populace. Broussonet was then ordered to superintend the provisions of the capital, and was frequently“in danger of his life at that turbulent period. In 1791 he had a seat in the legislative assembly, but quitted Paris the year following for his native city, from which he was soon obliged to make his escape, and after many dangers, arrived at Madrid, where he was gladly received, and liberally assisted by the literati of that city. There, however, the French emigrants were so enraged at his having filled any office under the revolutionary government, that they obliged him to leave Madrid, and soon after, Lisbon, to which he had removed. At last he had an opportunity of going out as physician to an embassy which the United States sent to the emperor of Morocco, and on this occasion, his friend sir Joseph Banks, hearing of his distresses, remitted him a credit for a thousand pounds. After his arrival at Morocco, he employed all his leisure hours in extending his botanical knowledge, and learning that his native country was recovering from its late anarchy, he solicited and obtained permission to return, when the directory appointed him consul at the Canaries. In consequence of this he resided for two years at Teneriffe. In 1796, on his return, he was admitted a member of the Institute, and again became professor of botany at Montpellier, with the direction of the botanical garden. He was afterwards chosen a member of the legislative body, but died July 27, 1807, at Montpellier, of an apoplectic stroke. It was to him that France owes the introduction of the Merino sheep, and Angola goats. His publications are: 1.” Varise positiones circa Respirationem,“Montpellier, 1778. 2.” Ichthyologia, sistens Piscium descriptiones et icones,“London, 1782, containing descriptions of the most rare fishes. 3.” Essai sur Phistoire naturelle de quelques especes de Moines, decrites a la maniere de Linnee,“1784, 8vo, This is the translation only of a Latin satire on the monks, the original of which appeared in Germany, in 1783. 4.” Annee rurale, ou calendrier a I'usage des cultivateurs,“Paris, 1787-8, 2 vols. 12mo. 5.” Notes pour servir a Thistoire de l‘ecole de medicine de Montpellier pendant l’an VI.“Montpellier, J 1 9 5, 8vo. 6.” La Feuille dn cultivateur," 1788, and following years, 8 vols. 4to, which he conducted with Messrs. Parmentier, Dubois, and Lefebure. He contributed also a great many dissertations to the academy of sciences, the society of agriculture, &c. and left many works in manuscript.

, a celebrated painter, according to some, was born at Oudenarde, in Flanders, or according to others, at Haerlem, in Holland, in 1608. His parents were of the poorer sort. His mother sold to the country people bonnets and handkerchiefs, on which Adrian, when almost in infancy, used to paint flowers and birds, and while thus employed, was discovered by Francis Hals, an eminent artist, who, charmed with the ease and taste he displayed in his art, proposed to take him as an apprentice, and Brouwer did not long hesitate about accepting such an dffer. His master soon discovered his superior talents, and separated him from his companions, that he might profit the better by him, locked him up in a garret, and compelled him to work, while he nearly starved him, but some pieces he painted by stealth, which probably irritated his jailor to be more watchful of him. By the advice, however, of Adrian Van Ostade, one of his companions, he contrived to make his escape, and took refuge in a church. There, almost naked, and not knowing where to go, he was recognised by some person, who brought him back to his master, and by means of a suit of clothes and some caresses, effected a temporary reconciliation; but being again subjected to the same mercenary and tyrannical usage, he made his escape a second time, and went to Amsterdam, where he had the happiness to find that his name was well known, and that his works bore a great price. A picture dealer with whom he lodged, gave him an hundred ducatoons for a painting representing gamesters, admirably executed, which Brouwer, who had never possessed so much money, spent in a tavern in the course of ten days. He then returned to his employer, and when asked what he had done with his money, answered that he had got rid of it, that he might be more at leisure; and this unfortunate propensity to alternate work and extravagance marked the whole of his future life, and involved him in many ridiculous adventures and embarrassments unworthy of a man of genius. As soon as ‘he had finished any piece, he offered it for sale; and if it did not produce a stipulated price, he burnt it, and began another with greater care. Possessing a vein of low humour, and engaging, both sober and drunk, in many droll adventures, he removed from Amsterdam to Antwerp, where he was arrested as a spy, and committed to prison. This circumstance introduced him to an acquaintance with the duke d’Aremberg, who, having observed his genius, by some slight sketches drawn with black lead while in custody, requested Rubens to furnish him with materials for painting. Brouwer chose for his subject a groupe of soldiers playing at cards in a corner of the prison; and when the picture was finished, the duke himself was astonished, and Rubens, when he saw it, offered for it the sum of 600 guilders. The duke, however, retained it, and gave the painter a much larger sum. Upon this, Rubens procured his release, and received him into his house; but, uninfluenced by gratitude to his benefactor, he stole away, and returned to the scenes of low debauch, to which he had been formerly accustomed. Being reduced to the necessity of flying from justice, he took refuge in France; and, having wandered through several towns, he was at length constrained by indigence to return to Antwerp, where he was taken ill, and obliged to seek relief in an hospital; and in this asylum of self-procured poverty and distress he died in his 32d year. Rubens lamented his death, and procured for him an honourable interment in the church of the Carmelites.

Such were the talents of Brouwer, that, in the course of a dissipated life, he attained to distinguished excellence in the style of painting which he adopted. His subjects were taken from low life, and copied after nature; such as droll conversations, feasts, taverns, drunken quarrels, boors playing and disputing at cards, or surgeons dressing the wounded. His expression, however, is so lively and characteristic; the management of his colours so surprising; and truth was united with exquisite high finishing, correctness of drawing, and wonderful transparence, to such a degree, that his paintings are more valuable, and afford higher prices, than many works of the most eminent masters. Some of his best works are found at Dusseldorp. His drawings are dispersed in the various cabinets of Europe, Several of his designs have been engraved; and we have some few etchings by himself of subjects usually represented in his pictures, which are signed with the initials of his name, H. B.; Adrian being spelled with an H.

, a learned Jesuit, was born at Arnheim in 1559, and entered among the Jesuits at Cologne in 1580, among whom he was distinguished for his talents. He taught philosophy at Treves, was afterwards rector of the college of Fulde, and chiefly employed at his leisure hours in composing his works, which procured him great reputation, and the esteem of many men of learning, especially cardinal Baronius, who often mentions Brower in his annals of the church, with high praise. He died -at Treves June 2, 1617. His writings are, 1. An edition of “Venantius Fortunattis,” with notes and additions, Cologne, 1624, 4to. 2. “Scholia on the poems of Rabanus Maurus,” in vol. VI. of the works of Maurus. 3. “Antiquitates Fuldenses,” 1612, 4to. 4. “Sidera illustrium et 'S. S. Virorum qui Germaniam lebus gestis ornarunt,” Mentz, 1616, 4to. 5. “Historia Episcoporum Trevereusium, &c.” Cologne, 162t>. He had also a principal hand in the “Antiquities and Annals of Treves,” 1626, 2 vols. folio, and reprinted 1670; but some antiquaries are of opinion that in his anxiety to give correct copies of certain ancient documents, he took liberties with the originals which tend to lessen the authority of his transcripts.

, an English traveller and scholar, the son of James Brown, M. D. (who died Nov. 24, 1733), was born at Kelso, in the shire or Roxburgh, in Scotland, May 23, 1709, and was educated under Dr. Freind at Westminster school, where he made great proficiency in the Latin and Greek classics. In the latter end of 1722, he went with his father to Constantinople, and having a great aptitude for the learning of languages, acquired a competent knowledge of the Turkish, vulgar Greek, and Italian; and on his return home in 1725, made himself master of the Spanish tongue. About the year 1732, he first started the idea of a very useful book in the mercantile world, although not deserving a place in any literary class, “The Directory,” or list of principal traders in London; and having taken some pains to lay the foundation of it, he gave it to the late Mr. Henry Kent, printer in Finch-lane, Cornhill, who continued it from year to year, and acquired an estate by it. In 1741, Mr. Brown entered into an agreement with twenty-four of the principal merchants of London, members of the Russia Company, as their chief agent or factor, for the purpose of carrying on a trade, through Russia, to and from Persia, and he sailed for Riga Sept. 29. Thence he passed through Russia, down the Volga to Astracan, and sailed along the Caspian sea to Reshd in Persia, where he established a factory, in which he continued near four years. During this time, he travelled in state to the camp of Nadir Shah, commonly known by the name of Kouli Khan, with a letter which had been transmitted to him from the late George II. to that monarch. While he resided in this country, he applied himself much to the study of that language, and made such proficiency in it that, after his return home, he compiled a very copious “Persian Dictionary and Grammar,” with many curious specimens of their writing, which is yet in manuscript. But not being satisfied with the conduct of some of the merchants in London, and being sensible of the dangers that the factory was constantly exposed to from the unsettled and tyrannical nature of the government of Persia, he resigned his charge to the gentlemen who were appointed to succeed him, returned to London Dec. 25, 1746, and lived to be the last survivor of all the persons concerned in the establishment of that trade, having outlived his old friend Mr. Jonas Hanway above two years. In May 1787, he was visited with a slight paralytic stroke, all the alarming effects of which very speedily vanished, and he retained his wonted health and chearfulness till within four 1 days of his death; when a second and more severe stroke proved fatal Nov. 30, 1788. He died at his house at Stoke Newington, where he had been an inhabitant since 1734, and was succeeded by his worthy son James Brown, esq. F. S. A. now of St. Alban’s. Mr. Lysons informs us that the elder Mr. Brown published also a translation of two “Orations of Isocrates” without his name. He was a man of the strictest integrity, unaffected, piety, and exalted, but unostentatious benevolence; of an even, placid, chearful temper, which he maintained to the last, and which contributed to lengthen his days. Few men were ever more generally esteemed in life, or more respectfully spoken of after death by all who knew him.

, an ingenious English writer, descended from the Browns of Colstown near Haddington in Scotland, was born in Northumberland, Nov. 5, 1715, at Rothbury, of which place his father was curate, but removed almost immediately after to the vicarage of Wigton in. Cumberland, where, at a grammar-school, he received the first part of his education; and was thence removed, May 8, 1732, to St. John’s college in Cambridge. He remained here, till in 1735 he took the degree of B. A. then returned to Wigton, and soon after went into orders. His first settlement was in Carlisle, being chosen a minor canon and lecturer in the cathedral there. This situation he afterwards resigned, on being reproved for omitting the Athanasian creed, which it is said was merely accidental. His pride, however, was hurt, and next Sunday he read the creed, out of course, and immediately after resigned. In 1739 he took a M. A. degree at Cambridge. In the rebellion of 1745, he acted as a volunteer at the siege of Carlisle, and behaved himself with great intrepidity; and, after the defeat of the rebels, when some of them were tried at Carlisle in 1746, he preached two excellent sermons in the cathedral, “on the mutual connection between religious truth and civil freedom; and between superstition, tyranny, irreligion, and licentiousness.” These are to be found in the volume of his sermons.

Thus distinguished, he fell under the notice of Dr. Osbaldeston; who, when raised to the see of Carlisle, made him one of his chaplains; he had before obtained for him from the chapter of Carlisle the living of Moreland in Westmoreland. It is probably about this time that he wrote his poem entitled “Honour;” to shew, that true honour can only be founded in virtue: it was inscribed to lord Lonsdale. His next poetical production, though not immediately published, was his “Essay on Satire,” in three parts, afterwards addressed to Dr. Warburton, who introduced him to Mr. Allen of Prior Park near Bath. While at Mr. Alien’s he preached at Bath, April 22, 1750, a sermon for promoting the subscription towards the general hospital in that city, entitled “On the pursuit of false pleasure, and the mischiefs of immoderate gaming;” and there was prefixed to it, when published, the following advertisement: “In justice to the magistrates of the city of Bath, it is thought proper to inform the reader, that the public gaming-tables were by them suppressed there, soon after the preaching of this sermon.” The year after, appeared the “Essay on Satire,” prefixed to the second volume of Pope’s Works by Warburton; with which it still continues to be printed, as well as in Dodsley’s collection.

Brown now began to make no small figure as a writer 5 and in 1751, published Jiis “Essays on Shaftesbury’s Characteristics,” 8vo, a work written with elegance and spirit, aud so applauded as to be printed a fifth time in 1764. This was suggested to him by Warburton, and to Warburton by Pope, who told Warburton that to his knowledge the Characteristics had done more harm to revealed religion in England than all the works of infidelity put together. He is imagined to have had a principal hand in another book, published also the same year, and called w An essay on musical expression;“though the avowed author was Mr. Charles Avison. (See Avison.) In 1754 he printed a sermon,” On the use and abuse of externals in religion: preached before the bishop of Carlisle, at. the consecration of St. James’s church in Whitehaven, and soon after he was promoted to Great Horkesiey in Essex; a living conferred upon him by the late earl of Hard wick e. His next appearance was as a dramatic writer. In 1755, hk tragedy “Barbarossa,” was produced upon the stage, and afterwards his “Athelstan” in 1756. These tragedies were acted with considerable success, under the management of Garrick; and the former long remained what is called a stock-piece, notwithstanding many critical objections offered to it in the publications of the time.

Our author had taken his doctor of divinity’s degree in 1755. In 1757, came out his famous work, “An Estimate of the manners and principles of the times,” 8vo; of which, seven editions were printed in little more than a year, and it was perhaps as extravagantly applauded, and as extravagantly censured, as any book that was ever written. The design of it was to show, that “a vain, luxurious, and selfish effeminacy, in the higher ranks of life, marked the character of the age; and to point out the effects and sources of this effeminacy.” And it must be owned, that, in the prosecution of it, the author has given abundant proofs of great discernment and solidity of judgment, a deep insight into human nature, an extensive knowledge of the world; and that he has marked the peculiar features of the times with great justness and accuracy. The great objection was, that a spirit of self-importance, dogmaticalness, and oftentimes arrogance, mixed itself in what he says; and this certainly did more towards sharpening the pens of his numerous adversaries, and raised more disgust and offence at him, than the m'atter objected to in his work, for it may be added that those who wrote against him were not men of the first rank in literature, and could have done little against him without the aid of those personalities which arise from the temper of an author. In 1758 he published a second volume of the Estimate, &c. and, afterwards, “An explanatory defence of it, &c.”

Between the first and second volume of the Estimate, he republished Dr. Walker’s “Diary of the Siege of Londonderry;” with a preface, pointing out the useful purposes to which the perusal of it might be applied. He was, about this time, presented by the bishop of Carlisle, Dr. Osbaldeston, to the vicarage of St. Nicholas in Newcastle upon Tyne, resigning Great Horkesley in Essex; and was made one of the chaplains in ordinary to his present majesty. These were all the preferments our author ever received; and, as this was supposed to be no small mortification to a man of Dr. Brown’s high spirit, so it was probably this high spirit which was the cause of it; for such was his temper that he never could preserve his friends long, and he had before this time quarrelled with Warburton and lord Hardwicke. In 1760 he published an additional dialogue of the dead, between “Pericles and Aristides,” being a sequel to a dialogue of lord Lyttelton’s between “Pericles and Cosmo.” This is supposed by some to have been designed as a vindication of Mr. Pitt’s political character, against some hints of disapprobation by lord Lyttelton; while others have not excluded a private motive of resentment. It is said that lord Lyttelton in a numerous and mixed company neglected to take notice of our author in so respectful a manner as he thought he deserved; and in revenge, weak enough certainly, he composed the dialogue. His next publication was “The Cure of Saul,” a sacred ode; which was followed the same year by a “Dissertation on the rise, union, and power, the progressions, separations, and corruptions of poetry and music,” 4to. This is a pleasing performance, displays great ingenuity, and, though not without mistakes, very instructing as well as amusing. “Observations” were printed upon it by an anonymous writer, and Dr. Brown defended himself in “Remarks.” He published in 8vo, 1764, the “History of the rise and progress of Poetry through its several species:” being the substance of the above work concerning poetry only, for the benefit of classical readers not knowing in music. The same year, he printed a volume of “Sermons,” most of which had been printed separately; and in 1765, “Thoughts on Civil Liberty, Licentiousness, and Faction;” a piece, drawn up with great parade, and assuming a scientific form, with an intention to censure the opposers of administration at that time. A sermon on the “Female character and education,” preached the 16th of May, 1765, before the guardians of the asylum for deserted female orphans.

His last publication, in 1766, was a “Letter to the rev. Dr. Lowth,” occasioned by his late letter to the right rev. author of the “Divine Legation of Moses.” Dr. Lowth had pointed at Dr. Brown, as one of the extravagant flatterers and creatures of Warburton; and Dr. Brown defended himself against the imputation, as an attack upon his moral character. To do him justice, he had a spirit too strong and independent, to bend to that literary subjection which the author of the Divine Legation expected from his followers. He insisted upon the prerogative of his own opinion; to assent and dissent, whenever he saw cause, in the most unreserved manner: and this was to Dr. Browiij as it was to many others, the cause of misunderstanding with Warburton. Besides the works mentioned, he published a poem on “Liberty,” and some anonymous pamphlets. At the end of his later writings, he advertised an intention of publishing “Principles of Christian Legislation,” but was prevented by death. He ordered, however, by his will, that the work should be published after his decease ; but it was left too imperfect for that purpose. The last memorable circumstance of his life was his intended expedition to Russia. While Dr. Dumaresque resided in Russia, 1765, whither, having been chaplain to our factory at St. Petersburg from 1747 to 1762, he had been invited the year before by the empress, to assist in the regulation of several schools she was about to establish; a correspondent in England suggested the idea tQ him of communicating the affair to Dr. Brown, as a proper person to consult with, because he had puhlished some sermons upon education. This brought on a correspondence between Dr. Dumaresque and Dr. Brown; the result of which, being communicated to the prime minister at St. Petersburg, was followed by an invitation from the empress to Dr. Brown also. Dr. Brown, acquainting the Russian court with his design of complying with the empress’s, invitation, received an answer from the minister, signifying how pleased her imperial majesty was with his intention, and informing him, that she had ordered to be remitted to him, by her minister in London, 1000l. in order to defray the expences of his journey. All the letters which passed, the plans which were drawn by Dr. Brown, and, in short, every thing relating to this affair, may be seen at large under his article in the “Biographia Britannica,” as communicated to the author of it by Dr. Dumaresque.

In consequence of the above proceedings, while he was. ardently preparing for his journey, and almost on the point of setting out for St. Petersburg, the gout and rheumatism, to which he was subject, returned upon him with violence, and put a stop to the affair for the present, to his no small disappointment. This disappointment concurring with his ill state of health, was followed by a dejection of spirits, which terminated in his putting an end to his life, at his lodgings in Pall-mall, Sept. 23, 1766, in his 5 1st year. He cut the jugular vein with a razor, and died immediately. He had, it seems, a constitutional tendency to insanity, and from his early life had been subject at times to disorders in the brain, at least to melancholy in its excess; of which he used to complain to his friends, and to “express his fears, that one time or another some ready mischief might present itself to him, at a time when he was wholly deprived of his reason.”

Dr. Brown was a man of uncommon ingenuity, but unfortunately tinctured with an undue degree of self-opinion, and perhaps the bias of his mind to insanity will assign this best cause, as well as form the best excuse, for this. genius was extensive; for, besides his being so elegant a prose writer in various kinds of composition, he was a poet, a musician, and a painter. His learning does not, however, appear to have been equal to his genius. His invention was, indeed, inexhaustible; and hence he was led to form magnificent plans, the execution of which required a greater depth of erudition than he was possessed of. In divinity, properly so called, as including an extensive knowledge of the controverted points of theology, and a critical acquaintance with the Scriptures, he was not deeply conversant. All we can gather from his sermons is, that his ideas were liberal, and that he did not lay much stress on the disputed doctrines of Christianity. His temper, we are told, was suspicious, and sometimes threw him into disagreeable altercations with his friends; but this arose, in a great measure, if not entirely, from the constitutional disorder described above, a very suspicious turn of mind being one of the surest prognostics of lunacy. He has been charged with shifting about too speedily, with a view to preferment; and it was thought, that his “Thoughts on Civil Liberty, Licentiousness, and Faction,” seemed to have something of this appearance. He, however, in that performance endeavoured to remove the objection, by observing, that, if he had indirectly censured those whom he had formerly applauded, he never was attached to men, but measures; and that, if he had questioned the conduct of those only who were then out of power, he had heretofore questioned their conduct with the same freedom, when in the fulness of their power. Upon the whole, Dr. Brown’s defects, which chiefly arose from a too sanguine temperament of constitution, were compensated by many excellencies and virtues. With respect to his writings, they are all of them elegant. Even those which are of a more temporary nature may continue to be read with pleasure, as containing a variety of curious observations; and in his Estimate are many of those unanswerable truths that can never be unseasonable or unprofitable.

, a Scotch artist, the son of a goldsmith and watchmaker, was born in 1752 at Edinburgh, and was early destined to take up the profession of a painter. He travelled into Italy in 1771, and durmg the course of ten years residence there, the pencil and crayon were ever in his hand, and the sublime thoughts of Raphael and Michael Angelo ever in his imagination. By continual practice he obtained a correctness and elegance of contour, rarely surpassed by any British artist, but he unfortunately neglected the mechanism of the pallet till his taste was so refined that Titian, and Murillo, and Correggio made his heart to sink within him when he touched the canvass. When he attempted to lay in his colours, the admirable correctness of his contour was lost, and he had not self-sufficiency to persevere till it should be recovered in that tender evanescent outline which is so difficult to be attained even by the most eminent painters. At Rome he met with sir William Young and Mr. Townley; who, pleased with some very beautiful drawings done by him in pen and ink, took him with them, as a draftsman, into Sicily. Of the antiquities of this celebrated island he took several very fine views in pen and ink, exquisitely finished, yet still preserving the character and spirit of the buildings he intended to represent. He returned some years afterwards from Italy to his native town, where he was much beloved and esteemed, his conversation being extremely acute and entertaining on most subjects, but peculiarly so on those of art; and his knowledge of music 'being very great, and his taste in it extremely just and refined. Lord Monboddo gave him a general invitation to his elegant and convivial table, and employed him ip, making several drawings in pencil for him. Mr. Brown, however, in 1786, came to London, and was caressed by scholars and men of taste in that metropolis, where he was very much employed as a painter of small portraits in black lead pencil, which were always correctly drawn, and exhibited, with a picturesque fidelity, the features and character of the person who sat to him.:

Mr. Brown was not only known as an exquisite drafts.­man, he was also a good philosopher, a sound scholar, and endowed with a just and refined taste in all the liberal and polite arts, and a man of consummate worth and integrity. Soon after his death his “Letters on the Poetry and Music of the Italian Opera,” 12mo, were published. They were originally written to his friend lord Monboddo, who wished to have Mr. Brown’s opinion on those subjects, which have so intimate a connection with his work on the Origin and Progress of Language; and who was so pleased with the style and observations contained in them, that he wrote an introduction, which was published with them, in one volume, 12mo, 1789, for the benefit of his widow. The letters, written with great elegance and perspicuity, are certainly the production of a strong and fervid mind, acquainted with the subject; and must be useful to most of the frequenters of the Italian opera, by enabling them to understand the reasons on which the pleasure they receive at that musical performance is founded, a knowledge in which they are generally very deficient. Not being written for publication, they have that spirit and simplicity which every man of genius diffuses through any subject which he communicates in confidence, and which he is but too apt to refine away when he sits down to compose a work for the public. Lord Monboddo, in the fourth volume of the Origin and Progress of Language, speaking of Mr. Brown, says, “The account that I have given of the Italian language is taken from one who resided above ten years in Italy; and who, besides understanding the language perfectly, is more learned in the Italian arts of painting, sculpture, music, and poetry, than any man I ever met with. His natural good taste he has improved by the study of the monuments of ancient art, to be seen at Rome and Florence; and as beauty in all the arts is pretty much the same, consisting of grandeur and simplicity, variety, decorum, and a suitableness to the subject, I think he is a good judge of language, and of writing, as well as of painting, sculpture, and music.” A very well-written character in Latin, by an advocate of Edinburgh, is appended to the Letters. Mr. Brown left behind him several very highly-finished portraits in pencil, and many very exquisite sketches in pencil and in pen and ink, which he had taken of persons and of places in Italy; particularly a book of studies of heads, taken from the life, an inestimable treasure to any history painter, as a common-place book for his pictures, the heads it contained being all of them Italian ones, of great expression, or of high character. He was so enraptured with his art, and so assiduous in the pursuit of it, that he suffered no countenance of beauty, grace, dignity, or expression, to pass him unnoticed; and to be enabled to possess merely a sketch for himself, of any subject that struck his fancy, he would make a present of a high-finished drawing to the person who permitted his head to be taken by him. The characteristics of his hancl were delicacy, correctness, and taste, as the drawings he made from many of Mr. Townley’s best statues very plainly evince. Of his mind, the leading features were acuteness, liberality, and sensibility, joined to a character firm, vigorous, and energetic. The last efforts of this ingenious artist were employed in making two very exquisite drawings, the one from Mr. Townley’s celebrated bust of Homer, the other from a fine original bust of Pope, supposed to have been the work of Rysbrac. From these drawings two very beautiful engravings have been made by Mr. Bartolozzi and his pupil Mr. Bovi. After some stay in London, his health, which had never been robust, yielded to extraordinary application, and he was forced to try a seavoyage, and return on a visit to Edinburgh, to settle his father’s affairs, who was then dead, having been some time before in a state of imbecility. On the passage from London to Leith, he was somehow neglected as he lay sick on his hammock, and was on the point of death when he arrived at Leith. With much difficulty he was brought up to Edinburgh, and laid in the bed of his friend Runciman, the artist, who had died not long before in the same place. Here he died, Sept. 5, 1787. His portrait with Runciman, disputing about a passage in Shakspeare’s Tempest, is in the gallery at Dryburgh abbey. This was the joint production of Brown and Runciman before the death of the latter in 1784.

, a clergyman of the church of Scotland, who long kept an academy for the education of young men for the ministry among the class called Seceders in that country, was born in 1722, in a village called Kerpoo, in the county of Perth. His parents died when he was very young, leaving him almost destitute, but by some means he contrived to obtain books, if not regular education, and by dint of perseverance acquired a considerable knowledge of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, with which last he was critically conversant. He could also read and translate the French, Italian, German, Arabic, Persian, Syriac, and Ethiopic, but his favourite studies were divinity, and history both ecclesiastical and civil. His principles being Calvinistic, his reading was much confined to writers of that stamp, but he appears to have studied every controversy in which the church has been involved, with much attention. At what time he was ordained, does not appear, but his extensive* learning pointed him out to the associate synod, or synod of seceders, as a fit person to be their professor of divinity, and train up young men, who had had a previous education, for the office of the ministry within their pale. His residence was at Haddington, where he was preacher to a numerous congregation of the seceders. At one time he received a pressing invitation from the Dutch church in the province of New York, to be their tutor in divinity, which he declined. He died June 19, 1787. His principal works are, 1. An edition of the Bible, called “The Self-interpreting Bible,” from its marginal references, which are far more copious than in any other edition, London, 1791, 2 vols. 4to, and since reprinted. 2. “Dictionary of the Bible, on the plan of Calmet, but principally adapted to common readers; often reprinted, 2 vols. 8vo. 3.” Ex-> plication of Scripture Metaphors,“' 12mo. 4.” History of the Seceders,“eighth edition, 1802, 12mo. 5.” The Christian Student and Pastor,“1781, an abridgment of the Lives of Pious Men. 6.” Letters on the Government of the Christian Church.“7.” General History of the Church,“1771, 2 vols. 12mo, a very useful compendium of church history, partly on the plan of Mosheim, or perhaps rather of Lampe. After his death appeared a volume entitled” Select Hemains," with some account of his life.

