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

The bishop resigned the mastership of Bene't college in July 17G4. After the death of lord Willoughby of Parham in 1765, the literary conversation meetings of the royal society, &c. which used to be held weekly at his lordship’s house, were transferred to the bishop of Lincoln’s in Scotland yard, as one of their most accomplished members. In July 1771, on a representation to his majesty, that, with distinguished learning and abilities, and a most extensive diocese, bishop Green (having nocommendam) had a very inadequate income, he was presented to the residentiaryship of St. Paul’s, which bishop Egerton vacated on his translation to the see of Durham. He now removed to his residentiary-house in Amen-corner, and took a small country-house at Tottenham. It has often been noticed as a circumstance conducing to our prelate’s honour, that, in May 1772, when the bill for relief of protestant dissenters, &c. after having passed the house of commons, was rejected, on the second reading, by the house of lords (102 to 27), he dissented from his brethren, and was the only bishop who voted in its favour. Without any particular previous indisposition, his lordship died suddenly in his chair at Bath, on Sunday, April 25, 1779. This elegant scholar was one of the writers of the celebrated “Athenian Letters,” published by the earl of Hardwicke in 1798, 2 vols. 4to.

The following anecdotes are given from indisputable authority: Mr. Sylvanus Bevan, a quaker and a friend of Mr. Green, was mentioning, at Batson’s coffee-house, thaty while he was bathing in the river, a waterman saluted him with the usual insult of the lower class of people, by calling out, “A quaker, a quaker, quirl” He at the same expressed his wonder, how his profession could be known while he was without his cloaths. Green immediately replied, that the waterman might discover him by his swimming against the stream. The department in the customhouse to which Mr. Green belonged was under the controul of the duke of Manchester, who used to treat those immediately under him once a year. After one of these entertainments, Mr. Green, seeing a range of servants in the hall, said to the first of them, “Pray, sir, do you give tickets at your turnpike” In a reform which took place in the custom-house, amongst other articles, a few pence, paid weekly for providing the cats with milk, were ordered to be struck off. On this occasion, Mr. Green wrote a humourous petition as from the cats, which prevented the regulation in that particular from taking place. Mr. Green’s conversation was as novel as his writings, which occasioned one of the commissioners of the customs, a very dull man, to observe, that he did not know how it was, but Green always expressed himself in a different manner from other people.

Such is the only information which the friends of this poet have thought proper to hand down to posterity, if we except Glover, the author of the preface to the first edition of “The Spleen,” who introduces the poem in these words:

, an English poet and miscellaneous iter of the Elizabethan age, and memorable for his tants and imprudence, was a native of Norwich, and born ubout 1560. His father appears to have been a citizen of Norwich, the fabricator of his own fortune, which it is thought he had accumulated by all the tricks of selfishness and narrow prudence. He educated his son, however, as a scholar, at St. John’s college, Cambridge. Here he took the degree of A. B. in 1578, and for some time travelled into Italy and Spain. Ou his return, he took his master’s degree at Clare-hall, in 1583, and was incorporated in the same at Oxford in 1588, no inconsiderable proof that hiproficiency in his studies had been very conspicuous, and that there was nothing at this time grossly objectionable in his moral demeanour. It is supposed that he took orders after his return from his travels, and that he was the same Robert Greene who was presented to the village of Tollesbury, in Essex, June 19, 1584. If this be the case, it is probable that he did not long reside, or was perhaps driven from Tollesbury, by his irregular life, the greater part of which was spent in London. Here, from some passages cited by Mr. Beloe, it would appear that he gave himself up to writing plays and love pamphlets, and from the date of his “Myrrour of Modestie,” 1584, it is probable that from this time he became an author by profession; but as four years after he was incorporated M. A. at Oxford, we are still willing to believe that his career of folly had not commenced so soon, or been so generally known as it was some time after. It was his fate to fall among dissolute companions, who, though men of genius like himself, probably encouraged each other in every sensual enjoyment. Among these were Christopher Mario w, George Peele, and Thomas Nash; for Dr. Thomas Lodge, another of their associates, is not loaded with the same stigma. “The history of genius,” says one of our authorities, with equal justice and feeling, “is too often a detail of immoral irregularities, followed by indigence and misery. Such, in after times, was the melancholy tale of Otway and Lee, of Savage, Boyse, Smart, Burns, Dermody, and many others. Perhaps the writers of the drama have, of all others, been the most unfortunate in this respect; perhaps there is something which more immediately seizes all the avenues of the fancy in the gorgeous exhibitions of the stage; which leads men away from the real circumstances of their fortune, to the delusions of hope, and to pursue the fairy lights so hostile to sober truth.” In what species of dissipation, and to what degree Greene indulged, it were useless now to inquire his faults were probably exaggerated by the rival wits of his day and his occupation as a playwriter being in itself at that time looked upon as criminal, was barely tolerated. Among his errors, about which we are afraid there is now no doubt, may be mentioned his marrying an amiable lady, whom he deserted and ill-used. His career, however, was short. He died Sept. 5, 1592, at an obscure lodging near Dowgate, not without signs of contrition, nor indeed without leaving behind him written testimonies that he was more frequently conscious of an. ill-spent life than able or willing to amend it. In some of his works also, he made strenuous exertions to warn the unthinking, and expose the tricks, frauds, and devices of his miscreant companions. His works, says one of his biographers, contain the seeds of virtue, while his acts display the tares of folly. From such of his writings as have fallen 'in our way, he appears to possess a rich and glowing fancy, great command of language, and a perfect knowledge of the manners of the times. As a poet he has considerable merit, and few of his contemporaries yield a more pleasant employment to the collectors of specimens. His writings attained great popularity in his day, but until very lately, have been seldom consulted unless by poetical antiquaries. The following list of his works, by Mr. Haslewood, is probably complete: 1. “The Myrrour of Modestie,” 1584. 2. “Monardo the Tritameron of Love,” 1534, 1587. 3. “Planetomachia,” 1585. 4. Translation of a funeral Sermon of P. Gregory XIII. 1585. 5. “Euphues’s censure to Pbilautus,” 1587, 1634. 6. “Arcadia or Menaphon, Camillae’s alarm to slumbering Euphues,” 1587,1589, 1599, 1605, 1610, 1616, 1634. 7. “Pandosto the Triumph of Time,” 1588, 1629. 8. “Perimedes the blackesmith,” 1588. 9. “The pleasant and delightful history of Dorastiis and Favvnia,” 1588, 1607, 1675, 1703, 1723, 1735. 10. “Alcida, Greene’s Metamorphosis,” 1617. 11. “The Spanish Masquerade,” 1589. 12. “Orpharion,” 1599. 13. “The Royal Exchange, contayning sundry aphorisms of Philosophic,” 1590. 14. “Greene’s mourning garment, given him by Repentance at the funerals of Love,” 1590, 1616. 15. “Never too late,” 1590, 1600, 1607, 1616, 1631. 16. “A notable discovery of Coosenage,” 1591, 1592. 17. “The ground work of Conny Catching,” 159U 18. “The second and last part of Conny Catching,” 1591, 1592. 19. “The third and last part of Conny Catching,” 1592. 20. “Disputation, between a hee conny-catcher and a shee conny-catcher,” 1592. 21. “Greene’s Groatsworth of wit bought with a million of repentance,” 1592, L-600,1616, 1617, 1621, 1629, 1637. Of this a beautiful edition was lately printed by sir Egerton Brydges, M. P. at the private press at Lee Priory, (only 61 copies for presents), with a biographical preface, to which this article is essentially indebted: his and Mr. Haslewood’s account of Greene, are compositions dictated by true taste and discrimination, and by just moral feeling. 22. “Philomela, the lady FitzwalterV nightingale,” 1592, 1615, 163h 23. “A quip for an upstart courtier,” r$92, 162O, 1625, 1635, and reprinted in 1 the Harleian Miscellany. 24. “Ciceronis amor, Tullie’s love,” 1592, 1611, 1615, 1616, 1628, 1639. 25. “News both from heaven and hell,” 159-3. 26. “The Black Book’s Messenger, or life and death of Ned Browne,” 1592. 27. “The repentance of Robert Greene,” 1592. 28. “Greene’s vision at the instant of his death,” no date. 29. “Mamillia, or the triumph of Pallas,” 1593. 30. “Mamillia, or the second part of the triumph of Pallas,” 1593. 31. “Card of Fancy,” 1593, 1608. 32. “Greene’s funerals,” 1594; but doubtful whether his. 33. “The honourable history of Fryer Bacon and Fryer Bongay, a comedy,” 1594, 1599, 1630, 1655. 34. “The history of Orlando Furioso, a play,” 1S94, 1599. 35. “The comical historic of Alphonsus king of Arragon, a play,” 1597, 1599. 36. “A looking-glass for London and England,” a comedy, jointly with Lodge, 1594, 1598. 37. “The Scottish Historic of James the Fourthe, si ai ue at Flodden, intermixed with a pleasant comedie,” 1598, 1599. 38. “Penelope’s Webb,” 1601. 39. “Historic of Faire Bellora,” no date, afterwards published, as “A paire of Turtle doves, or the tragical history of Bellora and Fidelio,” 1606. 40. “The debate between Follie and Love, translated out'of French,” 1608. 41. “Thieves falling out, true men come by their goods,” 1615, 1637, and reprinted in the Harleian Miscellany. 42. “Greene’s Farewell to Folie,” 1617. 43. “Arbasto, the history of Arbasto king of Denmarke,” 1617, 1626. 44. “FairEmme, a comedy,” 1631. 45. “The history of lobe,” a play, destroyed, but mentioned in Warburton’s list. A few other things have been ascribed toGreene on doubtful authority.