, M. D. author of what has been called the Brunonian system in medicine, was born in the parish of Buncle, in the county of Berwick, in the year 1735, of parents in a mean situation in life, but, in common with the children of other villagers in Scotland, he received his education at a grammar-school. As his mind was much above the rank he was born in, his progress in literature was proportionably superior to the rest of his school-fellows. He there imbibed a taste for letters, so that when he was afterwards put apprentice to a weaver, instead of attending to Ms business, his whole mind was bent on procuring books, which he read with great eagerness. Finding this disposition could not be conquered, his father took him from the loom, and sent him to the grammarschool at Dunse, where, under the tuition of Mr. Cruickshanks, he made such progress that he was soon regarded as a prodigy. He read all the Latin classics with the greatest facility, and was oo mean proficient in the knowledge of the Greek language. “His habits,” we are told, “were sober, he was of a religious turn, and was so strongly attached to the sect of Seceders, or Whigs as tlrey are called in Scotland, in which he had been bred, that he would have thought his salvation hazarded, if he had attended the meetings of the established church. He aspired to be a preacher of a purer religion.” An accident, however, disgusted him with this society, before he was of art age to be chosen a pastor, for which it appears he was intended. Having been prevailed on by some of his schoolfellows to attend divine service at the parish church of Dunse, he was summoned before the session of the seceding congregation to answer for this offence; but his high spirit not brooking to make an apology, to avoid the censures of his brethren, and the ignominy of being expelled their community, he abdicated his principles, and professed himself a member of the established church. As his talents for literature were well known, he was taken, at the age of twenty, to the house of a gentleman in the neighbourhood of Dunse, as tutor to his son. Here he did not long reside, but went the same year, 1755, to Edinburgh, where he applied to the study of divinity, in which he proceeded so far as to deliver, in the public hall, a discourse upon a prescribed portion of scripture, the usual step preliminary to ordination. But here his theological studies appear to have ended, and he suddenly left Edinburgh, returned to Dunse, and officiated as an usher in the school where he had been educated. He now exhibited himself as a free-liver and free-thinker, his discourse and manners being equally licentious and irregular, which accounts for his dereliction of the study of theology. At Dunse he continued about a year. During this time, a vacancy happening in one of the classes in the high school at Edinburgh, Brown appeared as a candidate, but was not successful. Soon after he was applied to by a student in medicine, at Edinburgh, to put his inaugural thesis into, Latin. This he performed in so superior a manner, that it gained him great reputation; it opened to him a path which he had not probably before thought of, for turning his erudition to profit. On the strength of the character procured him by this performance, he returned to 'Edinburgh, and determined to apply to the study of medicine. “He had now,” he said, “discovered his strength, and was ambitious of riding in his carriage as a physician.” At the opening of the session he addressed Latin letters to each of the professors, who readily gave him tickets of admission to their lectures, which he attended diligently for several years; in the interim, teaching Latin to such of the pupils as applied, and assisting them in, writing their theses, or turning them into Latin. The price, when he composed the thesis, was ten guineas; when he translated their compositions into Latin, five. If he had been now prudent, or had not indulged in the most destructive excesses, he might, it is probable, in a few years, have attained the eminence he promised himself; but he marred all by his intemperance. In no long time after this, his constitution, which had been hardy and robust, became debilitated, and he had the face and appearance of a worn-out debauchee. His bad habits had not, however, prevented his getting the friendship or assistance of Dr. Cullen, who, desirous of availing himself of his talents, employed him as a tutor to his sons, and made use of him as an assistant in his lectures; Brown repeating to his pupils in the evening, the lecture they had heard in the morning, and explaining to them such parts as were abstruse and difficult. In 1765 he married, and took a house, which was soon filled with boarders; but, continuing his improvident course, he became a bankrupt at the nd of three or four years. He now became a candidate for one of the medical chairs, but failed; and as he attributed his missing this promotion to Dr. Cullen, he very unadvisedly broke off his connection with him, and became the declared enemy to him and his system; which he had always before strenuously defended. This probably determined him to form a new system of medicine, doubtless meaning to annihilate that of his former patron. As he had read but few medical books, and was but little versed in practice, his theory must have been rather the result of contemplation than of experience. That in forming it, he was influenced by his attachment to spirituous liquors, seems probable from internal evidence, and from the effects he attributed to them of diminishing the number as well as the severity of the fits of the gout, under which he suffered. He always found them more severe and frequent, he says, he lived abstemiously. One of his pupils informed Br; Beddoes, “that he was used, before he began to read his lecture, to take fifty drops of laudanum in a glass of whisky; repeating the dose four or five times during the lecture. Between the effects of these stimulants, and voluntary exertions, he soon waxed warm, and by degrees his imagination was exalted into phrenzy.” His intention seems to have been to simplify medicine, and to render the knowledge of it easily attainable, without the labour of studying other authors. All general or universal diseases were therefore reduced by him to two great families or classes, the sthenic and the asthenic; the former depending upon excess, the latter upon deficiency of exciting power. The former were to be removed by debilitating, the latter by stimulant medicines, of which the most valuable and powerful are wine, brandy, and opium. As asthenic diseases are more numerous y and occur much more frequently than those from an opposite cause, his opportunities of calling in the aid of these powerful stimuli were proportionately numerous. “Spasmodic and convulsive disorders, and even hemorrhages,” he says, “were found to proceed from debility; and wine, and brandy, which had been thought hurtful in these diseases, he found the most powerful of all remedies in removing them.” When he had completed his plan, 'he published his theory or system, under the title of “Elementa Medicinse,” from his preface to which the preceding quotations have been principally taken. Though he had been eleven or twelve years at Edinburgh, he had not taken his degree of doctor; and as he was now at variance with all the medical professors, not thinking it prudent to offer himself there, he went to St. Andrew’s, where he was readily admitted to that honour. He now commenced public teacher of medicine, making his “Elementa” his text book; and convinced, as it seems, of the soundness of his doctrine, he exultingly demands (preface to a new edition of the translation of his “Elementa,” by Dr. Beddoes), whether the medical art, hitherto conjectural, incoherent, and in the great body of its doctrines false, was not at last reduced to a science of demonstration, which might be called the science of life? His method in giving his lectures was, first to translate the text book, sentence by sentence, and then to expatiate upon the passage. The novelty of the docfeine procured him at first a pretty numerous class of pupilsj but as he was irregular in his attendance, and his habits of drinking increased upon him, they were soon. reduced in number, and he became so involved in his circumstances, that it became necessary for him to quit Edinburgh; he therefore came to London in the autumn of the year 1786. Here, for a time, he was received with favour, but his irregularities in living increasing upon him, he came to his lodgings, in the evening of the 8th of October, in 1788, intoxicated, and taking, as it was his custom, a large dose of laudanum, he died in the course of the night, before he had entered on his career of lecturing, for which he was making preparations. He had the preceding year published “Observations on the Old Systems of Physic,” as a prelude to the introduction of his own; but it was little noticed. His opinions have, however, ' met with patrons in Germany and Italy, as well as in this country, and several volumes have been Written on the subject of them; but they are now pretty generally, and deservedly, abandoned.

In 1796, Dr. Beddoes published an edition of “The Elements of Medicine of John Brown, M. D.” for the benefit of his family, with a biographical preface, from which the above account was taken by a learned gentleman for the Cyclopædia. Perhaps from the same materials, a more favourable colouring might be given, and has been given in Dr. Gleig’s Supplement to the Encycl. Britannica, but we question if any account can be given more consistent with truth.

, an eminent horticulturist, and, from a word often employed by him in laying out gardens, called Capability Brown , was born at Kirkharle, in Northumberland, Aug. 1715. Of his education we have no account, but he came early in life to the metropolis, and was employed by lord Cobham in improving the grounds at Stowe; and afterwards at Richmond, Blenheim, Luton, Wimbledon, Nuneham, &c. where he improved ornamental gardening in a very high degree, and approached more nearly to nature than his predecessors. In these operations he frequently discovered a very highly cultivated taste, and may be said to have led the fashion in horticulture for nearly half a century. He associated also with familiarity with many of his noble and opulent employers, and realized a handsome fortune. In 1770 he served the office of high sheriff for the counties of Huntingdon and Cambridge. He died suddenly in Hertfordstreet, May-fair, Feb. 6, 1783, being at that time head gardener to his majesty, at Hampton-court.

, an English divine of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth century, from whom the sect of the Brownists derived its name, was descended of an ancient and worshipful family, says Fuller, (one whereof founded a fair hospital in Stamford), and was nearly allied to the lord-treasurer Cecil. He was the son of Anthony Brown, of Tol thorp, in Rutlandshire, esq. (though born at Northampton, according to Mr. Collier), and grandson of Francis Brown, whom king Henry VIII. in the eighteenth year of his reign, privileged by charter to wear Jiis cap in the presence of himself, his heirs, or any of his nobles, and not to uncover but at his own pleasure; which charter was confirmed by act of parliament. Robert Brown studied divinity at Cambridge, in Corpus Christi college, and was afterwards a schoolmaster in Southwark. He was soon discovered by Dr. Still, master of Trinity-college, to have somewhat extraordinary in him that would prove a great disturbance to the church. Brown soon verified what the doctor foretold, for he not only jm^ bibed Cartwright’s opinions, but resolved to refine upon his scheme, and to produce something more perfect of his own. Accordingly, about the year 1580, he began to inveigh openly against the discipline and ceremonies of the church of England, and soon shewed that he intended to go much farther than Cartwright had ever done. In his discourses the church government was antichristian; her sacraments clogged with superstition; the liturgy had a mixture of Popery and Paganism in it; and the mission of the clergy was no better than that of Baal’s priests in the Old Testament. He first preached at Norwich, in 1581, where the Dutch having a numerous congregation, many of them inclined to Ahabaptism; and, therefore, being the more disposed to entertain any new resembling opinion, he made his first essay upon them; and having made some progress, and raised a character for zeal and sanctity, he then began to infect his own countrymen; for which purpose he called in the assistance of one Richard Harrison, a country schoolmaster, and they formed churches out of both nations, but mostly of the English. He instructed his audience that the church of England was no true church; that there was little of Christ’s institution in the public ministrations, and that all good Christians were obliged to separate from those impure assemblies; that their only way was to join him and his disciples, among whom all was pure and unexceptionable, evidently inspired by the Spirit of God, and refined from all alloy and prophanation. These discourses prevailed on the audience; and his disciples, now called Brownists, formed a society, and made a total defection from the church, refusing to join any congregation in any public office of worship. Brown being convened before Dr. Freake, bishop of Norwich, and other ecclesiastical commissioners, he maintained his schism, to justify which he had also written a book, and behaved rudely to the court, on which he was committed to the custody of the sheriff of Norwich; but his relation, the lord treasurer Burghley, imputing his error and obstinacy to zeal, rather than malice, interceded to have him charitably persuaded out of his opinions, and released. To this end he wrote a letter to the bishop of Norwich, which procured his enlargement. After this, hisjordship ordered Brown up to London, and recommended him to archbishop Whitgift for his instruction and counsel, in order to his amendment; but Brown left the kingdom, and settled at Middleburgh in Zealand, where he and his followers obtained leave of the states to form a church according to their own model, which was drawn in a book published by Brown at Middleburgh in 1582, and called “A treatise of Reformation, without staying for any man.” How long he remained at Middleburgh, is not precisely known; but he was in England in 1585, when he was cited to appear before archbishop Whitgift, to answer to certain matters contained in a book published by him, but what this was, we are not informed. The archbishop, however, by force of reasoning, brought Brown at last to a tolerable compliance with the church of England; and having dismissed him, the lord treasurer Burgh.­Jey sent him to his father in the country, with a letter to recommend him to his favour and countenance, but from another letter of the lord treasurer’s, we learn that Brown’s errors had sunk so deep as not to be so easily rooted out as was imagined; and that he soon relapsed into his former opinions, and shewed himself so incorrigible, that his good old father resolved to own him for his son no longer than his son owned the church of England for his mother; and Brown chusing rather to part with his aged sire than his new schism, he was discharged the family. When gentleness was found ineffectual, severity was next practised; and Brown, after wandering up and down, and enduring great hardships, at length went to live at Northampton, where, industriously labouring to promote his sect, Lindsell, bishop of Peterborough, sent him a citation to come before him, which Brown refused to obey; for which contempt he was excommunicated. This proved the means of his reformation; for he was so deeply affected with the solemnity of this censure, that he made his submission, moved for absolution, and received it; and from that time continued in the communion of the church, though it was not in his power to close the chasrn^ or heal the wound he had made in it. It was towards the year 1590 that Brown renounced his principles of separation, antl was soon after preferred to the rectory of Achurch, near Thrapston in Northamptonshire. Fuller does not believe that Brown ever formally recanted his opinions, either by word or writing, as to the main points of his doctrine; but that his promise of a general compliance with the church of England, improved by the countenance of his patron and kinsman, the earl of Exeter, prevailed upon the archbishop, and procured this extraordinary favour for him. He adds, that Brown allowed a salary for one to discharge his cure; and though he opposed his parishioners in judgment, yet agreed in taking their tithes. He was a man of good parts and some learning, but was imperious and uncontroulable; and so far from the Sabbatarian strictness afterwards espoused by some of his followers, that he led an idle and dissolute life. In a word, says Fuller, he had a wife with whom he never lived, and a church in which he never preached, though he received the profits thereof: and as all the other scenes of his life were stonny and turbulent, so was his end: for the constable of his parish requiring, somewhat roughly, the payment of certain rates, his passion moved him to blows, of which the constable complaining to justice St. John, he rather inclined to pity than punish him but Brown behaved with so much insolence, that he was sent to Northampton gaol on a feather-bed in a cart, being very infirm, and aged above eighty years, where he soon after sickened and died, anno 1630, after boasting, “That he had been committed to thirty-two prisons, in some of which he could not see his hand at noon-day.” He was buried in his church of Achurch in Northamptonshire.

Those who are acquainted with the tenets and practices of some modern sects, will easily recognize in Brown their founder. The Brownists equally condemned episcopacy and presbytery, as to the jurisdiction of consistories, classes, and synods; and| would not join with any other reformed church, because they were not sufficiently assured of the sanctity and probity of its members, holding it an impiety to communicate with sinners. Their form of church-government was democratical. Such as desired to be members of their church made a confession of their faith, and signed a covenant obliging themselves to walk together in the order of the gospel. The whole power of admitting and excluding members, with the decision of all controversies, was lodged in the brotherhood. Their church officers for preaching the word, and taking care of the poor, were chosen from among themselves, and separated to their several offices by fasting, prayer, and imposition of hands from some of the brethren. They did not allow the priesthood to be any distinct order, or to give any indelible character; but as the vote of the brotherhood made a man a minister, and gave authority to preach the word and administer the sacraments among them; so the same power could discharge him from his office, and reduce him to a mere layman again. As they maintained the bounds of a church to be no greater than what would contain as many as could meet together in one place, and join in one communion, so the power of their officers was prescribed within the same limits. The minister or pastor pf a church could not administer the eucharist or baptism to the children of any but those of his own society. A lay brother was allowed the liberty of giving a word of exhortation to the people; and it was usual for some of them, after sermon, to ask questions, and reason upon the doctrines that had been preached. Until the civil war, they were much discouraged in England; but upon the ruin of episcopacy, they quitted Holland, and came over to England, they began to form churches on their peculiar model. The Presbyterians cortiplained of this as an encroachment, and insisted that the Independents should come under the Scotch regulation; This the latter refused to comply with, and continued a distinct sect, or faction; and, during the civil wars, became the most powerful party; and getting to the bead of affairs, most of the other sects, which were averse to the Church. of England^ joined with them, and all of them yielded to lose theit former names, in the general one of Independents.

, of facetious memory^ as Mr. Addison says of him, was the son of a considerable farmer of Shiffnal in Shropshire, and educated at Newport-school in. that county; from whence he was removed to Christchurch in Oxford^ where he soon distinguished himself by his uncommon attainments in literature. He had great parts and quickness of apprehension, nor does it appear that he was wanting in application; for we are told, that he was very well skilled in the Latin, Greek, French, Italian, and Spanish languages, even before he was sent to Oxford. The irregularities of his life did not suffer him however to continue long at the university; but when obliged to quit it, instead of returning home to his father, he formed a scheme of going to London, in hopes of making his fortune some way or other there. This scheme did not answer. He was very soon in danger of starving; upon, which he made interest to be schoolmaster of Kingston upon Thames, in which pursuit he succeeded. But this was a profession very unsuitable to a man of Mr. Brown’s turn, and a situation that must needs have been extremely disagreeable to him; and therefore we cannot wonder, that he soon quitted his school, and went again to London; where finding his old companions more delighted with his humour, than ready to relieve his necessities, he had recourse to his pen, and became an author, and partly a libeller, by profession. He published a great variety of pieces, under the names of dialogues, letters, poems, &c. in all which he discovered no small erudition, and a vast and exuberant vein of humour: for he was in his writings, as in his conversation, always lively and facetious. In the mean time he made no other advantage of these productions, than what he derived from the booksellers; for though they raised his reputation, and made his company sought after, yet as he possessed less of the gentleman than wits usually do, and more of the scholar, so he was not apt to choose his acquaintance by interest, but was more solicitous to be recommended to the ingenious who might admire, than to the great who might relieve him. An anonymous author, who has given the world some account of Mr. Brown, says, that though a good-natured man, he had one pernicious quality, which was, rather to lose his friend than his joke. He had a particular genius for satire, and dealt it out liberally whenever he could find occasion. He is famed for being the author of a libel, fixed one Sunday morning on the doors of Westminsterabbey; and of many others against the clergy and quality. He used to treat religion very lightly, and would often say, that he understood the world better, than to have the imputation of righteousness laid to his charge, yet, upon the approach of death, his heart misgave him, as if all was not right within, and he began to express sentiments of remorse for his past life.

Towards the latter end of Brown’s life, we are informed by Mr. Jacob, that he was in favour with the earl of Dorset, who invited him to dinner on a Christmas-day, with Dryden, and some other men of genius; when Brown, to his agreeable surprise, found a bank note of 50/, under his plate; and Dryden at the same time was presented with another of 100l. Brown died in 1704, and was interred in the cloister of Westminster-abbey, near the remains of Mrs. Behn, with whom he was intimate in his life-time. His whole works were printed in 1707, consisting of dialogues, essays, declamations, satires, letters from the dead to the living, translations, amusements, &c. in 4 vols. Much humour and not a little learning are, as we have already observed, scattered every where throughout them, but they are totally destitute of delicacy, and have not been reprinted for many years. Dr. Johnson, in his Life of Dryden, very justly says that “Brown was not a man deficient in literature, nor destitute of fancy; but he seems to have thought it the pinnacle of excellence to be a `merry fellow;' and therefore laid out his powers upon small jests or gross buffoonery, so that his performances have little intrinsic value, and were read only while they were recommended by the novelty of the event that occasioned them. What sense or knowledge his works contain is disgraced by the garb in which it is exhibited.”

, a celebrated general of the eighteenth century, was the son of Ulysses, baron de Brown, colonel of a regiment of cuirassiers in the service of the emperors Leopold and Joseph, created in 1716, by the emperor Charles VI. a count of the holy Roman empire, his younger brother George receiving the like dignity at the same time, who was general of foot, counsellor of war, and a colonel of a regiment of infantry, under Charles -VI. They were of an ancient and noble family in Ireland. The subject of the present memoir was born at Basle, Oct. 24, 1705-. After having passed through the lessons of a school at Limerick in Ireland, he was called to Hungary at ten years of age, by count George de Brown, his uncle, and was present at the famous siege of Belgrade in 1717; about the close of the year 1723, he became captain in his uncle’s regiment, and then lieutenant-colonel in 1725. He went to the island of Corsica in 1730, with a battalion of his regiment, and contributed greatly to the capture of Callansana, where he received a wound of some consequence in his thigh. He was appointed chamberlain to the emperor in 1732, and colonel in 1734. He distinguished himself in the war of, Italy, especially in the battles of Parma and Guastalla, and burnt, in presence of the French army, the bridge which the marechal de Noailles had thrown across the Adige. Being appointed general in 1736, he favoured, the year following, the retreat of the army, by a judicious manoeuvre, and saved all the baggage at the memorable day of Banjaluca in Bosnia, Aug. 3, 1737. This signal piece of service procured him a second regiment of infantry, vacant by the death of count Francis de Wallis. On his return to Vienna in 1739, the emperor Charles VI. raised him to the dignity of general-neld-marechal-lieute.^ nanr, and gave him a seat in the Aulic council of war. After the death of that prince, the king of Prussia having entered Silesia, count de Brown, with but a small body oi troops, disputed with him every foot of ground for the space of two months. He commanded in 1741 the infantry of the right wing of the Austrian army at the battle of Molvitz; and, though wounded, made a handsome retreat. He then went into Bavaria, where he commanded the van of the same army, made himself master of Deckendorf, an4 took much of the enemy’s baggage, and forced the French to quit the banks of the Danube, which the Austrian army afterwards passed in perfect safety; in commemoration of which, a marble pillar was erected on the spot, with the following inscription: “Theresise Austriacae Augustse Duce Exercitus Carolo Alexandro Lotharingico, septemdecirn superatis hostilibus VilHs, captoque Deckendorfio, renitentibus undis, resistentibus Gallis, Duce Exercitus Ludovico Borbonio Contio, transivit hie Danubium Ulysses Maximilianus, S. R. I. Comes de Brown, Locumtenens Campi Marashallusj Die 5 Junii, A. D. 1743.” The queen of Hungary sent him the s^me year to Worms, in quality of her plenipotentiary to the king of Great Britain: where he put the finishing Hand to the/ treaty of alliance between the courts of Vienna, London, and Turin, and she declared him her actual privy counsellor at her coronation qf Bohemia. The count de Brown, in 1744, followed prince Lobkovitz jnto Italy, took the city of Veletri the 4th of August, notwithstanding the great superiority of the enemy in numbers, penetrated into their camp, defeated several regiments, and took a great many prisoners. Being recalled to Bavaria, he performed several military exploits, and returned to Italy in 1746. He drove the Spaniards out of the Milanese; and, having joined the army of the prince de Lichtenstein, he commanded the left wing of the Austrian troops at the battle of Placentia, the 15th of June 1746; and routed the right wing of the enemy’s army, commanded by the marechal de Maillebois. After this famous battle, the gaining of which was due to him, he commanded in chief the army ordered against the Genoese, made himself master of the pass of la Bochetta, though defended by 4000 men, and took possession of the city of Genoa. Count Brown then went to join the troops of the king of Sardinia, and, in conjunction with him, took Montalbano and the territory of Nice. He passed the Var the 30th of November, in opposition to the French troops, entered Provence, and captured the isles of Saint-Marguerite and Saint-Honorat. He had nearly made himself master of all Provence, when the revolution at Genoa and the army of the marechal de Belleisle obliged him to make that fine retreat which acquired him the admiration of all good judges of. military tactics. He employed the rest of the year 1747 in defending the states of the house of Austria in Italy. The empress-queen of Hungary, in reward of his signal campaigns in Italy, made him governor of Transylvania in 1749. In 1752 he had the government of the city of Prague, with the general command of the troops of that kingdom; and the king of Poland, elector of Saxony, honoured him in 1755 with the order of the white eagle. The king of Prussia having invaded Saxony in 1756, and attacked Bohemia, count Brown marched against him; he repulsed that prince at the battle of Lobositz the 1st of October, although he had but 26,800 men, and the king of Prussia was at the head of at least 40,000. Within a week after this engagement, he undertook that celebrated march into Saxony, for delivering the Saxon troops shut up between Pirna and Konigstein: an action worthy of the greatest general whether ancient or modern. He afterwards obliged the Prussians to retreat from Bohemia; for which service he obtained the collar of the golden fleece, with which he was honoured by the empress March 6, 1757. Shortly after this count Brown went into Bohemia, where he raised troops with the utmost expedition, in order to make head against the king of Prussia, who had entered it afresh at the head of his whole army. On May 6th was fought the famous battle of Potshernitz, or of Prague, when count Brown was dangerously wounded. Obliged to retire to Prague, he there died of his wounds, the 26th of June 1757, at the age of 52. The count was not only a great general, he was an equally able negotiator, and well skilled in politics. He married, Aug. 15, 1726, Maria Philippina countess of Mar tinitz, of an illustrious and ancient family in Bohemia, by whom he had two sons. The life of this excellent commander was published in two separate volumes, one in German, the other in French, printed at Prague in 1757.

, an English judge, the son of sir Weston Browne of Abhess-roding in Essex, was born in that county, and educated for some time at Oxford, whence he removed to the Middle Temple, where he became eminent in the law, and was chosen summer reader in the first of queen Mary, 1553. The following year he was made serjeant at law, and was the first of the call. Soon after he was appointed serjeant to the king and queen, Philip and Mary. In 1558, he was preferred to be lord chief justice of the common pleas; but removed upon queen Mary’s decease, to make way for sir James Dyer, for though a Roman catholic, and queen Elizabeth might not chuse he should preside in that court, she had such an opinion of his talents that he was permitted to retain the situation of puisne on the bench as long as he lived. It is even said that he refused the place of lord keeper, which was offered to him, when the queen thought of removing sir Nicholas Bacon for being concerned in Hales’s book, written against the Scottish line, in favour of the house of Suffolk. This book sir Anthony privately answered , or made large collections for an answer, which Leslie, bishop of Ross, and Morgan Philips afterwards made use of, in the works they published in defence of the title of Mary queen of Scots. Sir Anthony Browne died at his house in the parish of Southwold in Essex, May 6, 1567. The only works attributed to him were left in ms.: namely, 1. “A Discourse upon certain points touching the Inheritance of the Crown,” mentioned already, and 2. “A book against Robert Dudley, earl of Leicester,” mentioned by Dr. Matthew Paterson, in his “Jerusalem and Babel,” 1653, p. 587, but the object of which we are unacquainted with. Plowden says of sir Anthony, that he was “a judge of profound genius and great eloquence.”

, an eminent physician, son of sir Thomas Browne, hereafter mentioned, was born about 1642. He was instructed in grammar learning at the school of Norwich, and in 1665 took the degree of bachelor of physic at Cambridge. Removing afterwards to Mertori college, Oxford, he was admitted there to the same degree in 1666, and the next year created doctor. In 1668, he visited part of Germany, and the year following made a wider excursion into Austria, Hungary, and Thessaly, where the Turkish sultan then kept his court at Larissa. He afterwards passed through Italy. Upon his return, he practised physic in London; was made physician first to Charl-es II. and afterwards in 1682 to St. Bartholomew’s hospital. About the same time he joined his name to those of many other eminent men, in a translation of Plutarch’s Lives. He was first censor, then elect, and treasurer of the college of physicians; of which in 1705 he was chosen president, and held this office till his death, which happened in August 1708, after a very short illness, at his seat at Northfleet, near Greenhithe in Kent. He was acquainted with Hebrew, was a critic in Greek, and no man of his age wrote better Latin. German, Italian, French, &c. he spoke and wrote with as much ease as his mother tongue. Physic was his business, and to the promotion thereof all his other acquisitions were referred. Botany, pharmacy, and chemistry, he knew and practised. King Charles said of him, that “he was as learned as any of the college, and as well-bred as any at court.” He was married, and left a son and a daughter; the former, Dr. Thomas Browne, F. R. S. and of the royal college of physicians, died in JiJy 17 Jo. The daughter married Owen Brigstock, of Lechdenny, in the county of Carmarthen, esq. to whom the public is indebted for part of the posthumous works of sir Thomas Browne.

, the first bishop that embraced and promoted the Reformation in Ireland, was originally an Austin friar of London. He received his academical education in the house of his order, near Halywell, in Oxford, and becoming eminent for his learning and other good qualities, was made provincial of the Austin monks in England. In 1523 he supplicated the university for the degree of B. D. but it does not appear that he was then admitted. He took afterwards the degree of D. D. in some university beyond sea, and was incorporated in the same degree at Oxford, in 1534, and soon after at Cambridge. Before that time, having read some of Luther’s writings, he took a liking to his doctrine; and, among other things, was wont to inculcate into the people, “That they should make their applications solely to Christ, and not to the Virgin Mary, or the saints.” King Henry VIII. being informed of this, took him into his favour, and promoted him to the archbishopric of Dublin, to which he was consecrated March 19, 1534-5, by Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, assisted by the bishops of Rochester and Salisbury. A few months after his arrival in Ireland, the lord privy-seal, Cromwell, signified to him that his majesty having renounced the Papal supremacy in England, it was his highness’ s pleasure that his subjects of Ireland should obey his commands in that respect as in England, and nominated him one of the commissioners for the execution thereof. On November 28, 1535, he acquainted the lord Cromwell with his success; telling him that he had “endeavoured, almost to the danger and hazard of his life, to procure the nobility and gentry of the Irish nation to due obedience, in owning the king their supreme head, as-well spiritual as temporal.” In the parliament which met at Dublin, May l, 1536, he was very instrumental in having the Act for the king’s supremacy over the church of Ireland passed; but he met with many obstacles in the execution of it; and the court of Rome used every effort to prevent any alterations in Ireland with regard to religious matters; for this purpose the pope sent over a bull of excommunication against all such as had ownedj or should own, the king’s supremacy within that kingdom, and the form of an oath of obedience to be taken to his holiness, at confessions. Endeavours were even used to raise a rebellion there; for one Thady é Birne, a Franciscan friar, being seized by archbishop Browne’s order, letters were found about him, from the pope and cardinals to O'Neal; in which, after commending his own and his father’s faithfulness to the church of Rome, he was exhorted “for the glory of the mother church, the honour of St. Peter, and his own security, to suppress heresie, and his holiness’s enemies.” And the council of cardinals thought fit to encourage his country, as a sacred island, being certain while mother church had a son of worth as himself, and those that should succour him and join therein, she would never fall, but have more or less a holding in Britain in spite of fate. In pursuance of this letter, O'Neal began to declare himself the champion of Popery; and having entered into a confederacy with others, they jointly invaded the Pale, and committed several ravages, but were soon after quelled. About the time that king Henry VIII. began to suppress the monasteries in England and Ireland, archbishop Browne completed his design of removing all superstitious reliques and images out of the two cathedrals of St. Patrick’s and the Holy Trinity, in Dublin, and out of the rest of the churches within his diocese, and in their room placed the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, and the Ten Commandments in gold letters. And in 1541, the king having converted the priory of the Holy Trinity into a cathedral church, consisting of a dean and chapter, our archbishop founded three prebends in the same in 1544, namely, St. Michael’s, St. John’s, and St. Michan’s, from which time it has generally been known by the name of Christ-church. King Edward VI. having caused the Liturgy to be published in English, sent an order to sir Anthony St. Leger, governor of Ireland, dated February 6, 1550-1, to notify to all the clergy of that kingdom, that they should use this book in all their churches, and the Bible in the vulgar tongue. When sir Anthony imparted this order to the clergy (on the 1st of March), it was vehemently opposed by the Popish party, especially by George Dowdall, primate of Armagh, but archbishop Browne received it with the utmost satisfaction; and on Easter-day following the Liturgy was read, for the first time within Ireland, in Christ -church, Dublin, in presence of the mayor and bailiffs of that city, the lord deputy St. Leger, archbishop Browne, &c. On this occasion the archbishop preached a sermon against keeping the Scriptures in the Latin tongue, and the worship of images, which is printed at the end of his life, and is the only part of his writings extant, except the letters mentioned above . But Dowdall, in consequence of his violent and unseasonable opposition to the king’s order, was deprived of the title of primate of all Ireland, which, by letters patent bearing date the 20th of October, 1551, was conferred on archbishop Browne, and his successors in the see of Dublin for ever. However, he did not long enjoy this dignity, for he was deprived both of it and his archbishopric in 1*554, the first of queen Mary I. under pretence that he was married, but in truth because he had zealously promoted the Reformation; and archbishop Dowdall, who had lived in exile during part of the reign of king Edward VI. recovered the title of primate, and also the archbishopric of Armagh, which had been given to Hugh Goodacre. While archbishop Browne enjoyed the see of Dublin, the cathedral of St. Patrick’s was suppressed for about the space of eight years; but queen Mary restored it to its ancient dignity, towards the end of the year 1554. The exact time of archbishop Browne’s death is not recorded; only we are told that he died about the year 1556. He was a man, says Usher, of a cheerful countenance; meek and peaceable: in his acts and deeds plain and downright; of good parts, and very stirring in what he judged to be for the interest of religion, or the service of his king; merciful and compassionate to the poor and miserable; and adorned with every good and valuable qualification.

, D.D. provost of Queen’s-college, Oxford, was born at a place called the Tongue, in Watermillock, Cumberland, in 1700, and was baptised Dec. 19, of that year. His father, George Browne, was a reputable yeoman, who was enabled to give his son a classical education at Barton school, and afterwards sent him to Queen’s-college, where he was admitted a member March 22, 1716-17. Here his good behaviour and rapid progress in knowledge, procured him many friends that were of great service to him. In due time he was elected taberdar upon the foundation; and having gone through that office with honour, he took the degree of M. A. Nov. 4th, 1724, and was chosen one of the chaplains of the college. In 1726 he published, from the university press, a most beautiful edition of cardinal Barberini’s Latin poems, with notes and a life of the author, (who was afterwards pope Urban VIII.) and a dedication to his friend Edward Hassel, esq. of Dalemain* his friend and patron. In April 1731, he was elected fellow, and became an eminent tutor, having several young noblemen of the first rank intrusted to his care. In this useful and important station he continued many years, exercising strict discipline, and assiduously studying to promote the prosperity of the college. He took the degree of D. D. July 9, 1743, and was presented by the provost and society to the rectory of Bramshot, in Hampshire, May 1, 1746, The university also conferred upon him the professorship of natural philosophy in 1747, which he held till his death. At his living at Bramshot, he resided more than ten years, during which time he was collated to the chancellorship of Hereford, and was made a canon-residentiary by the right rev. lord James Beauclerk, bishop of that diocese, who had formerly been his pupil.