, a worthy English prelate, was the son of Thomas Greene of St. Peter’s Mancroft in Norwich, where he was born in 1658, He was educated in the freeschool of that city, and in July 1674, admitted of Bene't college, Cambridge, of which he obtained a scholarship, and in 1680 a fellowship, and became tutor. He took his degree of A. B. in 1679, and that of A. M. in 1682. His first step from the university was into the family of sir Stephen Fox, grandfather of the late hon. Charles Fox, to whom he was made domestic chaplain through the interest of archbishop Tenison, who soon after his promotion to the see of Canterbury, took him under the same relation into his own palace; and collated him April 2, 1695, to the vicarage of Minster in the isle of Thanet; he being, since 1690, D. D. by the archbishop’s faculty. To the same patron he was likewise obliged for a prebend in the cathedral of Canterbury, into which he was installed in May 1702; for the rectory of Adisham cum Staple in Kent, to which he was collated Oct. 2, 1708, and for the archdeaconry of Canterbury, into which he was installed the next month, having been chosen before one of the proctors of the clergy in convocation for that diocese. Upon these preferments he quitted the vicarage of Minster, as he did the rectory of Adisham upon his institution (in Feb. 1716) to the vicarage of St. Martin’s in the Fields, Westminster; to which he was presented by the trustees of archbishop Tenison, for the disposal of his options, of whom he himself was one. This he held in commendam with the bishopric of Norwich, to which he was consecrated Oct. 8, 1721, but was thence translated to Ely, Sept 24, 1723.

Long previous, however, to these high appointments, he was elected, May 26, 1698, master of Bene't college, upon the recommendation of his friend Tenison, and proved an excellent governor of that society. Soon after he became master, he introduced the use of public prayers in the chapel immediately after the locking up of the gates, that he might know what scholars were abroad, and if necessary, visit their chambers: this practice was found so beneficial as to be continued ever since. In other respects, when vice-chancellor, which office he served in 1699 and 1713, and at the public commencement, he acquitted himself with great skill and dignity. The zeal also which he shewed for the protestant succession in the house of Hanover, upon the death of queen Anne, and his prudent conduct at that juncture, were so acceptable to the court, that they are thought to have laid the foundation of his church preferments; an earnest of which George I. gave him in appointing him one of his domestic chaplains the year following. Dr. Greene resigned the mastership of his college in 1716. He married Catherine sister of bishop Trimnell, by whom he had two sons and seven daughters. Having made a handsome provision for this family, he died in a good old age, May 18, 1738, and was buried in his cathedral. Those who knew him most intimately inform us that it was his unfeigned and uniform endeavour to exercise a conscience void of offence towards God and man, and to discharge his duty, in the several relations he bore to his fellow creatures, to the best of his judgment and abilities, with the same faith and spirit which appear through all his writings. These writings are, 1. “The Sacrament of the. Lord’s Supper explained to the meanest capacities,” Lond, 1710, 12mo, in a familiar dialogue between a minister and parishioner. 2. “The principles of religion explained for the instruction of the weak,” ibid. 1726, 12mo. 3. “Four discourses on the four last things, viz. Death, Judgment, Heaven, and Hell,” ibid. 1734, 12mo; and seven occasional sermons,

, a puritan divine of considerable talents and popularity, was born about 1631, and educated at Pembroke-hall, Cambridge, where he took his degrees in arts, and became a fellow. Quitting the university, he was appointed to the living of Dry Drayton near Cambridge, where he continued about twenty-one years, after which he removed to London, and died two years after, in 1591, of the plague, according to Fuller, who, as well as Strype, bishop Wilkins, and others, give him a high character for piety, usefulness, and moderation of sentiment, although a nonconformist in some points. His works, consisting of sermons, treatises, and a commentary on Psalm cxix. were collected into one volume, folio, and published in 1601, and again in 1612.

, a very ingenious English painter, was descended from a good family in Salisbury, where he was born. He was the most successful of all the disciples of sir Peter Lely, who is said to have considered him so much as a rival, that he never suffered him to see him paint. Greenhill, however, prevailed with sir Peter to draw his wife’s picture, and took the opportunity of observing how he managed his pencil; which was the great point aimed at. He is said to have been equally qualified by nature for the sister-arts of painting and poetry; but his loose and unguarded manner of living was probably the occasion of his early death; and only suffered him just to leave enough of his hand, to make us wish he had been more careful of a life so likely to do honour to his country. Mrs. Behn, with whom he was a great favourite, endeavoured to perpetuate his memory by an elegy, to be found among her works. He painted a portrait of bishop Ward, which is now in the town-hall of Salisbury. He died May 19, 1676.

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

, surnamed the Great, was born of a patrician family, equally conspicuous for its virtue and nobility at Rome, where his father Gordian was a senator, and extremely rich; and, marrying a lady of distinction, called Sylvia, had by her this son, about the year 544. From his earliest years he discovered genius and judgment; and, applying himself particularly to the apophthegms of th ancients, he fixed every thing worth notice in his memory, where it was faithfully preserved as in a store-house; he also improved himself by the conversation of old men, in which he took great delight. By these methods he made a great progress in the sciences, and there was not a man. in Rome, who surpassed him in grammar, logic, and rhetoric; nor can it be doubted but he had early instructions in the civil law, in which his letters prove him to have been well versed: he was nevertheless entirely ignorant of the Greek language. These accomplishments in a young nobleman procured him senatorial dignities, which he filled with great reputation and he was afterwards appointed praefect of the city by the emperor Justin the Younger but, being much inclined to a monastic life, he quitted that post, and retired to the monastery of St. Andrew, which he himself had founded at Rome in his father’s house, and put it under the government of an abbot, called Valentius. Besides this, he founded six other convents in Sicily; and, selling all the rest of his possessions, he gave the purchase-money to the poor.

He had not, however, enjoyed his solitude in St. Andrew’s long, when he was removed from it by pope Pelagius II. who made him his seventh deacon, and sent him as his nuncio to the emperor Tiberius at Constantinople, to demand succours against the Lombards. The pope, it is said, could not have chosen a man better qualified than Gregory for so delicate a negociation; but the particulars of it are unknown. Meanwhile, he was not wanting in exerting his zeal for religion. While he was in this metropolis, he opposed Eutychius the patriarch, who had advanced an opinion bordering on Origenism, and maintained, that after the resurrection the body is not palpable, but more subtile than air. In executing the business of his embassy, he contracted a friendship with some great men, and so gained the esteem of the whole court, by the sweetness of his behaviour, that the emperor Maurice chose him for a godfather to one of his sons, born in the year 583. Soon after this he was recalled to Rome, and made secretary to the pope; but, after some time, obtained leave to retire again into his monastery, of which he had been chosen abbot.

Here he had indulged himself with the hopes of gratifymg his wish, in the enjoyment of a solitary and unruffled lite, when Pelagius II. dying Feb. 8, 590, he was elected pope by the clergy, the senate, and the people of Rome; to whom he had become dear by his charity to the poor, whom the overflowing of the Tiber, and a violent plague, had left perishing with hunger. This promotion was so disagreeable to him, that he employed all possible methods to avoid it; he wrote a pressing letter to the emperor, conjuring him not to confirm his election, and to give orders for the choice of a person who had greater capacity, more vigour, and better health than he could boast; and hearing his letter was intercepted by the governor of Rome, and that his election would be confirmed by the imperial court, he fled, and hid himself in the most solitary part of a forest, in a cave firmly resolved to spend his days there, till another pope should be elected and, the people despairing to find him, a new election ensued. In this case, the Roman clergy, always fond of miracles, tell us that Gregory would never accept the papal chair, till he had manifestly found, by some celestial signs, that God called him to it. It is pretended, that a dove flying before those who sought for him, shewed them the way they were to go; or that a miraculous light, appearing on a pillar of fire over his cavern, pointed out to them the place of his reeat.

However that be, it is almost as certain that his reluctance was sincere, as that he at length accepted the dignity, and was enthroned pope, Sept. 3, 590. And it appeared by his conduct, that they could not have elected a person more worthy of this exalted station; for, besides his great learning, and the pains he took to instruct the church, both by preaching and writing, he had a very happy talent to win over princes, in favour of the temporal as well as spiritual interests of religion. It would be tedious to run over all the particulars of his conduct on these occasions; and his converting the English to Christianity, a remarkable fact in our history, is on that account generally known. In this attempt Gregory owed his success to the assistance of queen Ethelburga, who not only prompted the king Ethelbert her consort, to treat the pope’s missionaries kindly, but also to become himself a convert.