Upon the death of Dr. Smith, provost of Queen’s, Nor. 23, 1756, Dr. Browne offered himself a candidate for the headship, and had for his formidable competitor, Dr. George Fothergill, principal of Edmund-hall, who had likewise been fellow of the college, an eminent tutor, and a person universally esteemed. The election lasted three days, and each candidate having upon every day’s scrutiny an equality of votes, both among the senior and junior fellows, Dr. Browne being the senior candidate, was, as the statute directs, declared duly elected. This contest, however, made no disagreement between the two competitors; they lived in the same harmony and friendship as before. In 1759, Dr, Browne was appointed vicechancellor, which arduous office, together with that of his headship, he managed with great prudence and ability, till March 25, 1765, when a stroke of the palsy rendered him utterly incapable of business. Under this calamity he languished till June 17, 1767, when he died, leaving the character of being a well-bred man, a polite as well as a profound scholar, an agreeable companion, and a steady friend. There was a gravity and authority in his looks and deportment, that reflected dignity upon the offices he sustained. He cbntinued vice-chancellor an unusual length of time, and presided at the memorable Enccenia when the earl of Litchfield was installed. It is said that his death prevented his being advanced to one of the first vacancies Oh the episcopal bench.

, esq. F. R. S. and a very ingenious and elegant poet of the last century, was born at Burton-upon-Trent, January 21, 1705-6; and was the son of the rev. William Browne, minister of that parish, where he chiefly resided, vicar of Winge, in Buckinghamshire, and a prebendary of Litchfield, which last preferment was given him by the excellent bishop Hough. He was possessed, also, of a small paternal inheritance, which he greatly increased by his marriage with Anne, daughter of Isaac Hawkins, esq. all whose estate, at length, came to his only grandson and heir-at-law, the subject of this article. Our author received his grammatical education, first at Litchfield, and then at Westminster, where he was much distinguished for the brilliancy of his parts^ and the steadiness of his application. The uncommon rapidity with which he passed through the several forms or classes of Westminster school, attracted the notice, and soon brought him under the direction of the head master, Dr. Freind, with whom he was a peculiar favourite. Mr. Browne stayed above a year in the sixth, or head form, with a view of confirming and improving his taste for classical learning and composition, under so polite and able a scholar. When he was little more than sixteen years of age, he was removed to Trinity-college, Cambridge, of which college his father had been fellow. He remained at the university till he had taken his degree of M. A. and though during his residence there he continued his taste for classical literature, which through his whole life was his principal object and pursuit, he did not omit the peculiar studies of the place, but applied himself with vigour and success to all the branches of mathematical science, and the principles of the Newtonian philosophy. When in May 1724, king George the First established at both universities, a foundation for the study of modern history and languages, with the design of qualifying young men for employments at court, and foreign embassies, Mr. Browne was among the earliest of those who were selected to be scholars upon this foundation. On the death of that prince, he wrote an university copy of verses, which was the first of his poems that had been printed, and was much admired. About the year 1727, Mr. Browne, who had been always intended for the bar, settled at Lincoln’s-inn. Here he prosecuted, for several years, with great attention, the study of the law, and acquired in it a considerable degree of professional knowledge, though he never arrived to any eminence in the practice of it, and entirely gave it up long before his death. He was the less solicitous about the practice of his profession, and it was of the less consequence to him, as he was possessed of a fortune adequate to his desires; which, by preserving the happy mean between extravagance and avarice, he neither diminished nor increased.

Mr. Browne’s application to the law did not prevent his occasionally indulging himself in the exercise of his poetical talents. It was not long after his settlement at Lincoln’s-inn that he wrote his poem on “Design and Beauty,” addressed to Highmore the painter, for whom he had a great friendship. In this, one of the longest of his poems, he shews an extensive knowledge of the Platonic philosophy; and pursues, through the whole, the idea of beauty advanced by that philosophy. By design is here meant, in a large and extensive sense, that power of genius which enables the real artist to collect together his scattered ideas, to range them in proper order, and to form a regular plan before he attempts to exhibit any work in architecture, painting, or poetry. He wrote several other poetical pieces during the interval between his fixing at LincolnVinn and his marriage one of the mostpleasing and popular of which was his “Pipe of Tobacco,” an imitation of Gibber, Ambrose Philips, Thomson, Young, Pope, and Swift, who were then all living; the peculiar manner of these several writers is admirably hit off by our author, who evidently possessed an excellent imitative genius. Indeed, nothing but a nice spirit of discrimination, and a happy talent at various composition, could have enabled him to have succeeded so well as he hath done in the “Pipe of Tobacco.” The imitation of Ambrose Philips was not written by our poet, but by an ingenious friend, the late Dr. John Hoaclly, chancellor of the diocese of Winchester, and second son of -the bishop. Dr. Hoadlyy however, acknowledged that his little imitation was altered so much for the better by Mr. Browne, that he fairly made it his own.

On the 10th of February 1743-4, Mr. Browne married Jane, daughter of the rev. Dr. David Trimnell, archdeacon of Leicester, and precentor of Lincoln, and niece to the right rev. Dr. Charles Trimnell, bishop of Winchester, a woman of great merit, and of a very amiable temper. He was chosen twice to serve in parliament; first upon a vacancy in December 1744, and then at the general election in 1748, for the borough of Wenlock in Shropshire, near to which his estate lay. This was principally owing to the interest of William Forester, esq. a gentleman of great fortune and ancient family in Shropshire, who recommended Mr. Browne to the electors, from the opinion he entertained of his abilities, and the confidence he had in his integrity and principles. As Mr. Browne had obtained his seat in parliament without opposition or expence, and without laying himself under obligations to any party, he never made use of it to interested or ambitious purposes. The principles, indeed, in which he had been educated, and which were confirmed by reading and experience, and the good opinion he had conceived of Mr. Pelham’s administration, led him usually to support the measures of government; but he never received any favour, nor desired any employment. He saw with great concern the dangers arising from parliamentary influence, and was determined that no personal consideration should biass his public conduct. The love of his country, and an ardent zeal for its constitution and liberties, formed a distinguishing part of his character. In private conversation, Mr. Browne possessed so uncommon a degree of eloquence, that he was the admiration and delight of all who knew him. It must, therefore, have been expected that he should have shone in the house of commons, as a public speaker. But he had a modesty and delicacy about him, accompanied with a kind of nervous timidity, which prevented him from appearing in that character. His case, in this respect, was similar to that of the third earl of Shaftesbury, Mr. Addison, and other ingenious men. Dr. Johnson said of him, “I. H. Browne, one of the first witsof this country, got into parliament, and never opened hismouth.”

In 1754 Mr. Browne published what may be called his. great work, his Latin poem “I}e Aiumi Immortalitate^ in two books, the reception of which was such as its merit deserved. It immediately excited the applause of the most polite scholars, and has been praised by some of the most eminent and ingenious men of the age, by archbishop Herring, Dr. E. Barnard, R. O. Cambridge, Mr. Upton, bishop Hoadly, bishop Green, Mr. Harris, Dr. Beattie, &c. &c. Its popularity was so great, that several English translations of it appeared in a little time. The first was by Mr. Hay, author of an” Essay on Deformity,“and other pieces; and the second in blank verse, by Dr. Richard Grey, a learned clergyman, well known by his” Memoria Technica,“and his publications in scripture criticism. A third translation was published without a name, but with a laboured preface, containing some quotations from sir John Davies’s” Nosce Teipsum,“which were supposed to be analogous to certain passages in Mr. Browne. All these versions made their appearance in the course of a few months; and there was afterwards printed, by an unknown hand, a translation of the first book. Some years after Mr. Browne’s death, the” De Animi Immortalitate“was again translated by the rev. Mr. Crawley, a clergyman in Huntingdonshire, and more recently Dr. John Lettice published a translation in blank verse, with a commentary and annotations, 1795, 8vo. A close and literal version, of it in prose was inserted by Mr. Highmore the painter in his publication which appeared in 1766, entitled” Essays moral, religious, and miscellaneous," But the best translation is that by Soame Jenyns, esq. printed in his Miscellanies, and since published in Mr. Browne’s poems. These testimonies and attentions paid to our ingenious author’s principal production, are striking evidences of the high sense which was justly entertained of its merit. Not to mention the usefulness and importance of the subject, every man of taste must feel that the poem is admirable for its perspicuity, precision, and order; and that it unites the philosophical learning and elegance of Cicero, with the numbers, and much of the poetry, of Lucretius and Virgil. Mr. Browne intended to have added a third book. In these three books he proposed to carry natural religion as far as it would go, and in so doing, to lay the true foundation of Christianity, of which he was a firm believer. But he went no farther than to leave a fragment of the third book, enough to make us lament that he did not complete the whole.

Though Mr. Browne was bred to a profession, and sat several years in parliament, he was not so shining or distinguished a character in public as in private life . His private life was chiefly divided between his books and his friends. His reading took in a large compass; but he had the greatest delight in the Greek and Roman writers. Few men formed so early and lasting a taste, and acquired so familiar a knowledge of the ancient poets, philosophers, orators, and historians, particularly those of the purest ages; and hence it was that he derived the happy art of transfusing into the more serious of his compositions, the graces of their diction, and the strength of their sentiments, without servile imitation. He was very conversant likewise with the best English and Italian authors. His memory enabled him to retain every thing which he had heard or read; and he could repeat, with the greatest facility and gracefulness, the fine passages he had treasured up in his mind. Having a perfect ear for harmony and rhythm, he was an admirable reader both of prose and verse, and without having ever applied himself to the practice of music, his natural taste rendered him a good judge in that delightful art. With these various accomplishments, to which were added, a remarkably happy talent of telling a story, a genuine flow of wit, as well as eloquence, a peculiar vein of humour, and, indeed, an excellence in every species of conversation, it is not surprising that his company was almost universally sought for and desired. His acquaintance was so courted, that, though his private inclination would have led him to have lived retired, in the society of a few old friends, he became, at different periods of his life, intimate with all the distinguished men of the age, and with those especially, who were most eminent for their learning and parliamentary abilities. His particular friends were persons of distinguished merit and virtue. By these he was held in the highest esteem and respect, and his union with them was never broken by any thing but death. His fine feelings, his enlarged and exalted sentiments, and the general excellence of his character, continued to render any social connections with him as lasting as they were desirable and delightful. One great object of Mr. Browne’s attention, during the latter part of his life, was the education of his only son, to whom he was an excellent father and instructor. Our author, after having laboured a considerable time under a weak and infirm state of health, died, of a lingering illness, at his house in Great Russel-street, Bloomsbury-square, London, on the 14th of February, 1760, in the fifty-fifth year of his age. In 1768, the present Mr. Hawkins Browne published an elegant edition, in large octavo, of his father’s poems; upon which occasion he had the satisfaction of receiving fresh testimonies to their merit from many eminent men then living. To this edition is prefixed a very fine head by Ravenet from a picture by Highmore.

, vicar of Olney in Buckinghamshire, and chaplain of Morden college, was born in 1703, and was originally a pen-cutter. Early in life he distinguished himself by his, poetical talents, and when only twenty years of age, published a tragedy called “Polidus,” and a farce called “All-bedevilled,” which were played together at a private theatre in St. Alban’s-street, neither of much merit. He became afterwards a frequent contributor to the Gentleman’s Magazine, and carried off several of the prizes which Cave, the printer and proprietor of that Magazine, then offered for the best compositions. When, Cave published a translation of Du Halde’s China, he inscribed the different plates to his friends, and one to “Moses Browne,” with which familiar designation Browne thought proper to be offended, and Cave, to pacify him, directed the engraver to introduce Mr. with a caret under the line. In 1729, he published his “Piscatory Eclogues,” without his name, which were reprinted in 1739, among his “Poems on various subjects,” 8vo, and again in an extended form, with notes, in 1773. For along time, however, even after his abilities were known, he remained in poverty, and in 1745, when it appears he had a wife and seven children, we find him applying to Dr. Birch for the situation of messenger, or door-keeper, to the royal society. In 1750, he published an edition of Walton and Cotton’s Angler, with a preface, notes, and some valuable additions, which was republished in 1759 and 1772, and in the former year drew him into a controversy with sir John Hawkins, who happened to be then publishing an improved edition of the same work. From his poems, as well as from the scattered observations in the “Angler,” he appears to have been always of a religious turn; and in 1752 published in verse, a series of devout contemplations, entitled “Sunday Thoughts,” which went through a second edition in 1764, and a third in 1781. In 1753, having some prospect of encouragement in the church, he took orders, and soon after his ordination was presented by the earl of Dartmouth to the vicarage of Olney in Buckinghamshire, on the cession of Mr. Wolsey Johnson. In 1754 he published a sermon, preached at Olney, on Christmas day, entitled “The Nativity and Humiliation of Jesus Christ, practically considered.” In 1755, he published a small quarto poem, entitled “Percy Lodge,” a seat of the duke and duchess of Somerset, written by command of their late graces, in 1749. In what year he was presented to the vicarage of Sutton, in Lincolnshire, we are not informed; but in 1763, he was elected to the chaplainship of Morden college in Kent, and some time after appointed the late rev. John Newton for his curate at Olney. In 1765 he published a sermon “preached to the Society for the Reformation of Manners,” and a few years after, a “Visitation Sermon,” delivered at Stony Stratford. Besides these, Mr. Browne is said to have published one or two political tracts; and in 1772, a translation of a work of John Liborius Zimmerman, entitled “The Excellency of the knowledge of Jesus Christ,” London, 12mo. He died at Morden college, Sept. 13, 1787, aged eighty-four. His wife died in 1783. Mr. Browne was a man of some learning and piety, but as a poet, we fear he cannot be allowed to rank higher than among versifiers.

, M. D. a naturalist of considerable eminence, the fourth son of Edward Browne, esq. a gentleman of respectable family, was born at Woodstock, the paternal inheritance, in the parish of Crossboyne, and county of Mayo, about 1720. After receiving the best education that country could afford, he was sent to a near relation in the island of Antigua in 1737; but the climate disagreeing very much with his constitution, he returned in about a year to Europe, and landing in France, went directly to Paris, where he speedily recovered his health, and with the approbation of his parents applied himself closely to the study of physic, and particularly to the science of botany, for which he always had a particular predilection. After five years spent at Paris, he removed to Leyden, where he studied near two years more, and from that university obtained his degree of M. D. Here he formed an intimacy with Gronovius and Muschenbroeck, and commenced a correspondence with Linnæus and other eminent botanists and learned men. From Holland he proceeded to London, where he practised near two years, and thence went out again to the West Indies, and after spending some months in Antigua and some others of the Sugar Islands, he proceeded to Jamaica, where he spent his time in collecting and preserving specimens of the plants, birds, shells, &c. of those luxuriant soils, with a view to the improvement of natural history.

Whilst in Jamaica, his residence was chiefly in Kingston, and it was he who first pointed out the absurdity of continuing Spanish-town the port and capital, while reason plainly pointed out Kingston, or in his own words, “the defects of a port of clearance to leeward;” and by his writings the governor and council represented the matter so strikingly to earl Granville, president of the council 1756, that the measure was immediately adopted, and Kingston made the port of clearance, to the very great benefit of commerce in general, as before that, when ships were clearing out of Kingston, and ready to weigh anchor, they were obliged to send near seven miles to Spanish-town, by which they often suffered great inconvenience and delay.

At this time he also collected materials, and made the necessary observations (being a very good mathematician and astronomer) for a new map of Jamaica, which he published in London, in August 1755, engraved by Dr. Bayly, on two sheets, by which the doctor cleared four hundred guineas. Soon after this (March 1756) he published his “Civil and Natural History of Jamaica,” in folio, ornamented with forty-nine engravings of natural history, a whole sheet map of the island, and another of the harbour of Port-Royal, Kingston-town, &c. Of this work there were but two hundred and fifty copies printed by subscription, at the very low price of one guinea, but a few were sold at two pounds two shillings in sheets by the printer. Most unfortunately all the copper-plates, as well as the original drawings, were consumed by the great fire in Cornhill, November 7, 1765. This alone prevented in his life-time a second edition of that work, for which he made considerable preparations, by many additional plants, and a few corrections in his several voyages to these islands, for he was six different times in the West Indies; in one of those trips he lived above twelve months in the island of Antigua: however, these observations will we trust not be lost to the public, as he sent before his death to sir Joseph Banks, P. R. S. “A catalogue of the plants growing in the Sugar Islands, &c. classed and described according to the Linnaean system,” in 4to, containing about eighty pages. In Exshaw’s Gentleman’s and London Magazine for June 1774, he published “A catalogue of the birds of Ireland,” and in Exshaw’s August Magazine following, “A catalogue of its fish.” In 1788 he prepared for the press a very curious and useful catalogue of the plants of the north-west counties of Ireland, classed with great care and accuracy according to the Linnsean system, containing above seven hundred plants, mostly observed by himself, having trusted very few to the descriptions of others. This little tract, written in Latin with the English and Irish names, might be of considerable use in assisting to compile a “Flora Hibernica,” a work every botanist will allow to be much wanting.

The doctor was a tall, comely man, of good address and gentle manners, naturally cheerful, very temperate, and in general healthy; but in his latter years had violent periodical fits of the gout, by which he suffered greatly: in the intervals of these unwelcome visits, he formed the catalogue of plants, and was always, when in health, doing something in natural history or mathematics. At a very early period he married in Antigua a native of that island, but had no issue. His circumstances were moderate, but easy, and the poor found ample benefit from his liberality as well as professional skill He died at Rushbrook, county of Mayo, on Sunday August 29, 1790, and was interred in the family burial-place at Crossboyne.

, a native of Ireland, /was at first provost of Trinity college in Dublin, and afterwards bishop of Cork: in the palace of which see he died in 1735, after having distinguished himself by some writings. 1. “A refutation of Toland’s Christianity not mysterious.” This was the foundation of his preferment; which occasioned him to say to Toland himself, that it was he who had made him bishop of Cork. 2. “The progress, extent, and limits of the human understanding,” 1728, 8vo. This was meant as a supplemental work, displaying more at large the principles on which he had confuted Toland. 3. “Sermons,” levelled principally against the Socinians, written in a manly and easy style, and much admired. He published also, 4. A little volume in 12mo, against the “Custom of drinking to the memory of the dead.” It was a fashion among the Whigs of his time, to drink to the glorious and immortal memory of king William III. which greatly disgusted our bishop, and is supposed to have given rise to the piece in question. His notion was that drinking to the dead is tantamount to praying for the dead, and not, as is really meant, an approbation of certain conduct or principles. The only effect, however, was that the whigs added to their toast, “in spite of the bishop of Cork.”

, an able and learned minister and writer among the protestant dissenters, and who was remarkable for a mental disorder of a most extraordinary kind, was born at Shepton-Mallet, in Somersetshire, about 1680. He was instructed in grammar by the rev. Mr. Cumming, who was pastor of a congregation in that town; from whence he was removed to Bridgewater, and finished Jiis studies under the care of the rev. Mr. Moor. As he possessed uncommon parts, which had been improved by the most assiduous application, he was very early thought qualified for the ministry; so that he began to preach some time before he was twenty years of age. His talents soon rendered him so conspicuous among the dissenters, that he was chosen minister of a considerable congregation at Portsmouth, in which situation he continued some years. In 1706, he published a small treatise, entitled “A caveat against evil Company.” In 1709, he published, in one volume, 8vo, “The true character of the real Christian.” He discharged the duties of the pastoral office at Portsmouth with so much fidelity and diligence, as procured him universal esteem; but, in 1716, he removed to the great regret of his congregation, in consequence of his being invited to accept of the pastoral charge of the congregation of protestant dissenters in the Old Jewry, London, which was one of the most considerable in the kingdom. In 1720, he published, in one volume, 12mo, “Hymns and Spiritual Songs, in three books.” In 1722, he published a volume of “Sermons,” and about the same time a “Letter to the rev. Thomas Reynolds,” in which he censures that gentleman and other dissenters for requiring of their brethren explicit declarations of their belief in the doctrine of the Trinity. At the Old Jewry he continued to preach for about seven years with the greatest reputation, mid was much beloved and esteemed by his congregation: but, in 1723, a complicated domestic affliction, the loss of his wife, and of an only son, so deeply affected him, that he was at first in a state little different from distraction; and the disorder which his imagination had sustained from the shock that he had received, at length settled into a melancholy of a very extraordinary nature. He desisted from the duties of his function, and could not be persuaded to join in any act of worship, either public or private. He imagined, " that Almighty God, by a singular instance of divine power, had, in a gradual manner, annihilated in him the thinking substance, and utterly divested him of consciousness: that though he retained the human shape, and the faculty of speaking, in a manner that appeared to others rational, he had all the while no more notion of what he said than a parrot. And, very consistently with this, he looked upon himself as no longer a moral agent, a subject of reward or punishment. 7 ' He continued in this persuasion to the end of his life, with very little variation. Nothing grieved him more, than that he could not persuade others to think of him as he thought of himself. He sometimes considered this as questioning his veracity, which affected him in the most sensible manner; and he often took pains, by the most solemn asseverations, to remove such an imputation. At other times, and in a more gloomy hour, he would represent the incredulity which was manifested towards him, as a judicial effect of the same divine power jhat had occasioned this strange alteration in him, as if God had determined to proceed against him in this way, and would have no application made in his behalf. Upon this account, for a long while, he was unwilling that any prayers should be made for him; which, he would say, could be warranted by nothing but a faith in miracles, and even refused to say grace at table, or if urged to it, appeared in the greatest distress. At the beginning of his disorder, he was so unhappy in himself, as to have frequent propensities to deprive himself of life; but he afterwards grew more serene, and appeared to have little or no terror upon his mind. He considered himself as one who, though he had little to hope, had no more to fear, and was therefore, for the most part, calm and composed; and when the conversation did not turn upon himself, as it was generally rational and very serious, so was it often cheerful and pleasant. But his opinion concerning himself occasionally led him into inconsistencies; and when these were pointed out to him, he sometimes appeared much puzzled.

Whilst he was under the influence of this strange frenzy, it was extremely remarkable, that his faculties appeared to be in every other respect in their full vigour. He continued to apply himself to his studies, and discovered the same force of understanding which had formerly distinguished him, both in his conversation and in his writings. Having, however, quitted the ministry, he retired into the country, to his native town of Shepton-Mallet. Here, for some time, he amused himself with translating several parts of the ancient Greek and Latin poets into English verse. He afterwards composed several little pieces for the use of children, an English grammar and spelling-book, an abstract of the scripture -history, and a collection of fables, the two last both in metre. With great labour he also amassed together, in a short compass, all the themes of the Greek and Latin tongues, and compiled likewise a dictionary to each of these works, in order to render the learning of both those languages more easy and compendious. But neither of these pieces, nor several others which were written by him during his retirement, were ever printed. During the last two years of his life, he employed himself in the defence of the truth of Christianity, against some of the attacks which were then made against it; and also in recommending mutual candour to Christians of different sentiments concerning the doctrine of the Trinity. In 1732, he published, in 8vo, “A sober and charitable disquisition concerning the importance of the Doctrine of the Trinity; particularly with regard to Worship, and the doctrine of Satisfaction: endeavouring to shew, that those in the different schemes should bear with each other in their different sentiments; nor separate communions, and cast one another out of Christian-fellowship on this account.” The same year he published, “A fit Rebuke to a ludicrous Infidel, in some remarks on Mr. Woolston’s fifth Discourse on the Miracles of our Saviour. With a preface concerning the prosecution of such writers by the civil powers.” It was in the same year also that he published his “Defence of the Religion of Nature, and the Christian Revelation, against the defective account of the one, and the exceptions against the other, in a book, entitled, Christianity as old as the Creation.” In all these pieces, though written in his retirement, with little assistance from books, or learned conversation, he yet displayed considerable extent of knowledge, and of argumentative powers. But to the last of these performances, he prefixed a very singular dedication to queen Caroline, expressive of the unhappy delusion under which he laboured; and which his friends prudently suppressed, aU though it is too great a curiosity to be lost . After his retirement into the country, he could not be prevailed upon to use any kind of exercise or recreation; so that a complication of disorders, contracted by his sedentary mode of living, at length brought on a mortification in his leg, which put a period to his life, at the close of the year 1732, in the fifty-second year of his age. He had several daughters, who survived him. He was a man of extensive knowledge, and very considerable learning. He was well skilled in theology, his sentiments were liberal, and he was a zealous advocate for freedom of inquiry. He appears, from the general tenor of his life, and of his writings, to have been a man of distinguished virtue, and of the most fervent piety, and to have been animated by an ardent zeal for the interests of rational and practical religion. His abilities made him respected, and his virtues rendered him beloved: but such was the peculiarity of his case, that he lived a melancholy instance of the weakness of human nature.

After Mr. Browne’s death, in 1733, was published, in 8vo, as a separate piece, “The Close of the Defence of the Religion of Nature and the Christian Revelation: in answer to Christianity as old as the Creation. In an address to Christian ministers and the Christian people.” The author of Christianity as old as the Creation urges it as an argument against the truth of the Gospel revelation, that it has been productive of but little good effect in the lives of Christians, and that it does not appear that they have arrived at any higher state of perfection than the rest of mankind. This objection Mr. Browne answered in his Defence; and his Close of that Defence is an earnest and pathetic exhortation to Christian ministers and people, of all denominations, not to give so much ground by their conduct for such objections of the deists, but to regulate their lives in a more exact conformity to the precepts of the excellent religion which they professed. Besides the works of Mr. Browne which have been enumerated, he also published several single sermons; and was one of the authors of the “Occasional Paper,” a kind of periodical work, collected and published in 3 vols. 8vo. Some of his Mss. are in the British Museum, and among them a version of some of the Psalms.

, a clergyman of the church of England in the seventeenth century, was born in the county of Middlesex in 1604, was elected student of Christ church in 1620, and took the degrees in arts, that of master being completed in 1627. In 1636, he served the office of proctor, and the year after was made domestic chaplain to archbishop Laud, and bachelor of divinity. Soon after he became rector of St. Mary, Aldermary, London, canon of Windsor in 1639, and rector of Oddington in Oxfordshire. On the breaking out of the rebellion, he was ejected from his church in London by the ruling party, and retired to his majesty, to whom he was chaplain, at Oxford, and in 1642 was created D. D. having then only the profits of Oddington to maintain him. He appears afterwards to have been stripped even of this, and went to the continent, where he was for some time chaplain to Mary, princess of Orange. After the restoration, he was admitted again to his former preferments, but does not appear to have had any other reward for his losses and sufferings. He died at Windsor Dec. 6, 1673, and was buried on the outside of St. George’s chapel, where Dr. Isaac Vossius, his executor, erected a monument to his memory, with an inscription celebrating his learning, eloquence, critical talents, and knowledge of antiquities. Besides a sermon preached before the university in 1633, he published, “A Key to the King’s Cabinet; or animadversions upon the three printed speeches of Mr. L'isle, Mr. Tate, and Mr. Browne, members of the house of commons, spoken at a common hall in London, July 1645, detecting the malice and falsehood of their blasphemous observations upon the king and queen’s letters,” Oxford, 1645, 4to. His next publication was a treatise in defence of Grotius against an epistle of Salmasius, “De posthumo Grotii;” this he printed at the Hague, 1646, 8vo, under the name of Simplicius Virinus, and it was not known to be his until after his death, when the discovery was made by Vossius. He wrote also, “Dissertatio de Therapeutis Philonis adversus Henricum Valesium,” Loud. 1687, 8vo, at the end of Colomesius’ edition of St. Clement’s epistles; and he translated part of Camden’s annals of queen Elizabeth, under the title, “Tomus alter et idem; or the History of the life and reign of that famous princess Elizabeth, &c.” London, 1629, -4to. In the Republic of Letters, vol. VI. 1730, we find published for the first time, a “Concio ad Clerum,” delivered for his divinity bachelor’s degree in 1637; the subject, “the revenues of the clergy,” which even at that period were threatened.

, an eminent physician and antiquary, was born in London, in the parish of St. Michael, Cheapside, Oct. 19, 1605. His father was a merchant, of an ancient family at Upton in Cheshire. He lost his father very early, and was defrauded by one of his guardians, by whom, however, or by his mother, who soon after his father’s death married sir Thomas Dutton, he was placed at Winchester school. In 1623 he was removed from Winchester to Oxford, and entered a gentlemancommoner of Broadgate-hall. Here he was admitted to his bachelor’s degree, Jan. 31, 1626-27, being the first person of eminence graduated from Broadgate-hall, when endowed and known as Pembroke-college. After taking his master’s degree, he turned his studies to physic, and practised it for some time in Oxfordshire, but soon afterwards, either induced by curiosity, or invited by promises, he quitted his settlement, and accompanied his father-in-law, who had some employment in Ireland, in a visitation of the forts and castles, which the state of Ireland then made necessary. From Ireland he passed into France and Italy; made some stay at Montpelier and Padua, which were then the celebrated schools of physic; and, returning home through Holland, procured himself to be created M. D. at Leyden, but when he began these travels, or when he concluded them, there is no certain account. It is, however, supposed that he returned to London in 1634, and that the following year he wrote his celebrated treatise, the “Religio Medici,” which he declares himself never to have intended for the press, having composed it only for his own exercise and entertainment. He had, however, communicated it to his friends, and by some means a copy was given to a printer in 1642, and was no sooner published than it excited the attention of the public by the novelty of paradoxes, the dignity of sentiment, the quick succession of images, the multitude of abstruse allusions, the subtlety of disquisition, and the strength of language.

The earl of Dorset recommended this book to the perusal of sir Kenelm Digby, who returned his judgment upon it, not in a letter, but in a book; in which, though mingled with some positions fabulous and uncertain, there are acute remarks, just censures, and profound speculations, yet its principal claim to admiration is, that it was written in twenty-four hours, of which part was spent in procuring Browne’s book, and part in reading it. This induced sir Thomas to publish a more correct edition of his work, which had great success. A Mr. Merryweather of Cambridge, turned it, not inelegantly, into Latin, and from his version it was again translated into Italian, German, Dutch, and French, and at Strasburgh the Latin translation was published with large notes, by Lenuus Nicolaus Moltfarius. Of the English annotations, which, in all the editions from 1644, accompany the book, the author is unknown. Merryweather, we are told, had some difficulty in getting his translation printed in Holland. The first printer to whom he offered it carried it to Salmasius, “who laid it by (says he) in state for three months,” and then discouraged its publication: it was afterwards rejected by two other printers, and at last was received by Hackius. The peculiarities of the book raised the author, as is usual, many admirers and many enemies; but we know not of more than one professed answer, written under the title of “Medicus Ivledicatus,” by Alexander Ross, which was universally neglected by the world. Abroad it was animadverted upon as having an irreligious tendency, by Guy Patin, by Tobias Wagner, by Muller, Reiser, and Buddeus, and w&s put into the Index Expurgatorius. At present it will probably be thought that it was both too much applauded and too much censured, and that it would have been a more useful book had the author’s fancy been more guided by judgment.

At the time when this book was published, Dr. Browne resided at Norwich, where he had settled in 1636, by the persuasion of Dr. Lushington, his tutor, who was then rector of Barnham Westgate, in the neighbourhood. It is recorded by Wood, that his practice was very extensive. In 1637 he was incorporated M. D, at Oxford. He married in 1641 Mrs. Mileham, of a good family in Norfolk, a lady of very amiable character. Dr. Johnson says this marriage could not but draw the raillery of contemporary wits upon a man, who had been just wishing, in his new book, “that we might procreate, like trees, without conjunction;” and had lately declared, that “the whole world was made for man, but only the twelfth part of man for woman,” and that “man is the whole world, but woman only the rib or crooked part of man.” They lived happily, however, together for forty-one years, during which she bore him ten children, of whom one son and three daughters outlived their parents. She survived him two years.

In 1646, he printed “Enquiries into vulgar and common Errors,” small folio, a work, says his biographer, which, as it arose not from fancy and invention, but from observation and books, and contained not a single discourse of one continued tenor, but an enumeration of many unconnected particulars, must have been the collection of years, and the effect of a design early formed, and long pursued. It is, indeed, adds the same writer, to be wished, that he had longer delayed the publication, and added what the remaining part of his life might have furnished. He published in 1673 the sixth edition, with some improvements. This book, like his former, was received with great applause, was answered by Alexander Koss, and translated into Dutch and German, and afterwards into French. It might, Dr. Johnson thinks, now be proper to reprint it with notes, partly supplemental and partly emendatory, to subjoin those discoveries which the industry of the last age has made, and correct those mistakes which the author has committed, not by idleness or negligence, but for want of Boyle’s and Newton’s philosophy.

The reputation of Browne encouraged some low writer to publish, under his name, a book called “Nature’s cabinet unlocked,” translated, according to Wood, from the physics of Magirus, but Browne advertised against it. In 1658, the discovery of some ancient urns in Norfolk gave him occasion to write “Hydriotaphia, Urn -burial, or a discourse of Sepulchral Urns,” 8vo, in which he treats with his usual learning, on the funeral rites of the ancient nations; exhibits their various treatment of the dead; and examines the substances found in these Norfolk urns. There is, perhaps, none -of his works which better exemplifies his reading or memory. To this treatise was added “The Garden of Cyrus, or the Quincunxial lozenge, or net-work plantation of the ancients, artificially, naturally, mystically considered.” This is a more fanciful performance than the other, but still it exhibits the fancy of a man of learning. Besides these, he left some papers prepared for the press, of which two collections have been published, the first by Dr. Thomas Tennison, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, in 1684, 8vo, entitled, “A Collection of Miscellaneous Tracts,” and these, with what had been published in his life-time, were printed in one vol. fol. in 1686. In 1690 his son, Dr. Edward Browne, of whom we have already spoken, published a single tract, entitled “A Letter to a friend upon occasion of the death of his intimate friend,” 8vo. The second collection was of the “Posthumous Works,” edited in 1722 by Owen Brigstock, esq. his grandson by marriage.

To the life of this learned man, there remains little to be added, but that in 1665 he was chosen honorary fellow of the college of physicians; and in 1671, received at Norwich the honour of knighthood from Charles II. In his seventy-sixth year, he was seized with a colic, which, aftet having tortured him about a week, put an end to his life at Norwich, Oct. 19, 1682. Some of his last words were expressions of submission to the will of God, and fearlessness of death. He was buried in the church of St. Peter, Mancroft, in Norwich, with a Latin inscription on a mural monument.

In 1716 there appeared a book of his in 12mo, entitled “Christian Morals,” published from the original and correct manuscript of the author, by John Jeffery, D. D. archdeacon of Norwich. It was dedicated by our author’s daughter, Mrs. Elizabeth Littleton, to David, earl of Buchan. Of this a second edition was published in 1756 by Mr. John Payne, bookseller, and one of Dr. Johnson’s early patrons, who solicited him to write a life of sir Thomas. This, of which we have availed ourselves in the preceding account, may be classed among Dr. Johnson’s best biographical performances, and the present article may be very properly concluded with his character of Browne’s works. After mentioning the various writers who have noticed Browne, he adds, “But it is not on the praises of others, but on his own writings, that he is to depend for the esteem of posterity; of which he will not easily be deprived, while learning shall have any reverence among men: for there is no science in which he does not discover some skill; and scarce any kind of knowledge, profane or sacred, abstruse or elegant, which he does not appear to have cultivated with success. His exuberance of knowledge, and plenitude of ideas, sometimes obstruct the tendency of his reasoning, and the clearness of his decisions: on whatever subject he employed his mind, there started up immediately so many images before him, that he lost one by grasping another. His memory supplied him with so many illustrations, parallel or dependent notions, that he was always starting into collateral considerations: but the spirit and vigour of his pursuit always gives delight; and the reader follows him, without reluctance, through his mazes, in themselves flowery and pleasing, and ending at the point originally in view. To have great excellencies, and great faults, ‘ magn<e virtutes nee minora vitia, is the poesy/ says our author, l of the best natures.’ This poesy may be properly applied to the style of Browne: it is vigorous, but rugged; it is learned, but pedantic; it is deep, but obscure; it strikes, but does not please; it commands, but does not allure; his tropes are harsh, and his combinations uncouth. He fell into an age, in which our language began to lose the stability which it had obtained in the time of Elizabeth; and was considered by every writer as a subject on which he might try his plastic skill, by moulding it according to his own fancy. Milton, in consequence of this encroaching licence, began to introduce the Latin idiom; and Browne, though he gave less disturbance to our structures and phraseology, yet poured in a multitude of exotic words; many, indeed, useful and significant, which, if rejected, must be supplied by circumlocution, such as commensality for the state of many living at the same table; but many superfluous, as a paralogical for an unreasonable doubt; and some so obscure, that they conceal his meaning rather than explain it, as arthriticai analogies for parts that serve some animals in the place of joints. His style is, indeed, a tissue of many languages; a mixture of heterogeneous words, brought together from distant regions, with terms originally appropriated to one art, and drawn by violence into the service of another. He must, however, be confessed to have augmented our philosophical diction; and in defence of his uncommon words and expressions, we must consider, that he had uncommon sentiments, and was not content to express in many words that idea for which any language could supply a single term. But his innovations are sometimes pleasing, and his temerities happy: he has many verba ardentia, forcible expressions, which he would never have found, but by venturing to the utmost verge of propriety; and flights which would never have been reached, but by one who had very little fear of the shame of falling.”

sir Thomas Browne, is to vindicate him from the charge of infidelity; and haviilg fully shewn the falsity of this accusation, the ingenious biographer concludes in the following words: “The opinions of every man must be learned from himself: concerning his practice, it is safest to trust the evidence of others. Where these testimonies concur, no higher degree of historical certainty can be obtained; and they apparently concur to prove, that Browne was a zealous adherent to the faith of Christ, that he lived in obedience to his laws, and died in confidence of his mercy.”

, an ingenious English poet, was the son of Thomas Browne of Tavistock in Devonshire, gent, who, according to Prince, in his Worthies of Devon, was most probably a descendant from the knightly family of Browne of Brownes-Ilash in the parish of Langtree near Great Torrington in Devonshire. His son was born in 1590, and became a student of Exeter college, Oxford, about the beginning of the reign of James I. After making a great progress in classical and polite literature, he removed to the Inner Temple, where his attention to the study of the law was frequently interrupted by his devotion to the muses. In his twenty -third year (1613) he published, in folio, the first part of his “Britannia’s Pastorals,” which, according to the custom of the time, was ushered into the world with so many poetical eulogies, that he appears to have secured, at a very early age, the friendship and favour of the most celebrated of his contemporaries, among whom we find the names of Selden and Drayton. To these he afterwards added Davies of Hereford, Ben Jonson, and others. That he wrote some of these pastorals before he had attained his twentieth year, has been conjectured from a passage in Book I. Song V.; but there is sufficient internal evidence, independent of these lines, that much of tham was the offspring of a juvenile fancy. In the following year, he published in 8vo, “The Shepherd’s Pipe,” in seven eclogues. In the fourth of these he laments the death of his friend Mr. Thomas Manwood, under the name of Philarete, the precursor, as some critics assert, of Milton’s Lycidas.

In 1616, he published the second part of his “Britannia’s Pastorals,” recommended as before, by his poetical friends, whose praises he repaid with liberality in the body of the work. The two parts were reprinted in 8vo in 1625, and procured him, as is too frequently the case, more fame than profit. About a year before this, he appears to have taken leave of the muses, and returned to< Exeter college, in the capacity of tutor to Robert Dormer, earl of Caernarvon, a nobleman who fell at the battle of Newbury in 1643, while fighting gallantly for his king, at the head of a regiment of horse, and of whom lord Clarendon has given us a character drawn with his usual discrimination and fidelity. While guiding the studies of this nobleman, Browne was created master of arts, with this honourable notice in the public register, “Vir omni huinana literatura et bonarum artium cognitione instructus.”

After leaving the university with, lord Caernarvon, hefound a liberal patron in William earl of Pembroke, of whom likewise we have a most elaborate character in Clarendon, some part of which reflects honour on our poet.­“He was a great lover of his country, and of the religion and justice, which he believed could only support it: and his friendships were only it ith men of those principles. And as his conversation was most with men of the most pregnant parts and understanding; so towards any such, who needed support, or encouragement, though unknown, if fairly recommended to him, he was very liberal.” This nobleman, who had a respect for Browne probably founded on the circumstances intimated in the above character, took him into his family, and employed him in such a manner, according to Wood, that he was enabled to purchase an estate. Little more, however, is known of his history, nor is the exact time of his death ascertained. Wood finds that one of both his names, of Ottery St. Mary in Devonshire, died in the winter of 1645, but knows not whether this be the same. He hints at his person in these words, “as he had a little body, so a great mind;” a high character from this biographer who had no indulgence for poetical failings.

Browne has experienced the fate of many of his contemporaries whose fame died with them, and whose writings have been left to be revived, under many disadvantages, by an age of refined taste and curiosity. The civil wars which raged about the time of his death, and whose consequences continued to operate for many years after, diverted the public mind from the concerns of poetry. The lives of the poets were forgotten, and their works perished through neglect or wantonness. We have no edition of Browne’s poems from 1625 to 1772, when Mr. Thomas Davies, the bookseller, was assisted by some of his learned friends in publishing them, in three small volumes. The advertisement, prefixed to the first volume, informs us that the gentlemen of the king’s library procured the use of the first edition of “Britannia’s Pastorals,” which had several manuscript notes on the margin, written by the rev. William Thomson, one of the few scholars of his time who studied the antiquities of English poetry. Mr. Thomas Warton contributed his copy of the “Shepherd’s Pipe,” which was at that time so scarce that no other could be procured. Mr. Price, the librarian of the Bodleian library, sent a correct copy of the Elegy upon the death of Henry prince of Wales, from a manuscript in that repository; and Dr. Farmer furnished a transcript of the “Inner Temple Mask” from the library of Emanuel college, which had nevr before been printed. With such helps, a correct edition might have been expected, but the truth is, that the few editions of ancient poets, (Suckling, Marvel!, Carew, &c.) which Davies undertook to print, are extremely deficient in correctness. Of this assertion, which the comparison of a few pages with any of the originals will amply confirm, we have a very striking instance in the present work, in which two entire pages of the Book I. of Britannia’s Pastorals were omitted.

His works exhibit abundant specimens of true inspiration; and had his judgment been equal to his powers of invention, or had he yielded less to the bad taste of his age, or occasionally met with a critic instead of a flatterer, he would have been entitled to a much higher rank in the class of genuine poets. His Pastorals form a vast storehouse of rural imagery and description, and in personifying the passions and affections, he exhibits pictures that are not only faithful, but striking, just to nature and to feeling, and frequently heightened by original touches of the pathetic and sublime, and by many of those wild graces which true genius only can exhibit. It is not improbable that he studied Spenser, as well as the Italian poets. To the latter he owes something of elegance and something of extravagance. From the former he appears to have caught the idea of a story like the Faery Queene, although it wants regularity of plan; and he follows his great model in a profusion of allegorical description and romantic landscape. His versification, which is so generally harmonious, that where he fails it may be imputed to carelessness, is at the same time so various as to relax the imagination with specimens of every kind, and he seems to pass from the one to the other with an ease that we do not often find among the writers of lengthened poems. Those, however, who are in search of faulty rhimes, of foolish conceits, of vulgar ideas, and of degrading imagery, will not lose their pains. He was, among other qualities, a man of humour, and his humour is often exceedingly extravagant. So mixed, indeed, is his style, and so whimsical his flights, that we are sometimes reminded of Swift in all his grossness, and sometimes of Milton in the plenitude of his inspiration. Mr. Warton has remarked that the morning landscape of the L* Allegro is an assemblage of the same objects which Browne had before collected in his Britannia’s Pastorals, B. IV. Song IV. beginning

It has already been noticed that Philarete was the precursor of Lycidas, but what Mr. Warton asserts of Comus deserves some consideration. After copying the exquisite Ode which Circe, in the Inner Temple Mask, sings as a charm to drive away sleep from Ulysses, Mr. Warton adds, “In praise of this song, it will be sufficient to say that it reminds us of some favourite touches in Milton’s Comus, to which it perhaps gave birth. Indeed, one cannot help observing here in general, although the observation more properly belongs to another place, that a masque thus recently exhibited on the story of Circe, which there is reason to think had acquired some popularity, suggested to Milton the hint of a masque on the story of Comus. It would be superfluous to point out minutely the absolute similarity of the two characters; they both deal in incantations conducted by the same mode of operation, and producing effects exactly parallel.”

Without offering any objection to these remarks, it may still be necessary to remind the reader of a circumstance to which this excellent critic has not adverted, namely, that the Inner Temple Mask appears to have been exhibited about the year 1620, when Milton was a boy of only twelve years old, and remained in manuscript until Dr. Farmer procured a copy for the edition of 1772 and that Milton produced his Comus at the age of twenty-six. It remains, therefore, for some future conjecturer to determine on the probability of Milton’s having seen Browne’s manuscript in the interim.

Prince informs us, that “as he had honoured his country with his sweet and elegant Pastorals, 90 it was expected, and he also entreated, a little farther to grace it by his drawing out the line of his poetic ancestors, beginning in Joseph Iscanus, and ending in himself: a noble design, if it had been effected.” Josephus Iscanus was Joseph of Exeter, who flourished in the thirteenth century, and wrote two epic poems in Latin heroics. Had Browne begun much later, he would have conferred a very high obligation on posterity. Collections of poetry are of very ancient date, but very little is known with certainty of the lives of English poets, and that little, must now be recovered with great difficulty.

, a physician of the last century, and a man of a singular and whimsical cast of mind, was born in 1692, and in 1707 was entered of Peterhouse, Cambridge, where he took the degrees, B. A. 1710, M, A. 1714, and M. D. 1721, and soon after settled at Lynn, in Norfolk, where he published v Dr. Gregory’s “Elements of catoptrics and dioptrics,” translated from the Latin original, to which he added: 1. A method for finding the ibcrof all specula, as well as lenses universally; as also magnifying or lessening a given object by a given speculum, or lens> in any assigned proportion. 2. A solution of those problems which Dr. Gregory has left undemonstrated. 3. A particular account of microscopes and telescopes, from Mr. Huygens; with the discoveries made by catoptrics and dioptrics. By an epigram, many of which he provoked, he appears to have been the champion of the fair sex at Lynn, in 1748. On one occasion, a pamphlet having been written against him, he nailed it up against his house-door. Having acquired a competency by his profession, he removed to Queen-square, Ormondstreet, London, where he resided till his death, which happened March 10, 1774, at the age of 82. A great number of lively essays, both in prose and verse, the production of his pen, were printed and circulated among his friends. Among these were: 1. “Ode in imitation of Horace,” ode 3, lib. iii. addressed to the right hon. sir Robert Walpole, on ceasing to be minister, Feb. 6, 1741; designed, he says, as a just panegyric on a great minister, the glorious revolution, protestant succession, and principles of liberty. To which was added the original ode, “defended in commentariolo.” It was inscribed to George carl of Orford, as an acknowledgement of the favours conferred by his lordship as well as by his father and grandfather. On the first institution of the militia, our author was appointed one of the earl’s deputy-lieutenants, and was named in his lordship’s first commission of the peace. 2. Opuscula varia utriusque linguae, medicinam; medicorum collegium; literas, utrasque academias; empiricos, eorum cultores; solicitatorem, prsestigiatorem; poeticen, criticen; patronum, patriam; religionem, libertatem, spectantia. Cum praefatione eorum editionem defendente. Auctore D. Gulielmo Browne, equite aurato, M. D. utriusque et medicorum et physicorum S. R. S. 175, 4to. This little volume (which was dated “Ex area dicta reginali, MDCCLXV. in nonas Januarias, ipso Ciceronis et auctoris natali”) contained, I. Oratio Harveiana, in theatro collegii medicorum Londinensis habita, 1751. II. A vindication of the college of physicians, in reply to solicitorgeneral Murray, 1753. III. Ode in imitation of Horace, Ode I. addressed to the duke of Montague. With a new interpretation, in commentariolo, 1765. IV. The Ode, above-mentioned, to sir Robert Walpole. Some time before, sir William had published odes in imitation of Horace; addressed to sir John Dolben, to sir John Turner, to doctor Askew, and to Robert lord Walpole. 3. Appendix altera ad opuscula; oratiuncula, collegii medicorum Londinensis cathedrae vatedicens. In comitiis, postridie jdivi Michaelis, MDCCLXXVII. ad collegii administrationem renovandam designatis; machinaque incendiis extinguendis apta contra permissos rebelies munitis; habita a D. GuBrowne, equite aurato, praeside? “1768? 4to, This farewell oration contains so many curious particulars of sir William’s life, that the reader will not be displeased to see some extracts from it, and with his own spelling.” The manly age and inclination, with conformable studies, I diligently applied to the practice of physic in the country; where, as that age adviseth, I sought riches and friendships. But afterwards, being satiated witn friends, whom truth, not flattery, had procured; satiated with riches, which Galen, not fortune, had presented; I resorted immediately to this college: where, in further obedience to the same adviser, I might totally addict myself to the service of honour. Conducted by your favour, instead of my own merit, I have been advanced, through various degrees of honour, a most delightful climax indeed, even to the very highest of all which the whole profession of physic hath to confer. In this chair, therefore, twice received from the elects, shewing their favour to himself, he confesseth much more than to the college, your præsident

The age of presiding, by the custom of our predecessors, was generally a lustrum, five years; although our Sloane, now happy, like another Nestor, lived to see three ages, both as president and as man. But two years more than satisfy me: for, that each of the elects may in his turn hold the sceptre of prudence, far more desirable than power, given by Caius, which the law of justice and sequity recommends,

But in truth, among such endearing friendships with you, such delightful conversations, such useful communications, with which this amiable situation hath blessed me, one or two things, as is usual, have happened not at all to my satisfaction. One, that, while most studious of peace myself, I hoped to have preserved the peace of the college secure and intire, I too soon found that it was not otherwise to be sought for than by war: but even after our first adversary, because inconsiderable, was instantly overthrown, and his head completely cut off by the hand of the law, yet from the same neck, as if Hydra had been our enemy, so many other heads broke out, yea, and with inhuman violence broke into this very senate, like monsters swimming in our medical sea, whom I beheld with unwilling indeed, but with dry, or rather fixed eyes, because not suspecting'the least mischief from thence to the college, and therefore laughing, so far from fearing. The other, in reality, never enough to be lamented, that, while I flattered myself with having, by my whole power of persuasion, in the room of Orphaeaii music, raised the Croonian medical lecture as it were from the shades into day, if there could be any faith in solemn promises; that faith being, to my very great wonder, violated, this lecture, like another Eurydice, perhaps looked after by me too hastily, beloved by me too desperately, instantly slipped back again, and fled indignant to the shades below."

The active part taken by sir William Browne in the contest with the licentiates, occasioned his being introduced by Mr. Foote in his “Devil upon two sticks.” Upon Foote’s exact representation of him with his identical wig and coat, odd figure, and glass stiffly applied to his eye, he sent him a card complimenting him on having so happily represented him; but, as he had forgot his muff, he had sent him his own. This good-natured method of resenting, disarmed Foote. His next publication was: 4. “A farewell Oration, &c.” a translation of the preceding article, 1768, 4to. 5. “Fragmentum Isaaci Hawkins Browne, arm. sive Anti-Bolinbrokius, liber primus. Translated for a second Religio Medici,” 1768, 4to. The autlior modestly calls this “a very hasty performance;” and says, “In my journey from Oxford to Bath, meeting with continued rain, which kept me three days on the road, in compassion to my servants and horses; and having my friend a pocket companion, I found it the best entertainment my tedious baiting could afford to begin and finish this translation.” This was dated Oct. 24, 1768; and his second part was completed on the 20th of the following month: “My undertaking,” he says, “to complete, as well as I could, the Fragment of my friend, hath appeared to me so very entertaining a work, even amongst the most charming delights and most cheerful conversations at Bath; that I have used more; expedition, if the very many avocations there be considered, in performing this, than in that former translation;” and to this part was prefixed a congratulatory poem “To Isaac Hawkins Browne, esq. son of his deceased friend, on his coming of age, Dec. 7, 1766.” The good old knight’s Opuscula were continually on the increase. The very worthy master of a college at Cambridge, lately living, relates a story of him, that waiting for sir William in some room at the college, where hie was come to place a near relation, he found him totally absorbed in thought, over a fine 4to volume of these Opuscula, which he constantly, he said, carried about with him, that they might be benefited by frequent revisals.

“When you see Dr. Heberden, pray communicate to him. an unexpected honour I have lately received. The other day, word was brought me from below, that one sir William Browne sent up his name, and should be glad to kiss my hand. I judged it to be the famous physician, whom I had never seen, nor had the honour to know. When I came down into the drawing-room, I was accosted by a little, round, well-fed gentleman, with a large muff in one hand, a small Horace, open, in the other, and a spying-glass dangling in a black ribbon at his button. After the first salutation, he informed me that his visit was indeed to me; but principally, and in. the first place, to Prior-Park, which had so inviting a prospect from below; and he did riot doubt but, on examination, it would sufficiently repay the trouble he had given himself of coming up to it on foot. We then took our chairs; and the first thing he did or said, was to propose a doubt to me concerning a passage in Horace, which all this time he had still open in his hand. Before I could answer, he gave me the solution of this long-misunderstood passage; and, in support of his explanation, had the charity to repeat his own paraphrase of it in English verse, just come hot, as he said, from the brain. When this and chocolate were over, having seen all he wanted of me, he desired to see something more of the seat, and particularly what he called the monument, by which I understood him to mean the Prior’s tower. Accordingly, I ordered a servant to attend him thither, and when he had satisfied his curiosity, either to let him out from the Park above, into the Down, or from the garden below into the road. Which he chose, I never asked; and so this honourable visit ended. Hereby you will understand that the design of all this was to be admired. And indeed he had my admiration to the full; but for nothing so much, as for his being able at past eighty to perform this expedition on foot, in no good weather, and with all the alacrity of a boy, both in body and mind.” This portrait is correct in every thing but the age, sir William being only then (1767) seventy-five.

On a controversy for a raker in the parish where he lived in London, carried on so warmly as to open taverns for men, and coffee-house breakfasts for ladies, he exerted himself greatly; wondering a man bred at two universities should be so little regarded. (He had been expelled one, and therefore taken degrees at another.) A parishioner answered: “he had a calf that sucked two cows, and a prodigious great one it was.” He used to frequent the annual ball at the ladies’ boarding-school, Queen-square, merely as a neighbour, a good-natured man, and fond of the company of sprightly young folks. A dignitary of the church being there one day to see his daughter dance, and finding this upright figure stationed there, told him he believed he was Hermippus redivivus, who lived anhelitu puellarum. At the age of eighty, on St. Luke’s day, 1771, he came to BaU son’s coffee-house in hisjaced coat and band, and fringed white gloves, to shew himself to Mr. Crosby, then lord-mayor. A gentleman present observing that he looked very well, he replied, “he had neither wife nor debts.” He next published, “Fragmentum I. Hawkins completum,” 1769, 4to. 7. “Appendix ad Opuscula;” six Odes, 1770, 4to, comprising: I. De senectute. Ad amicum D. Roger um Long, apud Cantabrigienses, aulse custodem Pembrokianae, theologum, astronomum, doctissimum, jucundissimum, annum nonagesimum agentem, scripta. Adjecta versione Anglica. Ab amico D. Gulielmo Browne, annum agente fere octogesimum. IL De choreis, et festivitate. Ad nobilissimum ducem Leodensem, diem Walliae principis natalem acidulis Tunbrigiensibus celebrantem, scripta. A theologo festivo, D. Georgio Lewis. Adjecta versione Anglica ab amico, D. Gulielmo Browne. III. De ingenio, et jucunditate. Ad Lodoicum amicum, sacerdotem Cantianum, ingeniosissimum, jucundissimum, scripta. Adjecta versione Anglica. A. D. Gulielmo Browne, E. A. O. M. L. P. S. R. S. IV. De Wilkesio, et libertate. Ad doctorem Thomarn Wilson, theologum doctissimum, liberrimum, tarn mutui amici, Wilkesii, amicum, quam suum, scripta. V. De otio medentibus debito. Ad Moysseum amicum, medicum Bathoniac doctissimum, humanissimum, scripta. VI. De potiore metallis libertate: et omnia vincente fortitudine. Ad eorum utriusque patronum, Gulielmum ilium Pittium, omni et titulo et laude majorem, scripta. 8. Three more Odes, 1771, 4to. 9. “A Proposal on our Coin, to remedy all present, and prevent all future disorders. To which are prefixed, preceding proposals of sir John Barnard, and of William Shirley, esq. on the same subject. With remarks,” 1774, 4to, dedicated “To the most revered memory of the right honourable Arthur Onslow, speaker of the house of commons during thirty-three years; for ability, judgement, eloquence, integrity, impartiality, never to be forgotten or excelled; who sitting in the gallery, on a committee of the house, the day of publishing this proposal, and seeing the author there, sent to speak with him, by the chaplain; and, after applauding his performance, desired a frequent correspondence, and honoured him with particular respect, all the rest of his life, this was, with most profound veneration, inscribed.” 10. A New-Y.ear’s Gift. A problem, and demonstration on the XXXIX Articles,“1772, 4to.” This problem and demonstration,“he informs us,” though now first published, on account of the present controversy concerning these articles, owe their birth to my being called upon to subscribe them, at an early period of life. For in my soph’s year, 1711, being a student at Peter-house, in the university of Cambridge, just nineteen years of age, and having performed all my exercises in the schools (and also a first opponency extraordinary to an ingenious pupil of his, afterwards Dr. Barnard, prebendary of Norwich) on mathematical qusestions, at the particular request of Mr. proctor Laughton, of Clare-hall, who drew me into it by a promise of the senior optime of the year), I was then first informed that subscribing these articles was a necessary step to taking my degree of B. A. as well as all other degrees. I had considered long before at school, and on my admission in 1707, that the universal profession of religion must much more concern me through life, to provide for rny happiness hereafter, than the particular profession of physic, which I proposed to pursue, to provide for my more convenient existence here: and therefore had selected out of the library left by my father (who had himself been a regular physician, educated under the tuition of sir J. Ellis, M. D. afterwards master of Caius college), Chiilingworth’s Religion of a Protestant; the whole famous Protestant and Popish controversy; Commentaries on Scripture; and such other books as suited my purpose. I particularly pitched upon three for perpetual pocket-companions; Bleau’s Greek Testament; Hippocratis Aphoristica, and Elzevir Horace; expecting from the first to draw divinity, from the second physic, and from the last good sense and vivacity. Here I cannot forbear recollecting my partiality for St. Luke, because he was a physician; by the particular pleasure I took in perceiving the superior purity of his Greek, over that of the other Evangelists. But I did not then know, what I was afterwards taught by Dr. Freind’s learned History of Physic, that this purity was owing to his being a physician, and consequently conversant with our Greek fathers of physic. Being thus fortified, I thought myself as well prepared for an encounter with these articles, as so young a person could reasonably be expected. I therefore determined to read them over as carefully and critically as I could; and upon this, met with so many difficulties, utterly irreconcileable by me to the divine original, that I almost despaired of ever being able to subscribe them. But, not to be totally discouraged, I resolved to re-consider them with redoubled diligence; and then at last had the pleasure to discover, in article VI. and XX. what appeared to my best private judgement and understanding a clear solution of all the difficulties, and an absolute defeazance of that exceptionable authority, which inconsistently with scripture they seem to assume. I subscribe my name to whatever I offer to the public, that I may be answerable for its being my sincere sentiment: ever open, however, to conviction, by superior reason and argument.

His next was a republication. 11. The pill plot. To doctor Ward, a quack of merry memory, written at Lynn, Nov. 30, 1734, 1772, 4to. 12. “Corrections in verse, from the father of the college, on son Cadogan’s Gout dissertation; containing false physic, false logic, false philosophy,” 1772, 4to. Although these corrections are jocular, it is not intended that they should be less, but more sensibly felt, for that very reason: according to the rule of Horace,

The author repeated these verses to Dr. Cadogan himself, who censured their want of rhyme; he answered, that “the gout had a fourth cause, study, which was never his case: if he did not understand law and gavelkind, he would not talk to him; for there were two sorts of gout, freehold and copyhold; the first where it was hereditary, the other where a person by debauchery took it up.” 13. “Speech to the Royal Society,” 1772, 4to. 14. “Elogy and address,” 1773, 4to. 15. A Latin version of Job, unfinished, 4to.