The same year he composed his “Dialogues,” a work filled with fabulous miracles and incredible stories; the style is also, low, and the narration coarse yet they were received with astonishing applause and Theodilinda, queen of the Lombards, having converted her husband to the catholic faith, the pope rejoiced at it, and sent his “Dialogues,” composed the following year, to that princess. She is thought to have made use of his book at this time for the conversion of that people, who were easily influenced by such compositions, for the same reason pope Zachary, about 150 years after, translated it into Greek for the use of those people, who were so delighted with it, that they gave St. Gregory the surname of Dialogist. Still these dialogues being the composition of Gregory is a point now thought very doubtful. In the year 594, he excommunicated and suspended the bishop of Salona, the metropolis of Dalmatia, who, however, paid no regard to the exercise of his power in these censures. The same year he laboured to convert the infidels in Sardinia by gentle methods/ according to his system: which was, to punish heretics, especially at their first rise, as rebels and traitors, but to compel infidels only indirectly; that is, treating the obstinate with some rigour, and persuading them as much by promises, threats, and gentle severities, as by argument and reason. This was the distinction he made in treating with the Manichees and pagans.

In the year 595, he refused to send the empress Constantia any relics of St. Paul, which she had requested, desiring to look at the body of that apostle. On this occasion he relates several miraculous punishments for such a rash attempt, all as simply devised as those in his< Dialogues." The same year he warmly opposed John patriarch of Constantinople, for assuming the title of oecumenical or universal, which he himself disclaimed, as having Do right to reduce the other bishops to be his substitutes; and afterwards forbad his nuncio there to communicate with that patriarch, till he should renounce the title. His humility, however, did not keep him from resenting an affront put upon his understanding, as he thought, by the emperor, for proposing terms of peace to the Lombards, who besieged Rome this year: the same year he executed the famous mission into England; and as Brunehaut, queen of France, had been very serviceable in it, he wrote a letter of thanks to her on the occasion. The princess is represented as a profligate woman, but very liberal to the ecclesiastics; founding churches and convents, and even sueing t9 the pope for relics. This was a kind of piety which particularly pleased Gregory; and accordingly, he wrote to the queen several letters, highly commending her conduct in that respect, and carried his complaisance so far as to declare the French happy above all other nations in having such a sovereign. In the year 598, at the request of the Christian people at Caprita, a small island at the bottom of the gulph of Venice, he ordered another bishop to be ordained for that place, in the room of the present prelate, who adhered to the Istrian schism. This was done contrary to the orders of the emperor Maurice, against taking any violent measures with schismatics.

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

This letter, written in January 604, is the last of Gre* gory’s that has any date to it; he died the 12th of March following, worn out with violent and almost incessant ill* ness. His remains were interred in a private manner, near the old sacristy of St. Peter’s church, at the end of the great portico, in the same place with those of some preceding popes. It is thought he was not above sixty years of age. We shall only add one particular relating to our own country. Augustin the missionary having followed the rule approved by former popes of dividing the revenues of all the English churches into four parts, the first for the bishop, the second for the clergy, the third for the poor, and the fourth for repairing the church; this division was confirmed by Gregory, who directed farther, that the bishop’s share should be not only for himself, but likewise for all his necessary attendants, and to keep up hospitality,