Sir William Browne’s will, an attested copy of which is now before us, is not the least singular of his compositions, and may be said to be written in Greek, Latin, and English. From many of the legacies, however, and particularly his mode of introducing them, we perceive the kindness and benevolence of his heart, which, in the circle of his more immediate friends, probably atoned for his many oddities. The above account of his works sufficiently shows that he was a very weak man, and with all the conceit which usually accompanies defective judgment. With the periodical critics, he was long an object of ridicule, and conquered them only by writing faster than they had patience to read. Unsuccessful, however, as he was himself, he determined that better writers should not be without encouragement, and therefore by his will, directed three gold medals, of five guineas each, to be given yearly to three undergraduates of Cambridge on the Commencement day, when the exercises are publicly read, and copies of them sent, by the successful candidates, to sir Martin Folkes, his grandson by his only daughter. The first, to him who writes the best Greek ode in imitation of Sappho; the second for the best ode in imitation of Horace; the third for the best Greek and Latin epigrams, the former after the manner of Anthologia, the latter after the model of Martial. These have been adjudged since 1775. He also left a perpetual rent charge of 2 1/, per annum, upon sundry estates, for founding a scholarship, which is tenable for seven years; but the possessor, if of another college, must remove to the founder’s college, Peter-house, and reside there every entire term during his under-graduatesbip.

, bishop of Exeter, was born at Ipswich in Suffolk, in 1592. His father, who was a merchant of that place, dying when he was but a few weeks old, his mother took due care of his education, in which he made a very considerable progress. At the age of fourteen, he was sent to Pembroke-hall in Cambridge, of which he successively became scholar and fellow; and there he distinguished himself by his facetious and inoffensive wit, his eloquence, and his great skill and knowledge in philosophy, history, poetry, &c. He took his master’s degree in 1617, B. D. in 1621, and D. D. in 1626. He was appointed prevaricator when James I. visited the university, and discharged that employment to the universal aUmiration of the whole audience. His first preferments were, the rectory of Barley in Hertfordshire, and a prebend of Ely in 1621, to both which he was collated by Dr. Nicholas Felton, bishop of Ely. July 15, 1628, he was incorporated doctor of divinity at Oxford. On the 2 1st of September, 16-29, he was collated to the prebend of Tachbrook, in the cathedral church of Lichfield, which he quitted September 19, 1631, when he was admitted to the archdeaconry of Coventry. He was likewise master of Catherine-hall in Cambridge, and proved a great benefit and ornament both to that college and the whole university. In 1637, 1638, 1643, and 1644, he executed the office of vice-chancellor, to the universal satisfaction of all people, and to his own great credit. In 1641, he was presented to the eleventh stall or prebend in the church of Durham, by Dr. Thomas Morton, bishop of that diocese, to whom he was chaplain. Upon the translation of Dr. Joseph Hall to the bishopric of Norwich, Dr. Brown rig was nominated to succeed him in the see of Exeter, in 1641. Accordingly he was elected March 3 1, 1642; confirmed May 14; consecrated the day following; and installed the 1st of June. But the troubles that soon after followed, did not permit him long to enjoy that dignity. Before the beginning of them, he was much esteemed, and highly commended, by his relation John Pym, and others of the presbyterian stamp: but they forsook him, only because he was a bishop; and suffered him to be deprived of his revenues, so that he was almost reduced to want. Nay, once he was assaulted, and like to have been stoned by the rabble, his episcopal character being his only crime. About 1645, he was deprived of his mastership of Catherine-hall> on account of a sermon preached by him before the university, on the king’s inauguration, at some passages of which, offence was taken by the parliament party; and neither his piety, gravity, or learning, were sufficient to preserve him in his station. Being thus robbed of all, he retired to the house of Thomas Rich, of Sunning, esq. in Berkshire, by whom he was generously entertained: and there, and sometimes at London, at Highgate, and St. Edmundsbury, spent several years. During this time, he had the courage to advise Oliver Cromwell to restore king Charles II. to his just rights, but yet he suffered in his reputation, as not being zealous enough for the church. About a year before his decease, he was invited to be a preacher at the Temple, in London, with a handsome allowance; and accordingly he went and settled there, in good lodgings furnished for him. But his old distemper, the stone, coming upon him with greater violence than usual, and being attended with the dropsy and the infirmities of age, they all together put an end to his life, on the 7th of December, 1659: he was buried the 17th following in the Temple church, where there is an epitaph over him. He was once married, but never had a child. Though he was very elaborate and exact in his compositions, and completely wrote his sermons, yet he could not be persuaded to print any thing in his life-time. Bishop Brownrig, as to his person, was tall and comely. The majesty of his presence was so allayed with meekness, candour, and humility, that no man was farther from any thing morose or supercilious. He had a great deal of wit, as well as wisdom; and was an excellent scholar, an admirable orator, an acute disputant, a pathetic preacher, and a prudent governor, full of judgment, courage, constancy, and impartiality. He was, likewise, a person of that soundness of judgment, of that conspicuity for an unspotted life, and of that unsuspected integrity, that he was a complete pattern to all. Dr. Gauden, who had known him above thirty years, declares that he never heard of any thinor said or done by him, which a wise and good man would have wished unsaid or undone. Some other parts of Dr. Gauden’s character of him may be supposed to proceed from the, warmth of friendship. Echard says of him, that “he was a great man for the Anti-Arminian cause (for he was a rigid Calvinist), yet a mighty champion for the liturgy and ordination by bishops: and his death was highly lamented by men of all parties.' 7 Baxter, Neal, and other writers of the nonconformist party, are no less warm in his praises. He was one of those excellent men with whom archbishop Tillotson cultivated an acquaintance at his first coming to London, and by whose preaching and example he formed himself. After his death some of his sermons were published, under the title” Forty Sermons, &c." 1662, fol. and reprinted with the addition of twenty-five, making a second volume, 1674, fol. His style is rather better than that of many of his contemporaries.

, an eminent physician, a native of Cumberland, was born in 1711, and educated in medical science at Leyden, under Albinus, Euler, and Boerhaave. Having taken his medical degree in 1737, he returned to his native country, and settled at Whitehaven, where his practice became very extensive. About twenty years before his death, he retired to Ormathwaite, where he died, Jan. 7, 1800, in his eighty-ninth year, regretted as a man of amiable and endearing virtues, and a most skilful physician. His principal publications were, 1. His inaugural thesis, “De Praxi medica ineunda,” Leyden, 1737, 4to. 2. “A treatise on the art of making common Salt,” Lond. 1748, 8vo, which procured him the honour of being chosen a fellow of the royal society. This work, which has long been out of print, was praised by Chaptal and bishop Watson for the profound knowledge of the subject displayed in it. 3. “An enquiry concerning the mineral elastic spirit contained in the water of Spa in Germany,” printed in the Philosophical Transactions, vol. LV. 4. A treatise, “On the means of preventing the communication of pestilent contagion.” A trip to the Spas of Germany suggested to him the idea of analizing the properties of the Pyrmont springs, and of some others, and led him into that train of nice and deep disquisition, which terminated in the de-elementizing one of our elements, and fixing its invisible fluid form into a palpable and visible substance. All this he effected by producing the various combinations of gases and vapours which constitute atmospheric air, and separating into many forms this long-supposed one and indivisible, whilst he solidified its fluid essence into a hard substance. That Dr. Brownrigg was the legitimate father of these discoveries was not only known at the time to his intimate and domestic circle, but also to the then president of the royal society, sir John Pringle; who, when called upon to bestow upon Dr. Priestley the gold medal for his paper of “Discoveries of the Nature and Properties of Air,” thus observes, “And it is no disparagement to the learned Dr. Priestley, that the vein of these discoveries was hit upon, and its course successfully followed up, some years ago, by my very learned, very penetrating, very industrious, but too modest friend, Dr. Brownrigg.” To habits, indeed, of too much diffidence, and to too nice a scrupulosity of taste, the world has to attribute the fewness of his publications. One of his literary projects was a general history of the county of Cumberland, but it does not appear that he had made much progress. He assisted Mr. West, however, in his entertaining.“Tour to the Lakes,” forming the plan of that popular work.

, son of Gerard, one of the magistrates of Alost, in Flanders, was born in that city in 1531. Having passed through the usual school education “at Ghent, under Simon, a celebrated master, and at Paris and Bruges, at which last place he taught school himself with much credit, he was sent to Rome, where he taught the mathematics for some years; then taming his mind to the study of medicine, he went to Boulogne, and having completed his studies, and taken his degree of doctor, he travelled, for his further improvement, over a great part of France. At Paris, he was introduced to the acquaintance of Adrian Turnebus and Peter Ramus. Returning to Alost, he was made physician and principal magistrate of the city. As he had become a convert to Lutheranism, he readily accepted the invitation of John Albert, duke of Mecklenburgh, to settle at Rostock, where he might with safety profess his religion. He was here appointed professor in mathematics, and soon became popular also as a physician. After residing here 25 years, he was seized with an apoplexy, of which he died, December 31, 1593, His writings were, 1.” De Pritno Motu,“1580, 8vo. 2.” Institutiones -Spherae,“8vo. 5.” Propositiones de morbo. Gallico,“Rostock, 1569, 4to. 4.” Theses de hydrope triplici,“ibid. 1587. 5.” De scorbuto propositiones,“ib,” 1589, 1591, 8vo, reprinted with Eugalenus’s “Liber Observationum de Scorbuto,” Leipsic, 1614. 6. “Epistolae de variis rebus et argumentis medi^cis,” printed with “Smetii Miscellanea,” Francf. 1611, and including his theses on the dropsy.

, a celebrated modern traveller, descended of an ancient and honourable family, was the son of David Bruce, esq. of Kinnaird, by Marion Graham, daughter of James Graham, esq. of Airth, dean of the faculty of advocates, and judge of the high court of admiralty in Scotland. He was born at the family residence of Kinnaird, in the county of Stirling, Dec. 14, 1730. Of his first years few particulars are recorded of much consequence, except that his temper, contrary to the character which it afterwards assumed, was gentle and quiet; but as he advanced in life, became bold, hasty, and impetuous, accompanied, however, with a manly openness, that shewed the usual concomitant, a warm and generous heart. It having been determined to give him an English education, he was sent to London to the house of William Hamilton, esq. a barrister, and his uncle, with whom he remained for some time, and in 1742 he was placed at Harrow school, where he made great proficiency in classical learning. After leaving Harrow in May 1746, he lived about a year in the academy of a Mr. Gordon till April 1747, where he prosecuted his classical education, and studied French, arithmetic, and geometry. In May of that year he returned to Scotland in order to commence a course of study at the university of Edinburgh, preparatory to his following the profession of the law; but it does not appear that he made much progress, or indeed had much inclination for this study, and the precarious state of his health at this time rendered much study of any kind dangerous. His own expectations of success in the law became gradually abated, and various other circumstances determined him to relinquish it for ever.

In this uncertainty of mind, India offered to his ardent imagination a prospect of a more flattering nature. As he was considerably above the age at which persons are enrolled as writers in the service of the East India company, his friends advised him to petition the court of directors for the liberty of settling as a free trader under its patronage; and accordingly he left Scotland in July 1753 with a view to prosecute this design; but he was prevented from carrying it into execution by forming a connection with an amiable young lady, Miss Allan, daughter of a wine-merchant in London, whom he married in Feb. 1754. But though this year did not end with the prosperity with which it began, this accidental settlement in London changed hiss destination in life. It detained him in Europe till his mind was formed, his knowledge matured, and an opportunity presented itself of visiting the east with honour and advantage. In his own opinion, it prevented him from suffering the cruel imprisonment at Calcutta in 1756, which proved fatal to many of the company’s servants. He now entered into partnership in the wine-business, which, as well as his marriage, was approved of by his father; but his prospects in this new situation were soon clouded. A few months after their marriage, Mrs. Bruce exhibited evident symptoms of consumption, and being recommended to try the mild climate of the south of France, expired at Paris in October.

By this melancholy event, Mr. Bruce lost the principal tie that connected him with business, and although he did not think it prudent to relinquish a flourishing trade with-? out some equivalent object, relaxed his personal efforts very considerably, and added to his stock of languages, the Spanish and Portuguese. He also improved his skill in drawing, under a master of the name of Bonneau, recommended to him by Mr. (afterwards sir) Robert Strange. Before this time he had chiefly cultivated that part of drawing which relates to the science of fortification, in hopes that he might, on some emergency, find it of use in military service. But views of a more extensive kind now induced him to study drawing in general, and to obtain a correct taste in painting, so as to be able to visit with advantage those countries which possess the finest specimens of skill and genius in that department of the arts. This notice of Mr. Bruce' s application to the study of drawing we have given in the words of his biographer, because it was long and confidently reported by those who wished to lessen Mr. Bruce’s reputation, that he was totally and incorrigibly ignorant of the art.

His concern in the winotrade gave him an opportunity of travelling over a considerable part of Spain, Portugal, and the Netherlands, but hearing of his father’s death in 1758, he returned to England, and in 1761 withdrew entirely from the wine-trade. He now, from his observation while in Spain, suggested to the prime minister, Mr. Pitt, afterwards lord Chatham, the practicability of a successful expedition against Ferrol, in Galicia, where the Spaniards had a considerable harbour, and generally stationed a part of their navy; but various circumstances, of which perhaps Mr. Pitt’s resignation was the principal, prevented this enterprise from being attempted. Disappointed in this, he resolved to return to his native country, and pass his time as a private gentleman, cultivating his paternal estate. One of the new ministers, however, lord Halifax, diverted him from this design, and suggested Africa to him as a proper field for enterprize and discovery; and that he might go under the protection of a public character, it was proposed to send him as consul to Algiers. Bruce acceded to these proposals, and left England in the end of June 1762. He passed through France and Italy, and carried with him from the latter country an artist to assist him in his drawings. For his subsequent adventures, his travels into Abyssinia, and his discovery of the sources of the Nile, &c. we must refer to his published travels. He returned to his native country in 1773, and in 1776, he married a daughter of Thomas Dundas of Fingask, esq. by whom he had three children, two of whom, a son and daughter, are still living. After he settled at Kinnaird, his time was chiefly spent in managing his estate, in preparing his travels for the press, and other literary occupations; and he was preparing a second edition of his Travels, when death prevented the execution of/ his design. On Saturday, April 26, 1794, having entertained some company at Kinnaird, as he was going down stairs about eight o'clock in the evening, to hand a lady into a carriage, his foot slipt, and he fell from a considerable height. He was taken up in a state of insensibility, and expired early next morning. Mr. Bruce’s figure was above the common size; his limbs athletic, but well proportioned; his complexion sanguine; his countenance manly and good-tempered; and his manners easy and polite. The whole outward man was such as to announce a character well calculated to contend with the many difficulties and trying occasions, which so extraordinary a journey could not but have thrown in his way. His internal characters, the features of his understanding and disposition, seem in a great measure to have corresponded with these outward lineaments. As a country gentleman, though not without a tincture of haughtiness, he exhibited the elegance of a man of fashion, and the hospitality of a Briton. His personal accomplishments fitted him, in a superior manner, for the undertakings in which he engaged. His constitution was robust, and he had inured himself to every kind of fatigue and exercise. In mental accomplishments he equalled, if not surpassed, the generality of travellers. His memory was excellent, and his understanding vigorous and well cultivated. He understood French, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese, the two first of which he spoke and wrote with facility. Besides Greek and Latin, which he read well, though not critically, he knew the Hebrew, Chaldee, and Syriac; and, in the latter part of his life, compared several portions of the scriptures in those related dialects. He read and spoke with ease, Arabic, Ethiopic, and Amharic. Necessity made him acquainted with these last, and impressed them deeply on his mind. He had applied, during the greatest part of his life, to the study of astronomy, and other practical branches of mathematical learning.

His “Travels,” after many years of eager expectation on the part of the public, were published in 1790, at London, in 5 vols. 4to, under the title “Travels to discover the Source of the Nile, in the years 1768 1773.” Thereception they met with was exceeding -flattering, yet numerous attacks were made on the author’s character and veracity in the periodical journals, to which it is unnecessary now to refer . It seems agreed that the general credit of the work has survived. We cannot perhaps quote a higher authority than that of Dr. Vincent, who observes that “Bruce may have offended from the warmth of his temper; he may have been misled by aspiring to knowledge and science which he had not sufficiently examined; but his work throughout bears internal marks of veracity, in all instances where he was not deceived himself; and his observations were the best which a man, furnished with such instruments, and struggling for his life, could obtain.”

, a laborious Italian writer, was born at Florence towards the conclusion of the fifteenth century. Having meddled in 1522 in the plot formed by some Florentine citizens against cardinal Julius de Medicis, afterwards pope Ciement VII. he was obliged to expatriate himself, and withdrew into France. The Medici being driven out of Florence in 1527, this revolution brought him back to his country, where the liberty with which he chose to speak against the monks and priests, raised a suspicion of his being attached to the opinions of Luther. He was put into prison, and would not have escaped an ignominious death but for the kind offices of his friends; who procured a mitigation of his punishment to an exile of two years. He then retired to Venice with his brothers, who were printers and booksellers, and employed their presses in printing the greater part of his works, of which the most known and the most in request, is the, whole Bible translated into Italian, with annotations and remarks, which was put by the papists in the number of heretical books of the first class; but the protestants held it in such high esteem that it passed through several editions. The most ample and the most scarce is that of Venice, 1546 and 1548, 3 vols. folio. Brucioli pretends to have made his translation from the Hebrew text: but the truth is, that, being but moderately versed in that language, he made use of the Latin version of Pagnini. His other works are, 1. Italian translations of the natural history of Pliny, and several pieces of Aristotle and Cicero. 2. Editions of Petrarch and Bocace, with notes. 3. “Dialogues,” Venice, 1526, folio. The year of his death is not known; but it is certain that he was still alive in 1554.

, the learned author of the “History of Philosophy,” was a Lutheran clergyman, of whose life we have very few particulars. He was born Jan. 22, 1606, at Augsburgh, and educated at Jena, whence he returned to his native place, and in 1724, became rector of Kafbeueren. He was afterwards pastor of St. Ulric’s church at Augsburgh, where he died in 1770. Among his works are, I. “Tentamen introductionis in historiam doctrinae de Ideis,” Jena, 1719, 4to. 2. “Historia phijosophica doctrinae de Ideis,” Augsburg, 1723, 8vo. 3. “De Vita et Scriptis Cl. Etringeri,” ibid. 1724, 8vo. 4. “Otium Vindelicum, sive Meletematum Historico-philosophicorum Triga,” ibid. 1721, 8vo. 5. “Historia Vitae Adolphorum Occonum,” Lips. 1734, 4to. 6. “Dissertatio Epistol. de Vita Hier. Wolfii,” ibid. 1739, 4to. 7. “-De Hoeschelii Meritis in Rem Literariam,” ibid. 1739, 4to. 8. “Institutiones Historiae Philosophicae,” ibid. 1727, 8vo, and 1756, 4to. But the most important work, to which he owes his chief reputation, is his “Historia Critica Philosophiae,” published at Leipsic between the years 1742 and 1744, in four large volumes 4to; and reprinted at the same place in 1767, with large improvements and additions, in 6 vols. 4to. This was the fruit of nearly fifty years labour, and has received the general suffrage of the learned, as being the most comprehensive, methodical, and impartial history of philosophy hitherto written. He traces the progress of philosophy through three periods, the ancient, the middle, and the modern; in the first he surveys the state of philosophy in the ancient world, prior to the establishment of the Grecian states, and in the several sects of Grecian philosophers. In the second, he exhibits the various forms under which it appeared, during the course of twelve hundred years, among the Romans, the Orientalists, the Jews, the Saracens, and the Christians. In the third, he relates the attempts, whether successful or unsuccessful, which have been made since the revival of letters, to restore, or improve upon, ancient philosophy, or to introduce new methods of philosophizing. It is both a history of doctrines and of men. As a history of doctrines, it lays open the origin of opinions, the changes which they have undergone, the distinct characters of different systems, and the leading points in which they agree or differ. As a history of men, it relates the principal incidents in the lives of the more eminent philosophers, remarks those circumstances in their character or situation which may be supposed to have influenced their opinions, takes notice of their followers and opponents, and describes the origin, progress, and decline of their respective sects. To this part of his work every collector of biography must own his obligations. A very judicious and satisfactory abridgement of this work was published in 1791, 2 vols. 4to, by the late Dr. Enfield.

, a German physician and botanist, was born at Mariensbal, near Helmstadt, Dec. 17, 1697, and having completed his studies, was created doctor in medicine there, in the year 1721. As his taste inclined him to botany, he travelled over Bohemia, Austria, and a great part of Germany, examining and collecting plants indigenous to those countries, and other natural productions. In return for his communications to the Academia Nat. Curios. and of Berlin, he was made corresponding member of those societies. Having finished his travels, he settled at Brunswick, where he died March 21st, 1753. When young, and before he had taken the degree of doctor, he published: 1. “Specimen Botanicum, exhibens fungos subterraneos, vulgo tubera terræ dictos,” Helmst. 1720, 4to, with engravings. 2. “Opuscula Medico botanica,” Brunswick, 1727, 4to. In this he treats of the medical qualities of various vegetable productions, among others, of coffee, the use of which he condemns. 3. “Epistolæ Itineraries,” containing his observations on vegetable and other natural productions, collected during his travels, in which we find a great body of useful information. 4. “Historia naturalis τȢ ΑσβεσθȢ ejusque preparatorum chartæ lini lintei et ellychniorum incombustibilium,” Brunsw. 1727, 4to. In this he has discovered that the asbestos is susceptible of printing, and he had four copies of the work printed on this species of incombustible paper. 5. “Magnalia Dei in locis subterraneis,” a description of all the mines and mineralogical productions in every part of the world, Brunswick, and Wolfenbuttel, 1727, and 1730, 2 vols. fol.

, a Lutheran divine, settled in England, was born in the small island of Cadsand, near the Belgic frontier, Dec. 31, 1726, and was educated with a view to the theological profession, chiefly at the university of Franeker, whence he passed to Leyden, There he obtained a pastorship, and profited by the society of Hemsterhuis, of Valkenäer, and especially of the elder Schultens. His literary acquirements were eminent; he read the Hebrew and the Greek; he composed correctly; and has preached with applause in four languages, Latin, Butch, French, and English. In 1752, Mr. Columbine, of a French refugee family, which had contributed to found, and habitually attended, the Walloon church at Norwich, was intrusted by that congregation, when he was on a journey into Holland, to seek out a fit successor to their late pastor, Mr. Valloton, and applied, after due inquiry, to Mr. Bruckner, who accepted the invitation, and early in 1753 settled as French preacher at Norwich, where he officiated during fifty-one years, with undiminished approbation. About the year 1766, Mr. Bruckner succeeded also to Dr. Van Sarn, as minister of the Dutch church, of which the duties gradually became rather nominal than real, in proportion as the Dutch families died oft', and as the cultivation of their language was neglected by the trading world for the French. The French tongue Mr. Bruckner was assiduous to diffuse, and gave public and private lessons of it for many years. His income was now convenient and progressive. He kept a horse and a pointer, for he took great pleasure in shooting. He drew occasionally, and has left a good portrait of his favourite dog. He cultivated music, and practised much on the organ. In 1767 was printed at Leyden his “Theorie du Systme Animal,” in the seventh and tenth chapters of which there is much anticipation of the sentiments lately evolved in the writings of Mr. Mai thus. This work was well translated into English, under the title “A Philosophical Survey of the Animal Creation,” published for Johnson and Payne in 1768. Mr. Bruckner was married in 1782, to Miss Cooper, of Guist, formerly his pupil. In 1790, he published under the name Cassander, from his birth-place, those “Criticisms on the Diversions of Purley,” which attracted some hostile flashes from Mr. Home Tooke, in his subsequent quarto edition. This pamphlet displays a profound and extensive knowledge of the various Gothic dialects, and states that the same theory of prepositions and conjunctions, so convincingly applied in the “Epea pteroenta” to the northern languages, had also been taught concerning the Hebrew and other dead languages by Schultens. Mr. Wakefield’s pamphlet against Social Worship drew from Mr. Bruckner, in 1792, a learned reply. In the preface to these “Thoughts on Public Worship,” hopes are given of a continuation still desiderated by the friends of religion. Mr. Bruckner began a didactic poem in French verse, which had for its object to popularize in another form, the principles laid down in. his Theory of the Aoimal System. A gradual failure rather of spirits than of health, seems often to have suspended or delayed the enterprise; to have brought on a restless and fastidious vigilance; and to have prepared that termination of his life, which took place on the morning of Saturday, May 12, 1804. He was buried, according to his own desire, at Guist, near the kindred of his respected widow. His society was courted to the last; as his conversation was always distinguished for good sense, for argument, and for humour. He was beloved for his attentions and affability; esteemed for his probity and prudence; and admired for his understanding and learning.

, called Old Brueghel, to distinguish him from his son, was the first of a family of eminent artists. He was born at Brueghel, a village near Breda, in 1510, and acquired the first principles of his art from Peter Cock, or Koeck-van-Aelst, whose daughter he married. He afterwards travelled in France and Italy; studied nature, amidst the mountains of Tyrol, and the scenery of the Alps; and availed himself of the works of the greatest masters in Italy. On his return from Italy, he resided for some time at Antwerp, and from thence he removed to Brussels. Whilst he was employed by the magistrates of this city, in taking views of the canal which fails into the Scheldt, he sickened, and died in 1570; after having caused to be burned in his presence, all his licentious and satirical designs. He chiefly excelled in landscapes, and droll subjects, re sembling those of Jerom Bosche; and he was particularly fond of representing the marches of armies, robberies, skirmishes, sports, dances, weddings, and drunken quarrels; and in order to acquire greater skill and accuracy in this kind of representations, he often assumed the habit of a peasant, and joined the meaner boors at their feasts and. amusements. His figures were correct, and their draperies well chosen; the heads and hands were touched with spirit; and his expression, though not elegant, was true. Sir Joshua Reynolds says, that “he was totally ignorant of all the mechanical art of making a picture;” hut there is in his “Slaughter of the Innocents” (which sir Joshua saw in his travels), a great quantity of thinking, a representation of variety of distress, enough for twenty modern pictures. His principal performance is in the emperor’s collection at Vienna, which is the “Representation of the building of the tower of Babel, by Nimrod.” Several of his paintings are in the cabinets of the emperor and elector palatine, and dispersed through various parts of Europe. For his amusement he engraved some few landscapes and grotesque subjects.

, the younger, and sometimes Called " Hellish Brueghel 17 froni the nature of his subjects, was the son of the preceding artist, born at Brussels, and became the disciple of Gelles Coningsloo. His compositions rather excite disgust than satisfaction; and his human figures, though freely pencilled, and not ill coloured, are not much more elegant than those of the infernal kind. In his historical subjects he generally introduced witches and devils; such as Orpheus charming Pluto and Proserpine to procure the deliverance of Eurydice, surrounded with horrible forms and appearances; Saul and the Witchof Endor; or St. Anthony’s temptations. He is also enumerated by Strutt among the engravers. He died 1642.

, known, from his favourite dress, by the name of Velvet Brueghel, or Feuweeler, was the son of Peter Brueghel the old, and consequently brother to the preceding. He was born at Brussels, in 1560, and was instructed, probably by his father, and by other artists; but, whoever were his instructors, he acquired an eminence in every art of painting; in colouring, in design, and in pencilling, far superior to that of his father, and of all his contemporaries in his style. He began with painting flowers and fruit, which he executed with admirable skill; and then proceeded to landscapes, sea-ports, and markets, in which he introduced a number of small figures, surprisingly exact and correctly drawn. At Cologne, where he resided for some time, he gained an extraordinary reputation; and his pictures were well known and admired in Italy, in which country he spent some time. He died, according to the most probable accounts, in 1625. That the industry of this artist must have been singular, sufficiently appears from the number and variety of his pictures, and the exquisite neatness and delicacy of their execution. It has been lamented, however, by connoisseurs, that his distances are overcharged with a bluish tinge. Brueghel often decorated the pictures of his friends with small figures, thus greatly enhancing their value; he was employed in painting flowers, fruits, animals, and landscape scenery, in the pieces of history-paintings; and in this way Rubens made occasional use of his pencil. He sometimes joined this master in larger works, which have been much admired; and particularly in a “Vertumnus and Pomona,” a picture three feet high and four broad, highly commended by Houbraken, and sold at Amsterdam for above 2SOl. sterling; and “a Terrestrial Paradise,” painted for Charles I. king of England. In the gallery of the archiepiscopal palace at Milan, there is an admirable landscape of Brueghel, representing a desert, in which Giovanna Battista Crespi painted the figure of St. Jerom; and among a great number preserved in the Ambrosian library in that city, there is an oval picture of the Virgin, painted by Rubens, which is encompassed by a garland of flowers admirably executed by Brueghel. Most considerable cabinets possess specimens of the art of this master. Some small engravings of landscapes, &c. are also ascribed to Brueghel.

, a French writer of a singular character for versatility, was born at Aix, in 1640, and trained in the reformed religion, in defence of which he published some controversial pieces, particularly against Bossuet’s “Exposition de la Foi,” or Exposition of the faith; but the prelate, instead of answering, converted him. Brueys, become catholic, combated with the Protestant ministers, with Jurieu, Lenfant, and La Roche; but his airy spirit not rightly accommodating itself to serious works, he quitted theology for the theatre. He composed, jointly with Palaprat, his intimate friend, several comedies full of wit and gaiety. We have also of this writer a prosaic paraphrase or commentary on Horace’s art of poetry. In his latter years he became again a controversial writer, and, as his countrymen say, imitated Bellarmine and Moliere by turns. He died at Moritpellier in 1723, aged eighty -three; and all his dramatic pieces were collected, 1735, in 3 vols. 12mo. His comedies have some merit, but his tragedies and other works are deservedly sunk into oblivion.

, a French physician, was born at Bealivais about the end of the seventeenth century, and after studying medicine, acquired considerable reputation by his practice and his writings. He also arrived at the honour of being royal censor of the college, and a member of the academy or Angers. He died in 1756, after having written or edited some works of merit in his profession: 1. “Observations sur le manuel des Accouchments,” Paris, 1733, 4tc, a translation from Daventer. 2. “La Medicine Raisonnee,” from Hoffman, ibid. 1739, 9 vols. 12mo. 3. “Caprices d'imagination, on Lettres sur differens sujets,” ibid. 1746, in which he appears as a physician, metaphysician, moralist, and critic. 4. “Memoires pour servir a la vie de M. Silva,” ibid. 1744, 8vo. 5. “Traite des Fievres,” from Hoffman, ibid. 1746, 3 vols. 12mo. 6. “La Pohtique du Medicin,” from the same, ibid. 1751, 12mo, 7. “Traite des Alimens,” by Lemery, ibid. 1755, 2 vols. 12mo. 8. “Dissertations surPincertitude des signesde lamort, et Tabus des enterremens et embaumemens precipites,” ibid. 1742, often reprinted, and translated into many European languages. This is’the most useful of all his works, and has been the means of saving many lives. He wrote also some papers in the Journal des Savans.

, professor of natural philosophy and mathematics at Utrecht, was born at Gorcum in 1620. He went through a course of philosophy at Leyden; and then pursued his studies at Bois-le-duc, where he was very much esteemed by Samuel des Marets, who taught philosophy and divinity, in that place. He went from thence to Utrecht, where he learnt the mathematics, and then removed to Leyden, where he obtained leave to teach them. He was afterwards made professor at Utrecht; and because the professors had agreed among themselves that every one might teach at home such a part of philosophy as he should think fit, de Bruin, not contented with teaching what his public professorship required, made also dissections, and explained Grotius’s book “De jure belli et pacis.” He had uncommon skill in dissecting animals, and was a. great lover of experiments. He^made also observations in astronomy. He published dissertations “De vi altrice,” “De corporum gravitate et levitate,” “De cognitione Dei naturali,” “De iucis causa et origine,” &c. He had a dispute with Isaac Vossius, to whom he wrote a letter, printed at Amsterdam in 1663; wherein he cites Vossius’s book De natura et propnetate Iucis, and strenuously maintains the hypothesis of Descartes. He wrote also an apology for the Cartesian philosophy against a divine, named Vogelsang. In 1655, he married the daughter of a merchant of Utrecht, sister to the wife of Daniel Elzevir, the famous bookseller of Amsterdam, by whom he had two children who lived but a few days. He died in 1675, and his funeral oration was pronounced by Graevius.

, a celebrated French writer, was born at Rouen, Aug. 26, 1688, and commenced his noviciate among the Jesuits of Paris, Sept. 8, 1704. In 1706, he began his philosophical course in the royal college, and in 1708 was sent to Caen to complete his studies that he might take orders. Some of his pieces are dated from that city in 1710 and 1712, and one from Bourges in 1719. He appears indeed to have passed several years in the country, where he taught rhetoric. In 1713, he returned to Paris to study theology, and in 1722 he was again at Paris, where he took the vows in the society of Jesuits, and was intrusted with the education of the prince of Talmont. About the same time he assisted in the “Memoirs of the Arts and Sciences,” and continued his labours in that journal until 1729, when he was obliged to leave Paris for some time for having assisted in publishing father Margat’s History of Tamerlane, which it appears had g=ven offence. His absence, however, was not long, and on his return, or soon after, he was employed in continuing the “History of the Gallican church,” of which six volumes had been published by fathers Longueval and Fontenay. In 1725, he was appointed professor of mathematics, and filled that chair for six years with much reputation. It was probably in this situation that he read his lecture, on the “use of mathematical knowledge in polite literature,” now printed in the second volume of his works, nor did his various public employments prevent his publishing many other works, which were well received by the public. In 1722 he published, but without his name, his “Morale Chretienne,” Paris, a small volume, of which four editions were soon bought up. In 1723, he also published the first of his three letters, entitled “Examen du poema (de M. Racine) sur la grace,” 8vo, and in 1724, “La vie de Timperatrice Eleonore,” taken from that by father Ceva; the same year, “Abreg des vertus de soeur Jeanne Silenie de la Motte des Goutes,” Moulins, 12mo; and a new edition of father Mourgues “Traite de la Poesie Francoise,” with many additions, 12mo. But the work which contributed most to his reputation was his “Greek Theatre,” entitled “Theatre des Grecs, contenant des traductions ct analyses des tragedies Grecques, des discours et des remarques concernant la theatre Grec, &c.” 1730, 3 vols. 4to, and often reprinted in 12mo, in France and Holland. This useful work, not now in such high reputation as formerly, is yet well known in this country by the translation published by Mrs. Charlotte Lennox in 1760, 3 vols. 4to; to which the earl of Corke and Orrery contributed a general preface, and translated the three preliminary discourses: Dr. Sharpe, Dr. Grainger, and Mr. Bourryau translated some other parts, and Dr. Johnson contributed a dissertation on the Greek comedy, and the general conclusion of the work, which, in this translation, is certainly highly polished and improved. “Brumoy,” says Dr. Warton, “has displayed the excellencies of the Greek tragedy in a judicious and comprehensive manner. His jtranslations are faithful and elegant; and the analysis of those plays, which on account of some circumstances in ancient manners would shock the readers of this age, and would not therefore bear an entire version, is perspicuous and full. Of all the French critics, he and the judicious Fenelon have had the justice to confess, or perhaps the penetration to perceive, in what instances Corneille and Racine have falsified and modernized the characters, and overloaded with unnecessary intrigues the simple plots of the ancients.”

Brumoy was alao employed in completing the history of the “Revolutions of Spain,” left unfinished by father Orleans. This was published in 1734 in 3 vols. 4to, of which about a half belongs to our author. He was next requested by the booksellers to collect his own miscellaneous pieces, in prose and verse, and published 4 vols. 12mo, in 1741. Some of his poetry is in Latin, with translations, and we find here some dramatic pieces. He was also the editor of various editions of works at the request of the booksellers. He was employed on the continuation of the “History of the Gallican church,” when he was seized with a paralytic stroke, which proved fatal April 17, 1742.

, an illustrious French painter, was of Scottish extraction, and born in 1619. His father was a statuary by profession. At three years of age it is reported that he drew figures with charcoal; and at twelve he drew the picture of his uncle so well, that it still passes for a fine piece. His father being employed in the gardens at Seguier, and having brought his son along with him, the chancellor of that name took a liking to him, and placed him with Simon Vouet, an eminent painter, who was greatly surprised at young Le Brun’s amazing proficiency. He was afterwards sent to Fontainbleau, to take copies of some of Raphael’s pieces. The chancellor sent him next to Italy, and supported him there for six years. Le Brun, on his return, met with the celebrated Poussin, by whose conversation he greatly improved himself in his art, and contracted a friendship with him which lasted as long as their lives. Cardinal Mazarin, a good judge of painting, took great notice of Le Brun, and often sat by him while he was at work. A painting of St. Stephen, which he finished in 1651, raised his reputation to the highest pitch. Soon after this, the king, upon the representation of M. Colbert, made him his first painter, and conferred on him the order of St. Michael. His majesty employed two hours every day in looking over him, whilst he was painting the family of Darius at Fontainbleau. About 1662, be began his five large pieces of the history of Alexander the Great, in which he is said to have set the actions of that conqueror in a more glorious light than Quintus Curtius in his history. He procured several advantages for the royal academy of painting and sculpture at Paris, and formed the plan of another for the students of his own nation at Rome. There was scarce any thing done for the advancement of the fine arts in which he was not consulted. It was through the interest of M. Colbert that the king gave him the direction of all his works? and particularly of his royal manufactory at the Gobelins, where he had a handsome house, with a genteel salary assigned to him. He was also made director and chancellor of the royal academy, and shewed the greatest zeal to encourage the fine arts in France. He possessed in a great degree that enthusiasm which animates the efforts, and increases the raptures of the artist. Some one said before him of his fine picture of the Magdalen, “that the contrite penitent was really weeping.” “That, 7 * said he,” is perhaps all that you can see; I hear her sigh.“He was endowed with a vast inventive genius, which extended itself to arts of every kind. He was well acquainted with the history and manners of all nations. Besides his extraordinary talents, his behaviour was so genteel, and his address Sq pleasing, that he attracted the regard and affection of the whole court of France: where, by the places and pensions conferred on him by the king, he made a very considerable figure. He died at his house in. the Gobelins in 1690, leaving a wife, but no children. He was author of a curious treatise of” Physiognomy“and of another of the” Characters of the Passions."

The paintings which gained him greatest reputation were, besides what we have already mentioned, those which he finished at Fontainbleau, the great stair-case at Versailles, but especially the grand gallery there, which was the last of his works, and is said to have taken him up fourteen years. A more particular account of these, and a general character of his other performances, may be found in the writings of his countrymen, who have been rery lavish in his praises, and very full in their accounts of his works.

, known also by the name of Desmarettes, a learned Frenchman, who died at Orleans in 1731, advanced in age, was author or editor of many pieces of ecclesiastical history, lives of the saints, &c. but deserves notice chiefly for being the editor of an excellent edition of Lactantius, collated with valuable mamiscripts, and enriched with learned notes, which was published in 1748, 2 vols. 4to, by Lenglet du Fresnoy.

, a French Jesuit, was born at Nantes in 1607, and died at Paris Sept. 1, 1663. He wrote many pieces of Latin poetry. The principal are, 1. “The Ignatiad,” in xii books: the subject is the pilgrimage of St. Ignatius to Jerusalem. This poem forms a part of his “Virgilius Christianus;” in which he has imitated, with more piety than taste, the eclogues, the georgics, and the Æneid. His “Ovidius Christianus” is in the same strain: the Heroic Epistles are changed into pastoral letters, the Tristibus into holy lamentations, and the Metamorphoses into stories of converted penitents. Father Le Brun also wrote “Eloquentia Poetica,” Paris, 1655, 4to, a treatise in Latin on the precepts of the art of poetry, supported on examples drawn from the best authors. At the end is a treatise on poetical common-places, which may be of service to young versifiers.

, a French priest of the oratory, who made considerable approaches to liberality and good sense in his writings, was born at Brignolle, in the diocese of Aix in Provence, in 1661, and became celebrated for his knowledge of ecclesiastical history and antiquities; on which subjects he lectured in the seminary of St. Magloire, at Paris, for thirteen years. His first publication appears to have been against the illusion of the divining rod; “Lettres pour prouver l'illusion des philosophes sur la baguette,” Paris, 1693, reprinted in 1702, with many additions, under the title of “Histoire critique des pratiques superstitieuses, &c.” Of this there was a new edition in 3 vols. 12mo, 1732, with a life of the author by M. Bellon, his nephew, and in 1737 the abbe Granet printed a collection of pieces intended as a fourth volume. He also wrote against the theatre, as an amusement improper for Christians; but his more elaborate work was that on “Liturgies,” published in 4 vols. 8vd, containing a history of liturgies, prayers, ceremonies, &c. including those of the church of England. This, owing to some liberal opinions, involved him in a controversy, in which he defended himself with great ability, but before the contest was over he died, Jan. 6, 1729.

, a celebrated Greek scholar and critic, a member of the inscriptions and belles iettres, and of the institute, was born at Strasburgh, Dec. 30, 1729, and died in that city June 12, 1803. Of his history no detailed account has yet appeared in this country, as far as we have been able to learn. We are only told that he was first educated in the college of Louis le Grand at Paris, and that having afterwards engaged in the civil administration of affairs, he had long neglected the cultivation of letters, when, in the course of the campaigns in Hanover, he happened to lodge at Gie^sen, in the house of a professor of the university. With him he read several Latin and Greek authors, and was soon inspired with a great predilection for the latter language; but the most remarkable particular is, that some time before his death he lost on a sudden all taste for the critical and classical pursuits which he had followed so eagerly and successfully for upwards of half a century, and this without any visible decay of his powers either intellectual or physical. Yet, such was the change, that he totally abandoned all study of his favourite Greek, and could not be prevailed upon to cast even a glance on any of his favourite authors, nor did he appear to take the smallest interest in the discovery of a manuscript of Aristophanes, which happened to confirm the greater part of his notes and conjectures on that author, a circumstance, which, at any other period of his life, would have excited his warmest enthusiasm. The works for which the learned world is indebted to his pen are, 1. “Analecta veterum Poetarum Graecorum,” Strasburgh, 1772—1776, 3 vols 8vo, reprinted 1785. There is also a quarto edition. 2. “Anacreontis Carmina,” ibid. 1778, 12mo, and 1786, beautiful and accurate editions. 3. “Æschyli Tragcedioe, Prometheus, Persae, Septem ad Thebas: Sophoclis Antigone: Euripidis Medea,” ibid 1779, 8vo. 4. “Sophoclis Elettra, et Euripidus Andromache,” ibid. 1779, 8vo. 5. “Sophoclis Oedipus Tyrannus, et Euripidis Orestes,” ibid. 1779, 8vo. 6. “Euripidis Tragediae quatuor, Hecuba, Phcenissa?, Hyppolytus et Bacchae,” ibid. 1780, 8vo, with illustrations from a Parisian ms. an excellent edition. 7. “Apollonii Rhodii Argonautica,” ibid. 1780, 8vo, the notes and emendations more valuable than those of any preceding author, but Brunck is accused of employing conjecture rather too freely. 8. “Aristophanis Comœdiæ in Latinum Sermonem conversæ,” ibid. 1781, 3 vols. 9. “Aristophanis Comcediae ex optimis exemplaribus emendatae,” ibid. 1783, 8vo, and 4to, containing the preceding Latin translation and notes and emendations, one of the best editions of Aristophanes. 10. “G-nomici Poetae Graeci,” ibid. 1784, 8vo. 11. “Virgilius,” ibid. 1785, 8vo. 12. “Sophoclis qua; extant omnia, cum veterum Grammaticorum scholiis,” ibid. 1786, 4to, 2 vols. and 3 vols. 8vo, 1786 9, an edition of acknowledged superiority and value. 13. “Plautus,” Bipont. 1788, 2 vols. 8vo. 14. “Terentius,” 1787, from the press of Dannbach, but Mr. Dibdin mentions a Basil edition of 1797, said to have been superintended by Brunck, and printed in the same manner with his Virgil of 1789. Brunck’s enthusiastic admiration of the authors he edited was such, that he conceived their writings to have been originally immaculate, and therefore attributed to the copyists whatever errors he discovered. He is, as we have noticed, accused of taking some bold freedoms in the restoration of what he conceived defective, but he was more remarkable for this in the notes which he wrote on the margins of his books, and the manuscript copies of some Greek poets which he left behind him. Of Apollonius Rhodius only he wrote out five copies.

, an eminent Italian architect, was born at Florence in 1377. His father was a notary, and his sou for some time was apprenticed to a goldsmith, but afterwards discovered a turn for geometry, in which he was instructed by Paul Toscanelli. A journey which he happened to take to Rome gave him a taste for architecture, which he hftproved by the study of the edifices in that city, and had a very early opportunity of trying his skill. A dome was wanted for the church of St. Maria del Fiore at Florence; the ablest architects had been requested to send in their plans, and that of Brunelleschi was adopted, and carried into execution with an effect which astonished Michael Angelo himself. He was next employed by Cosmo the Great in building the abbey of Fesoli, and was afterwards solicited for the plan of a palace for Cosmo. Brunelleschi accordingly gave in a design of great magnificence, but Cosmo thought proper to prefer one more suited to the prudent economy which was then necessary for him, and Brunelleschi was so irritated that he destroyed his design. Brunelleschi afterwards built the Pitti palace, in part, and the church of St. Lorenzo in Florence almost entirely. He also gave some designs in military architecture. He is said to have been the first who attempted to restore the Grecian orders of architecture, and under his control this branch of the art attained a degree of perfection which it had not known from the time of the ancients. Brunelieschi died in 1446, greatly lamented, and was interred with sumptuous funeral honours, and Cosmo erected a monument to his memory. He is said to have employed his leisure hours in cultivating Italian poetry, and some of his burlesque verses have been printed along with those of Burchieiio: there is a separate poem, “Geta e Birna,” ascribed to him and to Domenico dal Prato, Venice, 1516, 8vo, but this seems doubtful. It is more certain that he wrote architectural descriptions of all his works, some of which are, or lately were, in Cosmo’s palace at Florence, now the residence of the noble family of Riccardi.

, a very eminent scholar and historian, derived his name of Aretine, or Aretino, from Arezzo, in which city he was born in the year 1370, of parents sufficiently wealthy to bestow on him a good education. In his early youth he was incited to a love of letters by an extraordinary accident. A body of French troops, who were marching to Naples to assist Louis of Anjou in maintaining his claim to trie sovereignty of that kingdom, at the solicitation of the partizans of a faction which had been banished from Arezzo, made an unexpected attack upon that city; and, after committing a great slaughter, carried away many of the inhabitants into captivity; and, among the rest, the family of Bruni. Leonardo being confined in a chamber in which hung a portrait of Petrarch, by daily contemplating the lineaments of that illustrious scholar, conceived so strong a desire to signalize himself by literary acquirements, that immediately upon his enlargement he repaired to Florence, where he prosecuted his studies with unremitting diligence, under the direction of John of Ravenna, and Manuel Chrysoloras. During his residence at Florence, he contracted a strict intimacy with the celebrated Poggio Bracciolini, and the latter being afterwards informed by Leonardo that he wished to procure a presentation to some place of honour or emolument in the Roman chancery, took every opportunity of recommending him. In consequence of this, pope Innocent VII. invited him to Rome, where he arrived March 24, 1405, but was at first disappointed in his hopes, the place at which he aspired being intended for another candidate, Jacopo d'Angelo. Fortunately, however, the pope having received certain letters from the duke of Berry, determined to assign to each of the competitors the task of drawing up an answer to them, and the compositions being compared, the prize was unanimously adjudged to Leonardo, who was instantly advanced to the dignity of apostolic secretary, and by this victory considerably increased his reputation, as his competitor was a man of very considerable talents. (See Angelo, James.) In 1410 Leonardo was elected chancellor of the city of Florence, but finding it attended with more labour than profit, resigned it in 1411, and entered into the service of pope John XXII. and soon after went to Arezzo, where he married a young lady of considerable distinction in that city. He was thought by his contemporaries rather too attentive to the minutiae of economy, and having married a lady who loved dress and ornaments, was somewhat disappointed. In a letter to his friend Poggio, after giving an account of his marriage expences, he adds, “In short, I have in one night consummated my marriage, and consumed my patrimony.” In 1415 he accompanied pope John XXIII. to the council of Constance, and this pope having been there deposed, Leonardo returned to Florence, where he was chosen secretary to the republic, and was employed in several political affairs of importance. He died in thebeginning of 1444, and was interred with the most solemn magnificence in the church of Santa Croce, with the following inscription, which is still legible, but not worthy of the object:

Leonardo Bruni was not only one of the most learned men of his age, but one of the most amiable in character and manners, nor was his fame confined to Italy. The learned of France and Spain travelled to Florence to have the honour of seeing him, and it is said that a Spaniard who was ordered by the king to pay him a visit, knelt down in his presence, and could with difficulty be persuaded to quit that humble and admiring posture. These honours, however, excited no pride in Leonardo, The only failing of which he has been accused is that of avarice; but, as one of his biographers remarks, that name is sometimes given to prudence and economy. His friendships were lasting and sincere, and he was never known to resent ill-usage with much asperity, unless in the case of Niccolo Niccoli, who appears to have given him sufficient provocation. The case, indeed, on the part of Niccoli appears abundantly ridiculous; a termagant mistress whom he kept had been publicly disgraced; and Niccoli expected that his friends should condole with him on the occasion. Leonardo staid away, for which Niccoli reproached him, and when Leonardo offered him such advice as morality as well as friendship dictated, irritated Leonardo by his reiterated reproaches and insultinrg language. The consequence was a satire Leonardo wrote, a manuscript copy of which is in the catalogue, although not now in the library, of New college, Oxford. The title of it was “Leonardi Florentini oratio in nebulonem maledicum.” It appears by Menus’ s catalogue of his works to be in the Laurentian library. Poggio, however, at last succeeded in reconciling the parties.

If, according to some, Leonardo was occasionally impatient in his temper, and too apt to take offence, his late biographer has given an anecdote which shews that he had the good sense to be soon convinced of his error, and the ingenuousness of spirit to confess it. Having engaged in a literary discussion with Gianozzo Manetti, he was so exasperated by observing that the bye-standers thought him worsted in argument, that he vented his spleen in outrageous expressions against Jiis antagonist. On the x following morning, however, by break of day, he went to the house of Gianozzo, who expressed his surprize that a person of Leonardo’s dignity should condescend to honour him so far as to pay him an unsolicited visit. On this, Leonardo requested that Gianozzo would favour him with a private conference, and thus apologized for the wajrmth of his temper: “Yesterday I did you great injustice ~; but I soon began to suffer punishment for my offence, for I have not closed my eyes during the whole night, and I could not rest till I had made to you a confession of my fault.” Mr. Shepherd justly observes, that the man who by the voluntary acknowledgment of an error could thus frankly throw himself upon the generosity of one whom he had offended, must have possessed in his own mind a fund of probity and honour. The failings of Leonardo were indeed amply counterbalanced by his strict integrity, his guarded temperance, his faithful discharge of his public duties, and his zeal in the cause of literature.

His works are, 1. “Historiarum Florentini populi, lib. duodecim,” Strasburgh, 1610, fol. The Italian translation by Acciajolo was printed at Venice, 1473, 1560, and 1561, and at Florence, 1492. 2. “Leonard! Aretini de Temporibus suis Libri duo,” fol. Venice, 1475 and 1485, &c. 3. “De Bello Italico ad versus Gothos gesto Libri quatuor,” founded upon the Greek history of Procopius, Foligno, 1470, and often reprinted. 4. “De Bello Punico Libri tres,” Brix, 1498, &c. 5. “Commentarium Rerum Graecarum,” Leyden, 1539, &c, 6. “Isagogicon moralis discipline ad Galeotum Ricasolanum.” This work also bears the title of “Dialogus de moribus, &c.” and under the title of “Aristoteles de moribus ad Eudemum Latine Leon. Aretino interprete,” was printed at Louvain, 1475, &c. 7. “Ad Petrum Histrium dialogoruni Libri,” Basil, 1536, and Paris, 1642. 8. “De Studiis et Literis ad illustrem Dominum Baptistam de Malatestis,” Strasburgh, 1521, &c. 9. “Laudatio Joan. Strozzse,” in Baluzzi’s Miscellanies. 10. “Imperatoris Heliogabali oratio protreptica,” published by Aldus Manutius in his “Hist. Augustae Scriptores Minores.” 11. “Oratio in Hypocritas,” printed in the Fasciculus of Ortuinus Gratius, Cologn, 1535, Leyden, 1679, and London, 1691. 12. “La vita di Dante e i costumi e studj di Petrarca.” The life of Petrarch was edited by Phil. Tomasinus in his “Petrarca Redivivus,” Padua, 1650, and was reprinted with the life of Dante, 1671. 13. “Magni Basilii Liber in Latinum translatus,” Brix. 1485, &c. 14. Seven of Plutarch’s Lives translated from the Greek, Basil, 1542. 15. “Apologia Socratis,” Bonon, 1502. 15. “Aristotelis Ethicorum Libri decem,” Paris, 1504 and 1510, &c. 16. <c Aristotelis Politicorum, libri octo.“Venice, 1504, &c. 17.” Oeconomicorum Aristotelis Libri duo,“Basil, 1538. 18.” Oratio Æschinis in Ctesiphontem,“Basil, 1528, 1540. 19.” Oratio Demosthenis contra Æschinem,“ibid. 1528. 20.” De crudeli anioris exitu Guisguardi, &c.“a translation of one of Boccaccio’s tales, Turon. 1467, printed also in the works of Pius II. 21. Epistolarum Libri VIII.” 1472, fol. often reprinted. 22. “Canzone morale di Messer Lionardo,” printed in the third volume of Crescembini’s Italian poetry. The numerous editions through which many of his works passed afford a sufficient indication of the esteem in which they were held by the learned of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.

, or Robert Mannyng, the first English poet who occurs in the fourteenth century, was born probably before 1270, as he was received into the order of black canons at Brunne, about 1288. Malton appears to have been his birth-place, but what Malton is doubtful. He was, as far as can be discovered, merely a translator. His first work, says Warton, was a metrical paraphrase of a French book, written by Robert Grosthead, bishop of Lincoln, called “Manuel Pecche” (Manuel des Péchés), being a treatise on the decalogue, and on the seven deadly sins, which are illustrated with many legendary stories. It was never printed, but is preserved in the Bodleian library, Mss. No. 415, and in the Harleian Mss. No. 1701. His second and more important work is a metrical chronicle of England, in two parts, the former of which (from Æneas to the death of Cadwallader) is translated from Wace’s “Brut d'Angleterre,” and the latter (from Cadwallader to the end of the reign of Edward I.) from a French chronicle written by Peter de Langtoft, an Augustine canon of Bridlington in Yorkshire, who is supposed to have died in the reign of Edward II. and was therefore contemporary with his translator. Hearne has edited Robert de Brunne, but has suppressed the whole of his translation from Wace, excepting the prologue, and a few extracts which he found necessary to illustrate his glossary. Mr. Ellis, to whom we are indebted for this article, has given some specimens of de Brunne’s work.

, a Swiss physician and anatomist of eminence, was born at Diessenhofen, the 16th of January, 1653. After passing through the usual school education, he was sent, at the age of sixteen, to Strasburgh, where, applying assiduously to the study of physic and anatomy, he was created doctor in medicine in 1672. For his thesis, he gave the anatomy of a child with two heads, which he met with. He now went to Paris, and attended the schools and hospitals there with such assiduity, as to attract the notice, and gain him the intimacy of Dionis and du Verny, who were present while he made the experiments on the pancreas, which enabled him, some years after, to publish a more accurate description of that viscus, than had been before given, under the title of “Experimenta nova circa Pancreas. Accedit Diatribe de Lympha et genuine Pancreatis usu,” Leidse, 1682, 8vo. He proved that the fluid secreted by the pancreas is not necessary to digestion, and that an animal may live after that viscus is taken out of the body, having tried the experiment upon a dog, which perfectly recovered from the operation. On quitting Paris, he came to London, and was introduced to Dr. Willis, Lower, and Henry Oldenburg, secretary to the royal society. From England he passed to Holland, and studied for some months at Leyden. At Amsterdam he visited Swammerdam and Ruysch, with whom he afterwards corresponded. Returning home he was made professor of medicine at Heidelberg, and first physician to the elector palatine, who conferred on him the title of baron de Brunn in Hamerstein. About the same time, he niarried one of the daughters of the celebrated Wepfer, and was elected honorary member of the academia naturae curios, in return for some ingenious dissertations which he had communicated to them. In 1688 he publised “Dissertatio Anatomica de Glandula pituitaria,” Heidelb. 4to. From this time he became in such great request for his knowledge and success in practice, that he was, in succession, consulted by most of the princes in Germany. Among others, in 1720, he was sent for to Hanover, to attend the prince of Wales, afterwards king George II. In 1715 he published at Heidelberg, “Glandula Duodeni sen Pancreas secundum detectum,” 4to, which was only an improved edition of his “De Glandulis in Duodeno Intestino detectis,” which had been before twice printed. There are some other lesser works, the titles and accounts of which are given by Haller, in his Bib. Anat. In the latter edition of Wepfer’s works are given dissections by our author, of the heads of some persons who died of apoplexy, of whom he had had the care. Though early afflicted with gravel, and in the latter part of his life with gout, he continued to attend to the calls of his patients, though living a great distance from his residence. When in his 74th year, he went in great haste to Munich, to attend the elector Maximilian Emanuel; on his return, he was seized with a fever, which, in a few days, put an end to his life, October 2, 1727.

, founder of the Carthusian monks, was descended from an ancient and honourable family, and born at Cologn about the year 1030. He was educated first among the clergy of St. Cunibert’s church at Cologn, and afterwards at Rheims, where he attracted so much notice by his learning and piety, that on a vacancy occurring, he was promoted to the office or rank of Scholasticus, to which dignity then belonged the direction of the studies, and all the great schools of the diocese. In this office, which he filled with great reputation, he continued until 1077, when the scandalous conduct of Manasses, archbishop of Rheims, who, by open simony had got possession of that church, induced him to join with some others in accusing Manasses in a council held by the pope’s legate at Autun. Manasses accordingly was deposed, and the church of Rheims was about to choose Bruno for his successor in the archbishopric, when he resigned his office, and persuaded some of his friends to accompany him into solitude. After searching for some time to discover a proper place, they arrived at Grenoble in 1084, and requested the bishop to allot them some place where they might serve God, remote from worldly affairs. The bishop having assigned them the desert of Chartreuse, and promised them his assistance, Bruno and his companions, six in number, built an oratory there, and small cells at a little distance one from the other like the ancient Lauras of Palestine, in which they passed the six days of the week, but assembled together on Sundays. Their austerities were rigid, generally following those of St. Benedict; and, among other rules, perpetual silence was enjoined, and all their original observances, it is said, were longer preserved unchanged than those of any other order. Before the late revolution in France, they had 172 convents divided into sixteen provinces, of which five only are said to have been nunneries, all situated in the catholic Netherlands, and where the injunction of silence was dispensed with. There were nine monasteries of this order in England at the dissolution under Henry VIII.

After St. Bruno had governed this infant society for six years, he was invited to Rome by pope Urban II. who had formerly been his scholar at Rheims, and now received him with every mark of respect and confidence, and pressed him to accept the archbishopric of Reggio. This however he declined, and the pope consented that he should withdraw into some wilderness on the mountains of Calabria. Bruno found a convenient solitude in the diocese of Squiiiaci, where he settled in 1090, with some new disciples, until his death, Oct. 6. 1101. There are only two letters of his remaining, one to Raoul le Verd, and the other to his monks, which are printed in a folio volume, entitled “S. Brunonis Qpera et Vita,” 1524, but the other contents of the volume belong to another St. Bruno, first a monk of Soieria in the diocese of Ast, and hence called Astiensis. He distinguished himself at the council of Rome in 1079 against Berenger, and was consecrated bishop of Segni by Gregory VII. He died in 1125, and is reckoned among the fathers of the church. He is reputed to have written with more elegance, clearness, and erudition, than most authors of his time, and there are several editions of his works. The Carthusian Bruno wrote on the Psalms and on some of St. Paul’s epistles. He followed the system of Augustine concerning grace, but it seems doubtful if any genuine works of his remain, unless what we have mentioned.