It remains to be observed, in justice to this pope, that the charge of his causing the noble monuments of the ancient splendour of the Romans o be destroyed, in order to prevent those who went to Rome from paying more attention to the triumphal arches, &. than to things sacred, is rejected by Platina as a calumny. Nor is the story, though credited by several learned authors, particularly by Brucker, of his reducing to ashes the Palatine library founded by Augustus, and the burning an infinite number of pagan books, particularly Livy, absolutely certain. However, it is undeniable, he had a great aversion to all such books, which he carried to that excess, that he flew in a violent passion with Didier, archbishop of Venice, for no other reason than because he suffered grammar to be taught in his diocese. In this he followed the apostolical constitutions: the compiler whereof seems also to have copied from Gregory Nazianzen, who thought reading pagan books would turn the minds of youth in favour of their idolatry; and we have seen more recently the same practice zealously defended, and upon the same principle too, by Mr. Tillemont. Yet Julian the apostate is charged with using the same prohibition, as a good device to effect the ruin of Christianity, by rendering the professors contemptible on account of their ignorance. Dupin says, that his genius was well suited to morality, and he had acquired an inexhaustible fund of spiritual ideas, which he expressed nobly mough, generally in periods, rather than sentences: his :omposition was laboured, and his language inaccurate, but sy, well connected, and always equally supported. He left more writings behind him than any other pope from the foundation of the see of Rome to the present period. 'hese consist of twelve books of “Letters,” amounting to ipwards of eight hundred in number. “A comment on :he book of Job,” generally known by the name of “Grejry’s Morals on Job.” “A Pastoral,” or a treatise on duties of a pastor. This work was held in such veneration by the Gallican church, that all the bishops were jbiiged, by the canons of that church, to be thoroughly icquainted with it, and punctually to observe the rules contained in it. He was author also of “Homilies” on the prophet Ezekiel; and on the gospels, and of four books of “Dialogues.” His works have been printed over and over again, in almost all forms, and at a number of different places on the continent, as Lyons, Paris, Rouen, Basil, Antwerp, Venice, and Rome. The best edition is that of Paris, in 1705, in 4 vols. folio.

, the principal event in whose life is the reformation he introduced in the Roman calendar, was born at Bologna in 1502. His name before his promotion was Hugh Buoncompagno. He was brought up to the study of the civil and canon law, which he taught in his native city with uncommon reputation. He was afterwards appointed judge of the court of commerce at Bologna. From this city he removed to Rome, where, after various preferments, he was on the death of Pius V. in 1572, unanimously elected his successor, and at his consecration he took the name of Gregory XIII. His reformation of the calendar, was according to a method suggested by Lewis Lilio, a Calabrian astronomer, which after his death was presented to the pope by his brother. This method, which was immediately adopted in all catholic countries, but was rejected by the protestants and by the Greeks, was intended to reform the old or Julian year, established by Julius Caesar, which consisted of'365 days 6 hours, or 365 difys and a quarter, that is three years of 365 days each, and the fourth year of 366 days. But as the mean tropical year consists only of 365 days 5 hours 48 minutes 57 seconds, the former lost 11 minutes 3 seconds every year, which in the time of pope Gregory had amounted to 10 <lays, and who, by adding these 10 days, brought the account of time to its proper day again, and at the same time appointed that every century after, a day more should be added, thereby making the years of the complete centuries, viz. 1600, 1700, 1800, &c. to be common years of 365 days each, instead of leap-years of 366 days, which makes the mean Gregorian year equal to 365 days 5 hours 45 minutes 36 seconds. This computation was not introduced into the account of time in England, till 1752, when the Julian account had lost 11 days, and therefore the 3d of September, was in that year by act of parliament accounted the 14th, thereby restoring the 11 days which had thus been omitted.

In 1584 Gregory incurred the suspicion, although some think without foundation, of having encouraged the assas, smation of Elizabeth queen of England, by Parr, an Eng* lisn catholic, who was detected in a conspiracy against the queen’s life. This pope contributed greatly to correct and amend Gratian’s decretals, which he enriched with learned He died of a quinsey, in the eighty-fourth year of Jbis age, and the 14th of his pontificate, in 1586. Several of his “Letters,” “Harangues,”&c. are said to be in existence.

, was born A. D. 324, at Azianzum, an obscure village belonging to Nazianzum, a town of the second Cappadocia, situated in a poor, barren, and unhealthy country. His parents were persons of rank, and no less eminent for their virtues: his father, whose name was also Gregory, had been educated in a religion called Hypsistarianism*, to which, being the religion of his ancestors, he was a bigot in his younger years; and the deserting it not only lost him the kindness of his friends, but estranged him from his mother, and deprived him of his estate. This, however, he bore with great cbearfulness for the sake of Christianity, to which he was converted by his wife, though not without the help of an emphatical dream; he was afterwards made bishop of Nazianzum, being the second who sat in that chair, where he behaved with great prudence and diligence. Nor was our author’s mother less eminent; descended of a pious family, sh was herself, for piety, so much the wonder of her age, that this son was said to have been the pure effect of her prayers, and of a vow to devote him to God, after the example of Hannah; and upon his birth she was careful to perform her vow.