, an Italian writer to whom atheism has been generally, but unjustly, imputed, was born atNola in the kingdom of Naples, about the middle of the sixteenth century. His talents are said to have been considerable, but this is hardly discoverable from his works: he early, however, set up for an inquirer and innovator, and very naturally found many things in the philosophy and theology then taught in Italy, which he could not comprehend. Being fond of retirement and study, he entered into a monastery of Dominicans, but the freedom of his opinions, and particularly of his censures on the irregularities of the fraternity, rendered it soon necessary to leave his order and his country. In 1582, he withdrew to Geneva, where his heretical opinions gave offence to Calvin and Beza, and he was soon obliged to provide for his safety by flight. After a short stay at Lyons he came to Paris, and his innovating spirit recommended him to the notice of multitudes, who at this time declared open hostilities against the authority of Aristotle. In a public disputation, held in the royal academy, in 1586, he defended, three days successively, certain propositions concerning nature and the world, which, together with brief heads of the arguments, he afterwards published in Saxony, under the title of “Acrotismus,” or “Reasons of the physical articles proposed against the Peripatetics at Paris.” The contempt with which Bruno, in the course of these debates, treated Aristotle, exposed him to the resentment of the academic professors, who were zealous advocates for the old system; and he found it expedientto leave thekingdom of France. According to some writers, he now visited England, in the train of the French ambassador Castelneau, wherehe was hospitably received by sir Philip Sydney and sir Fulke Gre.ville, and was introduced to queen Elizabeth. But though it is certain from his writings that he was in England, he probably made this visit in some other part of his life, and we should suppose before this, in 1583 or 1584. For, about the middle of the same year in which he was at Paris, we find him, at Wittenburg, a zealous adherent of Luther. In this city he met with a liberal reception, and full permission to propagate his doctrines: but the severity with which he inveighed against Aristotle, the latitude of his opinions in religion as well as philosophy, and the contempt with which he treated the masters of the public schools, excited new jealousies; and complaints were lodged against him before the senate of the university. To escape the disgrace which threatened him, Bruno, after two years residence in Wittenburg, left that place, and took refuge in Helmstadt, where the known liberality of the duke of Brunswick encouraged him to hope for a secure asylum. But either through the restlessness of his disposition, or through unexpected opposition, he went next year to Francfort, to superintend an edition of his works, but before it was completed was obliged again, probably from fear of persecution, to quit that city. His next residence was at Padua; where the boldness with which h.e taught his new doctrines, and inveighed against the court of Rome, caused him to be apprehended and brought before the inquisition at Venice. There he was tried, and convicted of his errors. Forty days being allowed him to deliberate, he promised to retract them, and as at the expiration of that term, he still maintained his errors, he obtained a further respite for forty days. At last, it appearing that he imposed upon the pope in order to prolong his life, sentence was finally passed upon him on the 9th of February 1600. He made no offer to retract during the week that was allowed him afterwards for that purpose, but underwent his punishment on the 17th, by being burnt at a stake.

Many modern writers have very successfully wiped off the aspersion of Bruno’s being an atheist; but, whatever he was with respect to religion, his character appears never to have risen much higher than that of a dealer in paradoxes. Brucker, who seems to have examined his works, and whose history we have chiefly followed in the preceding account, says, that a luxuriant imagination supplied him with wonderful conceptions, intelligible only to a few, which were never formed into a system. Not possessing that cool and solid judgment, and that habit of patient attention, which are necessary to a thorough investigation of subjects, he frequently embraced trifling and doubtful propositions as certain truths. His ideas are for the most part wild and fantastic, and he indulged himself in a most unbounded liberty of speech. Some of his original conceptions are indeed more luminous and satisfactory, and nearly coincide with the principles of philosophy afterwards received by Des Cartes, Leibnitz, and others. But these sparks of truth are buried in a confused mass of extravagant and trifling dogmas, expressed in a metaphorical and intricate style, and immethodically arranged. Brucker thinks that his doctrine was not founded, as Bayle and La Croze maintain, on the principles of Spinozism, but on the ancient and absurd doctrine of emanation.

His most celebrated philosophical pieces are the following: l. De Umbris Idearum, “On Shadows of Ideas.” 2. De rinfmito, Universe, et Mondi, “Of Infinity, the Universe, and World.” 3. Spaccio della Bestia triomfante, “Dispatches from the Triumphant Beast.” 4. Oratio valedictoria habita in Academia Wittebergensi, “A farewell Oration delivered in the University of Wittenberg.” 5. De Monade, Numero, et Figura, “Of Monad, Number, and Figure.” 6. Summa Terminorum Metaphysicorum, “Summary of Metaphysical Terms.” Of these the satirical work, “Dispatches from the Beast triumphant,” is the mot celebrated. Dr. Warton, in a note upon Pope’s Works, asserts on the authority of Toland, that sir Philip Sidney was “the intimate friend and patron of the famous atheist Giordano Bruno, who was in a secret club with him and sir Fulk Greville, held in London in 1587, and that the” Spaccio“was at that time composed and printed in London, and dedicated to sir Philip.” But, besides that this date must be wrong, sir Philip Sidney having died the preceding year, it appears evidently from the account of the “Spaccio” given in the Spectator, No. 389*, that it was a very harmless production, founded upon a poetical fiction, and little adapted to make any man a convert to atheism. We refer, however, to Dr. Zouch’s Memoirs of Sir Philip Sidney for an ample defence both of sir Philip, and Bruno, whose greatest crime, in the eyes of the inquisition, was rather Lutheranism than atheism.

, a physician of the sixteenth century, and one of the first modern restorers of botany, was born at Mentz, and originally brought up to the church. After his theological studies he took the habit of the Carthusians of Mentz, but was one of the earliest converts to Lutheranism, and having made his escape from his monastery, became a zealous preacher of the reformed religion. This appears to have involved him with Erasmus, who, in Brunsfeis’ opinion, was rather a time-server. Having lost his voice, however, by a disorder, he was obliged to give over preaching, and went to Strasburgh, where the government of the college was committed to his care. During a residence of nine years in this city he studied medicine, and was created doctor at Basil in 1530. He was soon after invited to Berne in Swisserland, where be died six months after, Nov. 23, 1534. Whilst at Strasburgh, he published two small tracts to facilitate the study of grammar to children, annotations on the gospels, and on the acts of the apostles, and an answer to Erasmus’s “Spongia,” in defence of Hutten. The following are the principal of his botanical and medical works “Catalogus illustrium Medicorum,” 1530, 4to. “Herbarum vivae icones, ad naturae imitationem, summa cum diligentia *et artificioefficiatae, cum effectibus earundem,” 1530, 1531, 1536, 3 vols. fol. The plates are much commended by Haller, who, on account of this work, ranks the author among the restorers of botany. “Theses, seu comounes loci totius Medicinae, etiam de usu Pharmacorum, Argentinae,” 1522, 8vo. " Onomasticon Medicinae, noaiina continens omnium stirpium, &c. Argent, 1534, folio.

, a general of infantry in the Prussian army, an honorary member of the royal academy of sciences of Berlin, and second cousin to his Britannic majesty, was born at Brunswick, Oct. 20, 1741. He was the second son of Charles, reigning duke of Brunswick, by the duchess PhilippineCharlotte, daughter of Frederick William I. king of Prussia, and sister to Frederick the Great. His education was intrusted to men of talents and virtue, and his progress was in proportion. He entered the military service in 1761, as colonel of his father’s regiment of infantry in the allied army, under the commander in chief, his uncle, the duke Ferdinand. In that year, and in 17 2, he distinguished himself in several actions. In 1763, he entered into the service of Frederick II. king of Prussia, and in 1768 married the only daughter of the reigning duke of Wirtemberg-Oels. From that time he fixed his residence entirely at Berlin, where he devoted his time to military and literary studies. His father-in-law dying about the end of the year 1792, he succeeded him in the principality of Oels, to which he went in the month of June 1793. The following year he resigned all his military preferments, in order to attend to his principality, and was not more distinguished as a statesman and a soldier than as a patron of learning and learned men, contributing liberally to the publication of many useful works. He died at Weimar Oct. 8, 1805.

The following is a list of his works, which are in general but little known, as he printed them at his own expence, principally for distribution among his friends. 1, “Considerazioni sopra le cose della grandezza dei Romani, trad, del Montesquieu,” Berlin, 1764, 8vo. 2. “Reflessioni critiche sopra ii carattere e le gesta d'Alessandro Magno,” Milan, 1764, 8vo. This was translated both into French and English, the. latter in 1767; and a new edition of the original was reprinted at Berlin in 1803, 8vo. 3. A German translation of the “Heureusement,” a comedy of Rochon de Chabannes, Brunswick, 1764, 8vo. 4. A Cferman translation of the tragedy of “Regulus,” Potsdam, 1767, 8vo. 5. “Discours sur les Grand Hommes,” Berlin, 1768, 8vo, and ibid. 1803. 6. A French translation of Brandes’ “Ariane a Naxos.” 7. “The Thoughts of a Cosmopolite on Air Balloons,” in German, Hamburgh, 1784, 8vo. 8. “A Discourse on taking the oath, Oct. 2, 1786,” in German, Berlin, 1786, 8vo. 9. “Instructions for his regiment, &c.” in German, ibid. 1791, 8vo, with military figures. 10. “The military history of prince Frederic Augustus of Brunswick-Lunebourg, &c.” in German, Oels, 1797, 4to, with a portrait and twenty plans and charts. 11. "Journal plaisant, historique, politique, et literaire, a Oels/' from July 1793 to July 179$. He left also several works in manuscript, principally on military tactics.

, a Latin historian and poet, was born at Egra in Bohemia, 1518. He was devoted to books from his childhood, and especially to poetry; in which he so happily succeeded, that he could make a great number of verses, and those not bad ones, extempore. He began early to publish some of them on several subjects; and acquired so much reputation, that he attained to the poetical crown, to the dignity of poet laureat, and of count palatine, which honour he received at Vienna from Ferdinand of Austria, king of the Remaps, in 1552. His business in that city was to present a work to Maximilian, king of Hungary, which he had dedicated to him, the “First century of the German monasteries.” In his return from Vienna, he stopped at Passau; where, finding a patron in Wolfgang bishop of Salms, he resolved to settle, and to remove his library and family. He hoped that he could better go on there with a great work he had undertaken, which was, “The history of all the bishoprics and bishops of Germany.” He had travelled much, and looked into several records *and libraries, to gather materials for his purpose. How long he staid there does not appear; but he was at Basil in June 1553, and lived in the citadel of Oporin. Arx Oporina: the usual way of speaking of that famous printer’s house, which stood on a rising ground. Here he published writings he had finished at Passau, some in prose, and others in verse. Bruschius was married, but had no children. He was far from being rich; but his poetical patrons assisted him, and he received presents also from the abbots and abbesses, whose monasteries he described. He was particularly well received by the abbess of the convent of Caczi, and obtained some presents from her, which, Melchior Adam says, was owing to his having described the antiquities of that convent. The liberalities of some abbots, while he was with Oporin at Basil, enabled him to buy a new suit of clothes; but when he found that appearing well dressed in the streets procured him many marks of respect from the vulgar, he tore his new finery to pieces, “as slaves (says the same author) that had usurped their master’s honours.”

This unhappy man was murdered in the forest of Scalingenbach, between Rottemberg on the Tauber and Winsheim, in 1559; and it was believed that this assassination was concerted and carried into execution by some gentlemen against whom Bruschius was about to write something. His ecclesiastical history of Germany is said to savour of Lutheranism, with which he was supposed to be strongly tainted, from his taking every slight occasion to speak ill of Rome and of the popes. It was published un^er the title “De omnibus totius Germanise Episcopatibus Epitome, &c.” Nuremberg, 1549; and “Monasteriorum Germanise prsecipuorum, &c. Centuria Prima,” Ingolstad, 1551. He published also, in his nineteenth year, “Tabula Philosophise partitionem continens,” Tubingen, 1537, and other works, enumerated in Gesner’s Bibliotheca.

, a very learned Venetian, was born about 1518, and studied at Padua. It appears from his letters, that he was obliged to leave his country as an exile; but he does not say upon what account, only that it was without any blemish to his honour. He travelled much, passing part of his life in Spain, England, France, Germany, Transylvania, and Poland. Notwithstanding this itinerant kind of life, he acquired great learning, as appears from his notes on Horace, Caesar, Cicero, &c. He was in Transylvania in 1574, having been invited thither by prince Stephen, in order to compose a history of that country. One of his letters, dated from Cracow, Nov. 23, 1577, informs us, that he had followed that prince, then king of Poland, in the expedition into Prussia. He had a convenient apartment assigned him in the castle of Cracow, that he might apply himself the better to his function of historiographer. He left Poland after the death of that monarch, and lived with William of St. Clement, ambassador from the king of Spain to the imperial court, where he was honoured with the title of his imperial majesty’s historiographer. He died afterwards in Transylvania, in 1594, in his seventy-sixth year.

His writings, become very scarce, were so earnestly sought after by the best judges, that there was great joy in the republic of letters, on hearing that Mr. Cromer had undertaken to publish a new edition of them. The first part of that design was accomplished in 1698, Berlin, 8vo. The Cracow edition was in 1582. Bruto promises in one of his letters, to add another to them, wherein he designed to treat of the custom of giving the same lofty titles to persons whom we write to in Latin, as are given in common languages. There are but few countries in which they are more nice in this point than in Poland; and yet Bruto would not conform to the new style, not even in writing to some Polish lords, but dispensed with all ceremonies that might make him deviate from the purity of the ancient language of Rome. In a letter he wrote to John Poniatowski, he says: “This is my first letter to you, which I write in the Roman manner, as I used to do even to the king. I can bring myself to every thing else, can love you, obey you, and always regard you, which I shall do very willingly, as you highly deserve. But when I have any thing to write to you in Latin, suffer me, without offence, to write according to the use of the Latin tongue, for I cannot understand that I am writing to your greatnesses, your magnificences, &c. which exist no where on this side of the moon: I am writing to you.” Bruto, though whimsical in this respect, was at least classical, as it is certain that ancient Rome had no such usage in the time of its greatest glory, and of its most accomplished politeness.

It is said, that the history of Florence, composed by our Bruto, and printed at Lyons in 1562, under the title 46 Florentine Historian, Libri octo priores,“is not favourable to the house of Medicis; and that it greatly displeased the duke of Florence, on which it was so far suppressed, that few copies are now to be met with. He published also” De Origine Venetiarum,“Leyden, 1560, 8vo, and” Epistolse," Berlin, 1690, 8vo.

, one of those celebrated persons whose writings attract universal admiration, while their lives pass on in one uniform tenour, without incident or adventure, was born in 1639, 1640, or 1644, (for we have seen all these dates given), in a village of France, near the town of Dourdan, in that part of the late province of the Isle of France which is now denominated the department of the Seine and Oise. Of his education, or of his youthful manners, we have no information. His first situation appears to have been at Caen, in the province of Normandy, where he had an office in the collection of the revenue. His literary talents, however, became soon too conspicuous to permit him to remain long in a situation so little corresponding with the expanding and elevating views of genius. The illustrious Bossuet appointed him to attend one of the royal children of France, to instruct him in history, with a pension of a thousand crowns a year. With this he might be considered at that period, and in that country, as in a state of affluence; and the literary distinctions, then the most courted by aspiring minds, were not withheld from him; for, in 163, he was elected by the express command of Lewis XIV. one of the forty members of the French academy. But he did not long enjoy that affluence which afforded him leisure to cultivate the fields of literature, nor the distinctions which he so well merited, and which were accompanied by the universal admiration of his countrymen, and indeed of all Europe. An apoplectic fit removed him from this transitory scene, in the year 1696, and in the fifty-third year of his age.

M. de la Bruyere was an ingenious philosopher, devoid of all ambition, content to enjoy in tranquillity his friends andhis books, and selecting both with judgment. Pleasure he neither sought, nor endeavoured to avoid. Ever disposed to the indulgence of a modest and placid joy, with a happy talent of exciting it, he was polite in his manners, and wise in his conversation; an enemy to every kind of affectation, and even to that of displaying the brilliancy of wit. The work by which he was distinguished was “The Characters of Theophrastus, translated from the Greek, with the Manners of the present age.” “These characters,” says Voltaire, “may be justly ranked among the extraordinary productions of the age. Antiquity furnishes no examples of such a work. A rapid, concise, and nervous style; animated and picturesque expressions; a use of language altogether new, without offending against its established rules, struck the public at first; and the allusions to living persons, which are crowded in almost every page, completed its success. When the author showed his work in manuscript to Malesieux, the latter told him that the book would have many readers, and its author many enemies . It somewhat sunk in the opinion of men, when that whole generation, whose follies it attacked, were passed away; yet, as it contains many things applicable to all times and places, it is more than probable that it will never be forgotten.”

, born at Serrieres in the Maconnois in 1708, quitted his country in order to pursue his studies at Geneva, from whence he went to the Hague, where he had some relations, and there he became a Calvinist. A dispute with some divines obliging him to leave Holland, he retired into Germany, from whence he returned to France. He there recanted, and died some time after at Dijon, in 1738, being only thirty years old. He published 1. “Critique desinteressee des journaux litteraires,” 1730, 3 vols. 12mo. 2. “History of the Popes,” from St. Peter to Benedict XIII. inclusive, 1732, 5 vols. 4to. 3. “Mernoires historiques, critiques, et litteraires,” 2 vols. 12mo, in which are many anecdotes of the characters and works of the learned men he had been acquainted with in the different countries he had visited. The first title of this work, was: “Reflexions serieuses et badines sur les Swisses, les Hollandois, et les Allemans, &c.” which he thought proper to change. 4. “Reflexions en forme de lettres adressees au prochain synod qui doit s’assembler a la Haye, sur l'affaire de M. Saurin, et sur celle de M. Maty,” Hague, 1730, 12mo. This alludes to a dispute with Saurin and Maty, which latter had been deposed from his ministry for his opinions on the Trinity. Bruys concealed his name in this work under the letters M. F. B. D. S. E. M. P. D. G. (i. e. Francois Bruys, de Serrieres en Magonnois, professeur de Grammaire.) 5. Tacite avec des notes historiques et politiques, pour servir de continuation a ce que M. Amelot de Houssai avoit traduit de cetauteur,“Hague, 1730, 6 vols. 12mo. 6.” Le postilion, ouvrage historique, critique, politique, &c." 1733—6, 4 vols. 12mo. His history of the popes was said to have been the production of a Benedictine of St. Maur, and the plan and some of the chapters having fallen into the hands of Bruys, he prepared it for the press in the shape we now find it.

, founder of the sect, if it may be so called, of the Petrobrussians, in the twelfth century, appears to have propagated his doctrines chiefly in Languedoc and Provence, and after a laborious ministry of twenty years, during which he had collected a great number of followers, was burnt at St. Gilles in 1130, by the populace instigated by the popish clergy. His chief tenets were, that no persons ought to be baptised unless adults; that it was an idle superstition to build churches, as God will accept sincere worship wherever it is offered, and that such churches as had been erected were to be destroyed; with all crucifixes or instruments of superstition; that the real body and blood of Christ were not exhibited in the eucharist, but were represented only by figures and symbols, and that the oblations, prayers, &c. of the living were of, no use to the dead.

, an English poet and warrior, was born of a genteel family, educated at Oxford, and afterwards spent some time in travelling abroad. In 1522, he attended, in a military capacity, the earl of Surrey on his expedition to the coast of Britany, and commanded the troops in the attack of the town of Morlaix, which he took and burnt. For this service he was knighted on the spot by the earl, which Tanner says took place in Germany, 1532, instead of Britany, 1522. In 1528 he was in Spain, but in what service is doubtful. In 1529 he was sent ambassador to France, and the following year ta Rome on account of the king’s divorce. He had also been therein 1522, in the same capacity, when cardinal Wolsey’s election to the holy see was in agitation. In 1533 he was one of those sent by Henry to be witnesses to the interview between the pope and the king of France at Marseilles. He was gentleman of the privy chamber to Henry VIII. and to his successor Edward VI. in the beginning of whose reign he marched with the protector against the Scots, and after the battle of Musselborough in 1547, in which he commanded the light horse with great bravery, he was made banneret. In 1549 he was appointed chief governor of Ireland, by the title of lord chief justice, and there he married the countess of Ormond. He appears to have died in 1550, and was buried at Walerford. He was nephew to John Bourchier, lord Berners, the translator of Froissart.

He translated from the French of Alaygri, “A Dispraise of the life of a Courtier,” which Alaygri had translated from the Castilian language, in which it was originally written by Guevara, London, 1548, 8vo. Several of the “Poems by uncertain authors,” printed with those of Surrey and Wyat, are supposed to have been his production. He left also in ms. letters written from Rome concerning the king’s divorce, and various letters of state, which Ant. Wood says he had seen. Dodd accuses sir Francis Bryan of having administered to the extravagant pleasures of Henry VIII. but perhaps he was not more culpable in this respect than Henry’s other courtiers, and it is in his favour that he retained the confidence of the succeeding government.

, one of the most learned English scholars of the eighteenth century, who adds a very illustrious name to the “Worthies of Devon,” was born at Plymouth in that county in 1715. His father held an office in the custom-house, but before his son arrived at his seventh year, was removed thence into Kent, a circumstance which may be mentioned as a proof of Mr. Bryant’s extraordinary memory; for, in a conversation with the late admiral Barrington, not long before his death, when some local circumstances in respect to Plymouth were accidentally mentioned, Mr. Bryant discovered so perfect a recollection of them, that his friend could scarcely be persuaded he had not been very recently on the spot, though he had never visited the place of his nativity after the removal of his father. Mr. Bryant received his grammatical education first under the rev. Sam. Thornton of Ludsdown in Kent, and afterwards at Eton, and undoubtedly was one of the brightest luminaries of that institution. The traditions of his extraordinary attainments still remain, and particularly of some verses which he then wrote. From Eton he proceeded to King’s college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of A. B. in 1740, and A. M. in 1744, obtained 3 fellowship, and was equally distinguished by his love of learning, and his proficiency in every branch of the academic course. He was afterwards first tutor to sir Thomas Stapylton, and then to the marquis of Blandford, now duke of Marlborough, and to his brother lord Charles Spencer, when at Eton school, which office, on account of an inflammation in his eyes, he quitted in 1744, and his place was supplied by Dr. Erasmus Saunders; but Mr. Bryant, after his recovery in 1746, again returned to his office, and in 1756 was appointed secretary to the late duke of Marlborough, when master-general of the ordnance, and ac-< companied him into Germany. His grace also promoted him to a lucrative appointment in the ordnance-office.

As Mr. Bryant had long outlived his contemporaries, few particulars, except what we have just related, are known of his early life and habits. He appears, even while connected with the late duke of Marlborough, whose family remained his kind patrons during the whole of his life, to have devoted himself to study, and to that particular branch which respects the ancient history of nations. Whatever his fortune might be, he appears to have been satisfied if it supplied the means of extending his studies in retirement, and we do not find that he ever inclined to pursue any of the learned professions. One of his contemporaries, the late rev. William Cole of Milton, informs us, in his ms Athenae Cantab, (in Brit. Mus.) that he had twice refused the mastership of the Charter-house, which one time was actually granted to him by a majority of the governors; and notice of his nomination was sent to him by Mr. Hetherington, a gentleman who afterwards left him his executor and 3,000l. as a legacy; but at what time these offers were made, Mr. Cole has not specified. It is certain, however, that he early formed his plan of life, a long life spent entirely in literary pursuits, and persevered in it with uncommon assiduity and steadiness, consecrating his talents to the best purposes of learning and religion.

His first publication was “Observations and Inquiries relating to various parts of Ancient History: containing Dissertations on the wind Euroclydon, and on the Island Melite, together with an account of Egypt in its most early state, and of the Shepherd Kings; wherein the time of their coming, the province which they particularly possessed, and to which the Israelites afterwards succeeded, is endeavoured to be stated. The whole calculated to throw light on the history of that ancient kingdom, as well as on the histories of the Assyrians, Chaldeans, Babylonians, Edomites, and other nations,” 1767, 4to. In this volume, with great modesty, and yet with well-grounded resolution, he attacks Bochart, Grotius, and Bentley, who supposed that Euroclydon, the name of a wind mentioned in Acts xxvii. 14th verse, is a misnomer, and ought to be read Euroaquilo, and very ably supports the present reading. In proving that the island Melite, mentioned in the last chapter of the Acts, is not Malta, he has to contend with Grotius, Cluverius, Beza, Bentley, and Bochart, and his arguments on this question are upon the whole conclusive. It happened that the hypothesis he suggested was brought forward about the same time by an ingenious Frenchman, and neither of them was acquainted with the opinion of the other. The remainder of this volume evinces uncommon research and acuteness, but not unmixed with that inclination to bold conjecture and fanciful speculation which more or less influenced the composition of all Mr. Bryant’s works. His next communication to the public, and the work on which his character as a scholar must ultimately rest, was his “New System or Analysis of Ancient Mythology; wherein an Attempt is made to divest Tradition of Fable, and to reduce Truth to its original Purity.” Of this publication the first and second volumes came forth together, in 1774, and the third followed two years after. It being his professed design to present a history of the Babylonians, Chaldeans, Egyptians, Canaanites, Helladians, lonians, Leleges, Dorians, Pelasgi, and other ancient nations, his researches for this purpose were not only of necessity recondite, but in many instances uncertain; but to facilitate his passage through the mighty labyrinth which led to his primary object, he not only availed himself of the scattered fragments of ancient history wherever he could find them, but also of a variety of etymological aids; for being persuaded that the human race were the offspring of one stock, and conceiving thence that their language in the beginning was one, this favourite notion was exemplified by him in the investigation of radical terms, and application of these as collateral aids. As his knowledge of the oriental dialects was very confined, upon some occasions he has indulged too freely to fancy; yet his defects in this kind of learning form a strong plea in his favour; for if, without fully understanding these languages, he has succeeded in tracing out so many radicals as his table of them exhibits, and more especially if he has been right in explaining them, it will follow that his explanations must be founded on truth, and therefore are not chimerical. In opposition, however, to them, Mr. Bryant experienced some severe and petulant attacks: first, from a learned Dutchman, in a Latin review of his work; and shortly after from the late Mr. Richardson, who was privately assisted by sir William Jones; a circumstance which there is reason to think Mr. Bryant never knew. Mr. Richardson, in the preface to his Persian Dictionary, has no doubt successfully exposed some of Mr. Bryant’s etymological mistakes with regard to words of eastern origin. Bryant had a favoyrite theory with regard to the Amonians, the original inhabitants of Kgypt^ whose name, as well as descent, he derives from Ham, but Richardson has stated an insuperable objection to the derivation of the name, for though the Greeks and Latins used Ammon and Hammou indifferently, yet the Heth in Ham is a radical, not mutable or omissible; and had the Greeks or Latins formed a word from it, it would have been Chammon, and not Ammon, even with the aspirate. To these and other strictures, Mr. Bryant replied in an anonymous pamphlet, of which he printed only a few copies for the perusal of his friends; and that part of his work which relates to the Apamean. medal having been particularly attacked, especially in the Gentleman’s Magazine, he defended himself in “A Vindication of the Apamean Medal, and of the inscription NilE, together with an illustration of another coin struck at the same place in honour of the emperor Severus.” This was first published in the Archaeologia, and afterwards separately, 1775, 4to, and although what he offered on the subject was lightly treated by some, whose knowledge in inedallic history is allowed to be great, yet the opinion of professor Eckhel, the first medallist of his age, is decidedly in favour of Mr. Bryant. And whatever may be the merit, in the opinion of the learned, of Mr. Bryant’s “New System” at large, no person can possibly dispute, that a very uncommon store of learning is perceptible through the whole; that it abounds with great originality of conception, much perspicacious elucidation, and the most happy explanations on topics of the highest importance: in a word, that it stands forward amongst the first works of its age.

About this time was published Mr. Wood’s “Essay on. the original genius and writings of Homer.” Of this posthumous work, Mr. Bryant was the editor, the author having left his Mss. to his care; and in the same year, the “Vindiciae Flavians),” a tract on the much disputed testimony of Josephus to Christ, was printed, and a few copies sent to a bookseller in either university; but as the pamphlet appeared without the name of its author, and no attention was shewed it, Mr. Bryant recalled them, and satisfied himself with distributing the copies thus returned amongst a few particular friends. The new light, however, which Mr. Bryant threw upon the subject, and the acuteness with which the difficulties attending it were discussed, soon brought the work into notice, and Mr. Bryant published it with his name in 1780, and has effectually vindicated the authenticity of the passage in question. It is no mean testimony of his success in this undertaking, that Dr. Priestley confessed that Mr. Bryant had made a complete convert of him. That his conversion, however, extended no farther than the present subject, appeared in the same year, when Mr. Bryant published “An Address to Dr. Priestley, upon his doctrine of Philosophical Necessity illustrated,” 8vo, which the doctor with his usual rapidity, answered in “A Letter to Jacob Bryant, esq.” Dr. Priestley, indeed, was not likely to be persuaded by a writer who insinuated that his “necessity” of philosophers was no other than the “predestination” of Calvinists. With respect to the “Vindiciae Flavians,” it yet remains to be mentioned that there is a great affinity between this publication, and the observations on the same subject of a learned Frenchman. See a letter to Dr. Kippis, at the end of his life of Dr. Lardner, by Dr. Henley, where the arguments for and against the authenticity of the passage are distinctly stated.

The poems attributed to Rowley having been published by Mr. Tyrwhitt, Mr. Bryant’s attention was next drawn to them, and in 1781 he published “Observations on the Poems of Thomas Rowley, in which the authenticity of these poems is ascertained,” 2 vols. 12mo. From the communications of his friend Dr. Glynn, and his own inquiries at Bristol, Mr. Bryant acquired such information as convinced him, that they had their foundation in reality, and were not entirely of Chatterton’s fabrication; but though he failed to produce conviction, his book discovers considerable talent, as well as much knowledge of English antiquities and literature.

The hypothesis of Mr. Bryant in reference to one original language was always kept in view by him, and as researches were extended on all sides to obtain elucidations, the language of the gypsies engaged his attention; accordingly the collections which he made from it, were published in the Archaeologia, vol. Yii. entitled “Collections on the Zingara, or Gypsey language.”

In 1783 was printed, at the expence of the duke of Marlborough, for private distribution, that splendid work, “The Maryborough Gems,” under the title of “Gemmarum antiquarurn delectus ex prsestantioribus desumptus in Dactylotheca Ducis Marburiensis.” The first volume of the exposition of these gems was written in Latin by Mr. Bryant, and translated into French by Mr. Maty. That of the second was written by Dr. Cole, prebendary of Westminster, and translated by Mr. Dutens. The friendship which subsisted between Mr. Bryant and the family of his patron, prompted him on all occasions to attend to their wishes, and to this disposition the public owe his “Treatise on the Authenticity of the Scriptures, and the Truth of the Christian Religion,” 1792, 8vo, which was written at the request of the dowager lady Pembroke, and is an excellent book for popular instruction. In two years after he published a large volume, entitled “Observations upon the Plagues inflicted upon the Egyptians; in which is shewn the peculiarity of those judgments, and their correspondence with the rites and idolatry of that people; with a prefatory Discourse concerning the Grecian Colonies from Egypt,” 8vo. This is certainly to be reckoned amongst Mr. Bryant’s best performances, and as such will be studiously read.

Professor Dalzel having communicated to the royal society of Edinburgh, and afterwards published in a separate volume, M. le Chevalier’s “Description of the Plain of Troy,” Mr. Bryant, who many years before had not only considered, but written his sentiments on the Trojan war, first published, in 1795, his Observations on M. le Chevalier’s treatise, and, in 1796, a Dissertation concerning the war itself, and the expedition of the Grecians as described by Homer; with the view of shewing that no such expedition was ever undertaken, and that no such city in Phrygia existed. Of this singular publication we shall only notice, that on the one side it has been remarked that “for the repose” of Mr. Bryant’s well-earned fame, it probably would have been better had this dissertation never been written. Even the high authority with which he is armed could not warrant him in controverting opinions so long maintained and established among historians, and in disproving facts so well attested by the most extensive evidence. Great and natural was the surprize of the literary world on the appearance of this publication; and very few, if any, were the proselytes to the new doctrine which it inculcates. It was answered by Mr. Gilbert Wakefield, in a very indecent letter to Mr. Bryant; and in a style more worthy of the subject by J. B. S. Morrit, esq. of Rokeby park, near Greta bridge;“and by Dr. Vincent. On the other hand, it has been suggested, that” the testimony of antiquity goes for nothing in this case, as the whole depends on the authority of Homer; and unless authors can be cited anterior to him, or coeval with him, or who did not derive their information from him, or some of his transcribers, the whole history of the warm ust rest on his authority; and if his authority were equal to his genius, the transactions which he records would stand in need of no other support. But, certainly, as the subject stands at present, were the alternative proposed to us, we would rather reject the whole as a fable, than receive the half as authentic history."

In forming a general estimate of Mr. Bryant’s literary character, it will be found that, as a classical scholar, he had few equals; his acquaintance with history, and the topics of general information, was of very uncommon extent, but from the want of Oriental literature, and the stricter sciences, he yielded too often to the impulses of a vigorous fancy. It will, notwithstanding, be found from repeated perusals of his writings, that he deservedly ranks amongst the first men of his age, and from having consecrated his great talents and acquisitions to the service; of religion, will be ever entitled to the veneration of mankind.

In his person Mr. Bryant was lower and more delicately formed than men in general, and, consequently, less capable of strong exercise: but in early life he had great agility, particularly in swimming, a circumstance which enabled him to save Dr. Barnard, afterward head-master of Eton, when drowning. In his ordinary habits of life he was remarkable for his temperance, and though his time and studies were principally devoted to literature and the pursuit of truth, yet his conversation with those he received and conversed with was uncommonly sprightly, as he never failed to mix entertaining anecclote with instruction. In his person he was particularly neat, and in his deportment courteous. His liberality was often conspicuous, and the spirit of religion diffused itself through all his actions. As few comparatively live so long, instances of such exemplary merit can but rarely be found. He died, after a, long residence at Cypenham, near Windsor, Nov. 14, 1804, of ajnortification in his leg, occasioned by a hurt from the tilting of a chair in reaching down a book from its shelf. At his own desire, Mr. Bryant was interred in his parish church, beneath the seat he there occupied. He left his valuable library to King’s college, Cambridge; 2000l. to the society for propagating the gospel, and 1000/, to the superannuated collegers of Eton school, to be disposed of as the provost and fellows think proper.

, a law-writer and antiquary, son and heir of John Bry<lal, esq. of the Rolls Liberty, was born in Somersetshire about 1635, and became a commoner of Queen’s college, Oxford, in Michaelmas term, 1651, where he took a degree in arts in -1655, but left the university without completing it by determination. He then settled in Lincoln’s inn, and after the usual course of law studies was admitted to the bar. After the restoration he became secretary to sir Harbottle Grirnston, master of the rolls. When he died is uncertain, as he survived the publication of Wood’s Athenae, from which we have extracted this brief notice of him, but he appears to have been living in 1704. He published several law treatises, some of which are still in estimation: 1. “Jus imaginis apud Anglos, or the Law of England relating to the Nobility and Gentry,” 1671, 1675, 8vo. 2. “Jus Sigilli; or the law of England touching the four principal Seals, the great seal, privy seal, exchequer seal, and the signet; also those grand officers to whose custody those seals are committed,” 1673, 24mo. 3. “Speculum Juris Anglicani; or a view of the Laws of England, as they are divided into statutes, common-law, and customs,” 1673, 8vo. 4. “Jus criminis, or an abridgment of the laws of treason, murther, conspiracies, poisonings, &c.” 1675, 1679, 8vo. 5. “Camera Regis, or a short view of Lon^ don, viz. antiquity, &c, officers, courts, customs, franchises,” &c. 1076, 8vo. 6. “Decus et tutamen; or a prospect of the laws of England, framed for the safeguard of the king’s majesty,” 1679, 8vo. 7. “Ars transferendi; of sure guide to the conveyancer,” 1697, 8vo. 8. “Non compos mentis; or, the law relating to natural fools, mad folks, and lunatic persons,” 1700, 8vo. 9. “Lex Spuriorum; or, the law relating to bastardy, collected from the common, civil, and ecclesiastical laws,” 1703, 8vo. 10. “Declaration of the divers preheminences or privileges allowed by the laws and customs of England, unto the firstborn among her majesty’s subjects the temporal lords in parliament,” 1704, fol. Wood adds another work, “Jura Coronae; or, his majesty’s royal rights and prerogatives asserted against papal usurpations, and all other antimonarchical attempts and practices,” 1680, 8vo.

, a man of abilities, succeeded his father William, fourth lord Chandos, in Nov. 1602. He was a friend of the earl of Essex, in whose insurrection he was probably involved, for his name appears on the list of prisoners confined in the Fleet on that account, Feb. 1600. He was made a knight of the bath at the creation of Charles duke of York, Jan. 1604, and in August 1605 was created M. A. at Oxford, the king being present. He was an associate of that active and romantic character, lord Herbert of Cherbury. and appears to have volunteered his services in the Low Countries, when the prince of Orange besieged the city of Juliers in 1610, and the Low Country army was assisted by four thousand English soldiers, under the command of sir Edward Cecil. From the great influence which his hospitality and popular manners afterwards obtained in Gloucestershire, and his numerous attendants when he visited the court, he was styled king of Cotswould, the tract of country on the edge of which his castle of Sudeley was situated. On November 18, 1617, he was appointed to receive and introduce the Muscovite ambassadors, who had brought costly presents from their master to the king. He died August 20, 1621. There is no doubt, says sir Egerton JBrydges (by whom the preceding notices were drawn together) that lord Chandos was a man of abilities as well as splendid habits of life, and by no means a literary recluse, although he is supposed to have been the author of “Horae subsecivas, Observations and Discourses,” Lond. 1620, 8vo, a work containing a fund of good sense and shrewd remark. In sir John Beaumont’s poems are some lines on his death, highly expressive of an excellent character.

, an eminent engraver, was born in 1528, at Leige, but resided chiefly at Francfort, where he carried on a considerable commerce in prints. It does not appear to what master he owed his instructions in the art, but the works of Sebast Beham were certainly of great service to him. He copied many of the plates engraved by that artist, and seems to have principally formed his taste from them. He worked almost entirely with the graver, and seldom called in the assistance of the point. He acquired a neat, free style of engraving, well adapted to small subjects in which many figures were to be represented, as funeral parades, processions, &c. which he executed in a charming manner. He also drew very correctly. His heads, in general, are spirited and expressive, and the other extremities of his figures well-marked. His backgrounds, though frequently very slight, are touched with a masterly hand. He died, as his sons inform us (in the third part of Boissard’s collection of portraits), March 27, 1598. The two first parts of that collection were engraved by De Brye, assisted by his sons, who afterwards continued it.

His great works are, 1. “The plates for the first four volumes of Boissard’s ` Roman Antiquities’.” 2. Those for the illustration of “The Manners and Customs of the Virginians,” in the “Brief true report of the new found land of Virginia, published by Thomas Hariot, servant to sir Walter Raleigh, &c.” Francfort, 1590. 3. The plates to the Latin narrative of the “Cruelties of the Spaniards in America,” 1598; and 4. his greatest work, “Descriptio Indise Orientalis et Occidentals,” 1598, 5 vols. fol. He published also many detached plates, the most remarkable and scarce of which is the “Procession for the funeral of sir Philip Sidney.” This is a long roll, contrived and invented by Thomas Lant, gent, servant of that honourable knight, and engraven in copper by Derich or Theodore de Brie, in the city of London, 1578." Prefixed is the portrait of Mr. Lant, aged thirty-two. It contains thirty plates (in the copy we have seen, but Strutt says thirtyfour) and has usually been considered as the first English work by De Brye. There was a copy in Mr. Cough’s collection, which was purchased at his sale in 1810 by sir Joseph Banks for thirty-eight guineas. Mr. Strutt describes another roll by De Brye, representing the procession of the knights of the garter in 1576, which was considered as unique. The copy belonged to the late sir John Ferm. De Brye’s two sons were engravers, but nothing is recorded of them, unless, as already noticed, that they continued Boissard’s portraits and Roman antiquities.

, was a native of Orestia, in Macedonia, and married the princess Anna Comnena, daughter of Alexius Comnenus, who raised him to the rank of Caesar, but declined announcing him as his successor in prejudice of his own son. After the death of Alexius, the empress Irene and her daughter Anna attempted to elevate Bryennius to the empire, but he refused to concur in the plot. Having been sent in 1137 to besiege Antiocb, he fell sick, and returning to Constantinople, died in that city. His history of the reigns of Isaac Comnenus and of the three succeeding emperors, was comprised in four books, and published with a Latin translation, by the Jesuit Poussines, at Paris, in 1661, to which the annotations of Du Cange were annexed in 1670.

, the last writer on music in the Greek language that has come to our knowledge, flourished under the elder Paiaeologus, about the year 1320, and it is probable that he was a descendant of the house of Brienne, an ancient French family, that went into Greece during the crusades, at the beginning of the thirteenth century. His work is divided into three books, all which are confined to harmonics: the first is a kind of commentary on Euclid; and the second and third little more than explanations of the doctrines of Ptolemy. Meibomius had promised a Latin translation of this book, but dying before it was finished, Dr. 'Wallis performed the task, and it now constitutes a part of the third volume of his works, published at Oxford, 1699, 3 vols. fol.

, chevalier and count of Nanay, was born near Livarot, in Normandy, March 2, 1752, and died on his estate at Nangay, Sept. 18, 1787. He was minister plenipotentiary in most of the courts of Germany, and having a great taste -for history, politics, and antiquities, passed much of his time in pursuits calculated to gratify it. He published the following works, all of which were well received by his countrymen: i. “Tableau de gouvernement de PAllemagne,” 1755, 12mo. 2. “Origines, ou Pancien gouvernement de la France, de l‘Allemagne, et de l’Italie,” Hague, 1757, 4 vols. 8vo. 3. “L‘Histoire ancienne des peuples de l’Europe,” 1772, 12 vols. 12mo. 4. “Heche rches sur l‘Histoire d’Allemagne,” 1772, 2 vols. fol. 5. “Maximes du gouvernement monarchique,” 1789, 4 vols. 8vo, and several other dissertations on subjects of history and politics. He was also author of a tragedy named “Charlemagne,” printed, and of another, “Rosamond,” which remains in manuscript.

, a learned antiquary, was born in Lincolnshire, in the sixteenth century, and flourished in the beginning of the seventeenth. He was descended from the ancient family of the Bucs, or Buckes, of West Stanton, and Herthill, in Yorkshire, and Melford-hall, in Suffolk. His great grandfather, sir John Buc, knight, was one of king Richard the Third’s favourites, and attended that unfortunate prince to the battle of Bosworth, where he lost his crown and life. In the first parliament of king Henry VII. this sir John Buc was attainted for being one of the chief aiders and assistants to the king just now mentioned, in the battle of Bosworth, and soon after was beheaded at Leicester. By this attainder his posterity were reduced to very great distress; but, through the interest of Thomas duke of Norfolk, the great patron of the family, they had probably some of their estates restored to them, and, among others, that in Lincolnshire, where our author was born. In the reign of king James I. he was made one of the gentlemen of his majesty’s privy-chamber, and knighted. He was also constituted master of the revels, whose office was then kept on St. Peter' s-hill, in London. What he mostly distinguished himself by, was writing “The Life and Reign of Richard III. in five books,” wherein, in opposition to the whole body of English historians, he endeavours to represent that prince’s person and actions in a quite different light from what they have been by others; and takes great pains to wipe off the bloody stains that have been fixed upon his character. He has also written: “The third universitie of England; or, a treatise of the foundations of all the colledges, ancient schooles of priviledge, and of houses of learning, and liberall arts, within and about the most famous citie of London. With a briefe report of the sciences, arts, and faculties therein professed, studied, and practised.” And a treatise t)f “The Art of Revels.” Mr. Camden gives him the character of “a person of excellent learning,” and thankfully acknowledges that he “remarked many things in his historiei, and courteously communicated his observations to him.” He has since received very able support, and Richard III. has found a powerful advocate in Horace Walpole, the late lord Orford, who in his “Historic Doubts” has, with much ingenuity, at least, shewn that the evidence produced in confirmation of Richard’s crimes, is far from being decisive, But we have now an “historic doubt” to bring forward of more importance to the present article, which we find in a note on Malone’s Shakspeare, in the following words: “I take this opportunity of correcting an error into which Anthony Wood has fallen, and which has been implicitly adopted in the new edition of the Biographia Britannica, and many other books. The error I allude to, is, that this sir George Buc, who was knighted at Whitehall by king James the day before his coronation, July 23, 1603, was the author of the celebrated * History of king Richard the Third;' which was written above twenty years after his death, by George Buck, esq. who was, I suppose, his son. The precise time of, the father’s death, I have not been able to ascertain, there being no will of his in the prerogative office; but I have reason to believe that it happened soon after the year 1622. He certainly died before August 1629.”

In answer to this, Mr. Ritson asserts that there can be no doubt of the fact, that sir George Buc was the author of this History, although published, and said in the title to be “composed b} George Bucke, esq.” in 1646, his original ms. (though much injured by fire) being still preserved among the Cotton Mss. Mr. Ritson adds that sir George died, in 1623. He has also enrolled him among his poets, on account of “An Eclog treating of crownes, and of garlandes, and to whom of right they appertaine. Addressed and consecrated to the king’s majestie,” 1605, 4to, and of some other verses.

, an eminent German reformer, was born in 1491, at Schelestadt, a town of Alsace. At the age of seven he took the religious habit in the order of St. Dominic, and with the leave of the prior of his convent, went to -Heidelberg to learn logic and philosophy. Having applied himself afterwards to divinity, he made it his endeavour to acquire a thorough knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew. About this time some of Erasmus’s pieces came abroad, which he read with great avidity, and meeting afterwards with certain tracts of Luther, and comparing the doctrine there delivered with the sacred scriptures, he began to entertain doubts concerning several things in the popish religion. His uncommon learning and his eloquence, which was assisted by a strong and musical voice, and his free censure of the vices of the times, recommended him to Frederick elector palatine, who made him one of his chaplains. After some conferences with Luther, at Heidelberg, in 1521, he adopted most of his religious notions, particularly those with regard to justification. However, in 1532, he gave the preference to the sentiments of Zuinglius, but used his utmost endeavours to re-unite the two parties, who both opposed the Romish religion. He is looked upon as one of the first authors of the reformation at Strasburg, where he taught divinity for twenty years, and was one of the ministers of the town. He assisted at many conferences concerning religion; and in 1548, was sent for to Augsburg to sign that agreement betwixt the Protestants and Papists, which was called the Interim. His warm opposition to this project exposed him to many difficulties and harships; the news of which reaching England, where his fame had already arrived, Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, g av e him an invitation to come over, which he readily accepted. In 1549 an handsome apartment was assigned him in the university of Cambridge, and a salary to teach theology. King Edward VI. had the greatest regard for him; being told that he was very sensible of the cold of this climate, and suffered much for want of a German stove, he sent him an hundred crowns to purchase one. He died of a complication of disorders, in 1551, and was buried at Cambridge, in St. Mary’s church, with great funeral pomp. Five years after, in the reign of queen Mary, his body was dug up and publicly burnt, and his tomb demolished; but it was afterwards set up again by order of queen Elizabeth. He married a nun, by whom he had thirteen children. This woman dying of the plague, he married another, and, according to some, upon her death, he took a third wife. His character is thus given by Burnet: “Martin Bucer was a very learned, judicious, pious, and moderate person. Perhaps he was inferior to none of all the reformers for learning; but for zeal, for true piety, and a most tender care of preserving unity among the foreign churches, Melancthon and he, without any injury done to the rest, may be ranked apart by themselves. He was much opposed by the Popish party at Cambridge; who, though they complied with the law, and so kept their places, yet, either in the way of argument, as if it had been for dispute’s sake, or in such points as were not determined, set themselves much to lessen his esteem. Nor was he furnished naturally with that quickness that is necessary for a disputant, from which they studied to draw advantages; and therefore Peter Martyr wrote to him to avoid all public disputes.” His writings were in Latin and in German? and so numerous, that it is computed they would form eight or nine folio volumes. His anxiety to reconcile the Lutherans and Zuinglians led him to use many general and perhaps ambiguous expressions in his writings. He seems to have thought Luther’s notion of the sacrament too strong, and that of Zuinglius too weak. Verheiclen in Latin, and Lupton in English, have given a list of his works, but without size or dates.

, the foundress of a set of modern fanatics, and the daughter of John Simpson, the keeper of an inn at Fitmy-Can, the half-way house between Banff and Portsoy, in the north of Scotland, was born in 1738; and, when she had completed her one-andtwentieth year, was sent to Glasgow, where she entered into the service of Mr. Martin, one of the principal proprietors of the Delft-work there. In this situation she had remained but a short time, when she accepted proposals of marriage from Robert Buchan, one of the workmen in the service of the same Mr. Martin. For some years, Robert and Elspeth Buchan lived happily together, having many children, whom they educated in a manner suitable to their station in life. At the time of her marriage, Mrs. Buchan was of the episcopal persuasion, but the husband being a burgher-seceder, she adopted his principles, and entered into communion with that sect. She had always been a constant reader of the scriptures; and taking a number of passages in a strictly literal sense, she changed her opinions about the year 1776, became the promulgator of many singular doctrines, and soon brought over to her notions Mr. Hugh Whyte, a dissenting minister at Irvine, and connected with Mr. Bell in Glasgow, and Mr. Bain in Edinburgh; and who, upon Mr. Whyte’s abdication of his charge, settled Mr. Robertson in his place at Irvine. She went on continually making new converts till April 1790, at which time the populace in Irvine rose, assembled round Mr. Whyte’s house, and broke all the windows; when Mrs. Buchan and the whole of her converts, of whom the above-mentioned were a part, to the number of fortysix persons, left Irvine. The Buchanites (for so they were immediately called) went through Mauchlin, Cumnock old and new, halted three days at Kirconnel, passed through Sanquhar and Thornhill, and then settled at a farm-house, the out-houses of which they had all along possessed, paying for them, as well as for whatever they wanted.

The gentleman from whonj this narrative was received, being a merchant in Glasgow, and having occasion to go to that country, spent a great part of two days in their company in August 1784, conversing with most of them; and from him we shall give what he was able to pick up of their particular notions:

"Some people call Mrs. Buchan a witch; which she treats with contempt. Others declare she calls herself the virgin Mary, which title she also refuses; declaring she has more to hoast of, viz. that the virgin Mary was only Christ’s mother after the flesh, whereas she assures herself to be Christ’s daughter after the spirit.

“Her husband is still in the burgher-secession communion; and when I asked Mrs. Buchan, and others of the Buchanites who knew me, if they had any word to any of their acquaintances in Glasgow? they all declared they minded not former things and former connections; but that the whole of their attention was devoted to their fellow-saints, the living a holy life, and thereby hastening the second coming of their Lord Jesus Christ.”

, a medical writer of great popularity, descended of a respectable family in Roxburghshire, was born at Ancram in the year 1729. Having passed through the usual school education, he was sent to the university at Edinburgh. His inclination leading him to mathematics, he became so considerable a proficient in that branch of science, as to be enabled to give private lessons to many of the pupils. Having made choice of medicine for his profession, he attended the lectures of the several professors, necessary to qualify him for practice;, and as he was of a studious turn of mind, his progress ia knowledge may be supposed to have been equal to his application. After having passed a period of not less than nine years at the university, he first settled in practice at Sheffield, in Yorkshire. He was soon afterwards elected physician to a large branch of the Foundling hospital then established at Ackworth. In the course of two years he reduced the annual number of deaths among the children from one half to one in fifteen; and by the establishment of due regulations for the preservation of health, greatly diminished the previously burthensome expense of medical attendance. In this situation, he derived from experience that knowledge of. the complaints, and of the general treatment of children, which was afterwards published in “The Domestic Medicine,” and in the “Advice to Mothers;” works which, considering their very general diffusion, have no doubt tended to ameliorate the treatment of children, and consequently to improve the constitutions of the present generation of the inhabitants of this country. When that institution was dissolved, in consequence of parliament withdrawing their support from it, Dr Buchan returned to Edinburgh, where he became a fellow of the royal college of physicians, and settled in the practice of his profession, relying in some measure on the countenance and support of the relations of the lady he married, who was of a respectable family in that city. On the death of one of the professors, the doctor offered himself as a candidate for the vacant chair, but did not succeed.

About this period, the work entitled “Domestic Medicine” was first published, with the view of laying open the science of medicine, and rendering it familiar to the comprehension of mankind in general. In this plan he was encouraged by the late Dr. Gregory, of liberal memory, who was of opinion, that to render medicine generally intelligible was the only means of putting an end to the impostures of quackery. This work was also patronised by, and dedicated to, sir John Pringle, then president of the royal society, and a distant relation of the author. This work has had a degree of success unequalled by any other medical book in the English language. It has also been translated into every European language. On its appearing in Russian, the late empress Catharine transmitted to the author a large and elegant medallion of gold, accompanied by a letter expressive of her sentiments of the utility of his exertions towards promoting the welfare of mankind in general. Yet successful as this work has proved, Dr. Buchan’s expectations from it were not great, and he sold the copyright in 1771 for a very inconsiderable sum but the liberal purchaser, the late Mr. Cadell, and his successors, made the doctor a handsome present on revising each edition, of which he lived to see nineteen published, amounting to upwards of 80,000 copies. It has likewise been printed in Ireland and America, and pirated in various shapes in England, but without much diminution either of the sale or credit of the authentic work.

On the death of Fergusson, the celebrated lecturer on natural philosophy, which took place about the year 1775, he bequeathed to the doctor the whole of his apparatus. Unwilling that this collection, which at that period was perhaps the best this country could boast of, should remain shut up and useless, the doctor, with the assistance of his son, who conducted the experimental part, delivered several courses of lectures, during three years, at Edinburgh, with great success, the theatre being always crowded with auditors. On removing to London, he disposed of this apparatus to Dr. Lettsom. Of natural philosophy, the part which particularly attracted the doctor’s attention was astronomy. Nothing delighted him more than to point out the celestial phenomena on a fine starlight evening to any young person who appeared willing to receive information; and the friendship of the late highly respectable astronomer royal, Dr. Maskelyne, afforded him every facility of renovating his acquaintance with the planetary bodies, whenever so inclined.

He was possessed of a most retentive memory, which was particularly exemplified in his recollection of the Bible, which in his more early years he had been much accustomed to peruse with attention. On an appeal being made to him concerning any particular text of scripture, he hardly ever erred in giving the very words of which it consisted, and pointing out the precise chapter and verse where it was to be found. The same faculty furnished him with an infinite fund of amusing anecdotes, which he used to relate in a good-humoured and entertaining manner. This talent rendered his company much courted by private circles, and interfered with that assiduous attention to business requisite to ensure success to a medical practitioner in the metropolis, which his popular reputation and pleasing manners were in other respects well calculated to obtain. He latterly confined his practice to giving advice at home, and in that way did more business than most people acquainted with his habits supposed.

The doctor had a prepossessing exterior, and was of a mild, humane, and benevolent disposition, which not only embraced all the human race, but was extended to the whole of the animal creation. He was blessed with an excellent constitution, never having experienced sickness till within a year of his decease, when he began sensibly to decline. The immediate cause of his death, of the approach of which he was sensible, and which he met with the same gentleness and equanimity which characterized every action of his life, appeared to be an accumulation of water in the chest. He died Feb. 24, 1805, in the seventy-sixth year of his age, and is buried in the cloisters of Westminster-abbey. Two children survive him, a daughter and a son, the latter of whom, a man of profound and general learning, has been for some years settled in practice as a physician in Percy-street, London.

, a Scottish historian, and Latin poet, of great eminence, and uncommon abilities and learning, was descended from an ancient family, and was born at Killairn, in the shire of Lenox, in Scotland, in the month of February 1506. His father died of the stone in the prime of life, whilst his grandfather was yet living; by whose extravagance the family, which before was but in low circumstances, was now nearly reduced to the extremity of want. He had, however, the happiness of a very prudent mother, Agnes, the daughter of James Heriot of Trabrown, who, though she, was left a widow with five sons and three daughters, brought them all up in a decent manner, by judicious management. She had a brother, Mr. James Heriot, who, observing the marks of genius which young George Buchanan discovered when at school, sent him to Paris in 1520 for his education. There he closely applied himself to his studies, and particularly cultivated his poetical talents but before he had been there quite two years, the death of his uncle, and his own ill state of health, and want of money, obliged him to return home. Having arrived in his native country, he spent almost a year in endeavouring to re-escablish his health; and in 1523, in order to acquire some knowledge of military affairs, he made a campaign with the French auxiliaries, who came over into Scotland with John duke of Albany. But in this new course of life he encountered so many hardships, that he was confined to his bed by sickness all the ensuing winter. He had probably much more propensity to his books, than to the sword; for early in the following spring he went to St. Andrews, and attended the lectures on logic, or rather, as he says, on sophistry, which were read in that university by John Major, or Mair, a professor in St. Saviour’s college, and assessor to the dean, of Arts, whom he soon after accompanied to Paris. After struggling for about two years with indigence and ill fortune, he was admitted, in 1526, being then not more than twenty years of age, in the college of St. Barbe, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1527, and M. A. in 1528, and in 1529 was chosen procurator nationis, and began then to teach grammar, which he continued for about three years. But Gilbert Kennedy, earl of Cassils, a young Scottish nobleman, being then in France, and happening to fall into the company of Buchanan, was so delighted with his wit, and the agreeableness of his manners, that he prevailed upon him to continue with him five years. According to Mackenzie, he acted as a kind of tutor to this young nobleman; and, during his stay with him, translated Linacre’s Rudiments of grammar out of English into Latin; which was printed at Paris, by Robert Stephens, in 1533, and dedicated to the earl of Cassils. He returned to Scotland with that nobleman, whose death happened about two years after; and Buchanan had then an inclination to return to France: but James V. king of Scotland prevented him, by appointing him preceptor to his natural son, James, afterwards the abbot of Kelso, who died in 1548, and not, as some say, the earl of Murray, regent of that kingdom. About this time, he wrote a satirical poem against the Franciscan friars, entitled, “Somnium;” which irritated them to exclaim against him as a heretic. Their clamours, however, only increased the dislike which he hud conceived against them on account of their disorderly and licentious lives; and inclined him the more towards Lutheranism, to which he seems to have had before no inconsiderable propensity. About the year 1538, the king having discovered a conspiracy against himself, in which he suspected that some of the Franciscans were concerned, commanded Buchanan to write a poem against that order. But he had probably already experienced the inconveniency of exasperating so formidable a body; for he only wrote a few verses which were susceptible of a double interpretation, and he pleased neither party. The king was dissatisfied, that the satire was not more poignant; and the friars considered it as a heinous offence, to mention them in any way that was not honourable. But the king gave Buchanan a second command, to write against them with more seventy; which he accordingly did in the poem, entitled, “Franciscanus;” by which he pleased the king, and rendered the friars his irreconcileable enemies. He soon found, that the animosity of these ecclesiastics was of a more durable nature than royal favour: for the king had the meanness to suffer him to feel the weight of their resentment, though it had been chiefly excited by obedience to his commands. It was not the Franciscans only, but the clergy in general, who were incensed against Buchanan: they appear to have made a common cause of it, and they left no stone unturned till they had prevailed with the king that he should be tried for heresy. He was accordingly imprisoned at the beginning of 1539, but found means to make his escape, as he says himself, out of his chamber-window, while his guards were asleep. He fled into England, where he found king Henry the Eighth persecuting both protestants and papists. Not thinking that kingdom, therefore, a place of safety, he again went over into France, to which he was the more inclined because he had there some literary friends, and was pleased with the politeness of French manners. But when he came to Paris, he had the mortification to find there cardinal Beaton, who was his great enemy, and who appeared there as ambassador from Scotland. Expecting, therefore, to receive some ill offices from him, if he continued at Paris, he withdrew himself privately to Bourdeaux, at the invitation of Andrew Govea, a learned Portuguese, who was principal of a new college in that city. Buchanan taught in the public schools there three years; in which time he composed two tragedies, the one entitled, “Baptistes, sive Calurania,” and the other “Jephthes, Votum;” and also translated the Medea and Alcestig of Euripides. These were all afterwards published;-but they were originally written in compliance with the rules of the school, which every year required some new dramatic exhibition; and his view in choosing these subjects was, to draw off the youth of France as much as possible from the allegories, which were then greatly in vogue, to a just imitation of the ancients; in which he succeeded beyond his hopes. During his residence at Bourdeaux, the emperor Charles V. passed through that city; upon which Buchanan presented his imperial majesty with an elegant Latin poem, in which the emperor was highly complimented, and at which he expressed great satisfaction. But the animosity of cardinal Beaton still pursued our poet: for that haughty prelate wrote letters to the archbishop of Bourdeaux, in which he informed him, that Buchanan had fled his country for heresy; that he had lampooned the church in most virulent satires; and that if he would put him to the trial, he would find him a most pestilentious heretic. Fortunately for Buchanan, these letters fell into the hands of some of his friends, who found means to prevent their effects: and the state of public affairs in Scotland, in consequence of the death of king James V. gave the cardinal so much employment, as to prevent any farther prosecution of his rancour against Buchanan.