Nazianzen now thought it time to fulfil a vow which he had made during the storm above-mentioned, to consecrate himself to God by baptism. Afterwards he was ordained a presbyter by his father, who soon had occasion to avail himself of his assistance. Gregory, the father, among several of the eastern bishops, had received a creed composed by a convention at Constantinople, in the year 395, in which the word consubstantial being laid aside, that article was expressed thus: “that the Son was in all things like the Father, according to the Scriptures.” In consequence, the monks of Cappadocia, in denying him communion, were followed by a great part of the people. Nazianzen, therefore, zealously endeavoured to make up this breach. He first convinced his father of the error, which he found him as ready to recant, and give public satisfaction to the people; then he dealt with the other party, whom he soon prevailed with to be reconciled; and, to bind all with a lasting cement, he made on this occasion his first oration, “Concerning Peace.”

Julian had now ascended the throne; and in order to suppress Christianity, published a law, prohibiting Christians not only to teach, but to be taught the books and learning of the Gentiles. The defeat of this design, next to the two Apollinarii in Syria, Was chiefly owing to Na0ianzen, who upon this occasion composed a considerable part of his poems, comprehending all sorts of divine, grave, and serious subjects, in all kinds of poetry; by which means the Christian youth of those times were completely furnished;, and found no want of those heathen authors that were taken from them. Julian afterwards coming to Caesarea, in the road to his Persian expedition, one part of the army was quartered at Nazianzum, where the commander peremptorily required the church (which the elder Gregory had not long since built) to be delivered to him. But the old man stoutly opposed him, daily assembling the people to public prayers, who were so affected with the common cause, that the officer was forced to retire for his own safety. Julian being slain not long after, Nazianzen published two invective orations against him, which are at once remarkable proofs of his wit and eloquence, but which qualities were mixed with too much virulence and acriiony.

Having by Julian’s death obtained some respite from public concerns, he made a visit to his friend Basil, who was then in monastic solitude upon a mountain in Pontus, whither he had often solicited Nazianzen’s company. The latter was naturally inclined to such a course of life, and always looked upon his entering into orders as a kind of force and tyranny put upon him, which he could hardly digest; yet he knew not how to desert his parents. But his brother Caesarius being now returned from court, where he had been for some years, with a purpose to fix in his possession at home, gave him an opportunity to indulge his inclination. He accordingly retired to his old companion, with whom in his solitary recess he remained several years, passing the time in watching, fasting, and all the several acts of mortification. He was tbus employed when the necessity of affairs at home obliged him to quit his retirement. His father laboured under the infirmities of age, and being no longer able to attend his charge, prevailed with him to come home; he returned accordingly about Easter, and published a large apologetic in excuse of his flight, which had been much censured. He had not long entered upon his charge of assistant to his father, u-ben the family had the misfortune to lose his brother Cacsarius, who departed this life October 11, 358. Some time after, died of a malignant fever, his sister Gorgonia, whose funeral-sermon he preached; as he did also that of his father, the aged bishop of Nazianzum, who died not long after, near one hundred years old, having been fortyfive years bishop of that place. In the conclusion of thig latter oration he addressed himself to his mother Norma, to support her mind under so great a loss, consolations which were proper and seasonable: for she, being thus deprived of her affectionate partner, and being nearly of equal years to her husband, expired, as may probably be conjectured, soon after.

By these breaches in the family, Nazianzen was sufficiently weaned from the place of his nativity; and, though he was not able to procure a successor to" his father, he resolved to throw up his charge, and accordingly retired to Seleucia, famous for the temple of St. Thercla, the virginmartyr; where, in a monastery of devout virgins dedicated to that saint, he continued a long time, and did not return till the death of St. Basil, whom he deeply regretted he could not attend at his last hours, being himself confined by sickness. About this time he was summoned to a council at Antioch, holden anno 378, to consider the emperor’s late edict for tolerating the catholics, in order to suppress Arianism; and, being ordered by the council to fix himself for that purpose at Constantinople, he presently repaired thither. Here he found the catholic interest at the lowest ebb; the Arians, favoured by Valens, had possessed themselves of all the churches, and proceeded to such extremities that scarcely any of the orthodox dared avow their faith. He first preached in his lodgings to those that repaired thither, and the congregation soon growing numerous, the house was immediately consecrated by Nazianzen, under the name of the church of Anastasia, or the resurrection; because the catholic faith, which in that city had been hitherto oppressed, here seemed to have its resurrection. The opposition to his measures but increased his fame, together with the number of his auditors, and even drew admirers and followers from foreign parts; among whom St. Jerom, lately ordained presbyter, came on purpose to put himself under his tutelage and discipline; an honour in which Jerom glories on every occasion. As the catholics grew more considerable, they chose him for their bishop, and the choice was confirmed by Meletus of Antioch, and Peter who succeeded Athanasius at Alexandria; but he was opposed by the Arians, who consecrating Maximus, a famous cynic philosopher and Christian, gave him a great deal of trouble. The Arian bishop, however, was at length forced to retire, and his successor Demophilus was deposed by the emperor Theodosius, who directed an edict to the people of Constantinople, February 27, 380, re-establishing the orthodox faith; and afterward coming thither in person, he treated Nazianzen with all possible kindness and respect, and appointed a day for his instalment in the see.

But this ceremony was deferred for the present at his own request; and falling sick soon after, he was visited by crowds of his friends, who all departed when they had made their compliments, except a young man with a pale look, long hair, in squalid and tattered cloaths, who, standing at the bed’s feet, made all the dumb signs of the bitterest sorrow -and lamentation. Nazianzen, starting, asked him, “Who he was, whence he came, and what he wanted?” To which he returned no answer, but expressed so much the moi'e passion and resentment, howling, wringing his hands, and beating his breast in such a manner that the bishop himself was moved to tears. Being at length forced aside by one who stood by, he told the bishop, “This, sir, is the assassin, whom some had suborned to murder you; but his conscience has molested him, and he is here come ingenuously to confess ins fault, and to beg your pardon.” The bishop replied. “Friend, God Almighty be propitious to you, his gracious preservation of me obliges me freely to forgive you the desperate attempt you designed has made you mine, nor do I require any other reparation, than that henceforth you desert your party, and sincerely give up yourself to God.”

He was one of the ablest champions of the orthodox faith concerning the Trinity, whence he had the title given him of e SeoAoyes, “The Divine,” by unanimous consent. His moral and religious qualities were attended with the natural graces of a sublime wit, subtle apprehension, clear judgment, and easy and ready elocution, which were all set off with as great a stock of human learning as the schools of the East, as Alexandria, or Athens itself, was able to afford. All these excellences are seen in his works, of which we have the following character by Erasmus; who, after having enriched the western church with many editions of the ancient fathers, confesses, that he was altogether discouraged from attempting the translation of Nazianzen, by the acumen and smartness of his style, the grandeur and sublimity of his matter, and those somewhat obscure allusions that are frequently interspersed among his writings. Upon the whole, Erasmus doubts not to affirm, that, as ha lived in the most learned age of the church, so he was the be*t scholar of that age. His works consist of sermons, letters, and poems, the latter evidently imbued with genius, and have been printed in Greek and Latin, Paris, 1609 and 1611, 2 vols. fol. with notes by the learned abbot de Billi, who was also author of the Latin translation. This edition is more esteemed than the new one of 1G30. There are some poems by St. Gregory in “Tollii insignia itinerarii Italici,” Utrecht, 1696, 4to, never printed before.

, surnamed Thaumaturgus, was descended of parents eminent for their birth and fortune, at Neo-Cesarea, the metropolis of Cappadocia, where he was born. He was educated very carefully in the learning and religion of the Gentiles by his father, who was a warm, zealot; but, losing this parent at fourteen years of age, he, enlarging his inquiries, began by degrees to perceive the vanity of that religion in which he had been bred, and turned his inclinations to Christianity. Having laid the necessary ground-work of his education at home, and studied the law for some time, to which he had no great inclination, he resolved to accomplish himself by foreign travels, to which purpose he went first to Alexandria, then become famous by the Platonic school lately erected there*. Departing from Alexandria, he came back probably through Greece, and staid awhile at Athens whence returning home, he applied himself to his old study of the law but again growing weary of it, he turned to the more agreeable speculations of philosophy.

The fame of Origen, who at that time had opened a school at Csesarea, in Palestine, and whose renown tid doubt was great at Alexandria, soon reached his ears. To that city therefore he betook himself, where meeting with Fermilian, a Cappaclocian gentleman, and afterwards bishop of Ca^area, in that country, he commenced a friendship with him, there being an extraordinary sympathy and agreement in their tempers and studies; and they jointly put themselves, together with his brother Athenodorus, under the tutorage of that celebrated master. Origen endeavoured to settle him in the full belief of Christianity, of which he had some insight before, and to ground him in the knowledge of the holy scriptures, as the best system of true wisdom and philosophy.

Thus furnished, he began to apply himself more directly to the charge committed to him, and he was said to b^> endowed with the power of working miracles: hence the title of Thaurnaturgus, or wonder-worker, is constantly ascribed to him in the writings of the church. St Basil assures us, that upon this account the Gentiles used to call him a second Moses. In this faithful and successful government of his flock he continued quietly till about anno '2bO, when he fled from the Decian persecution; but, as soon as the storm was over, he returned to his charge, and in a general visitation of his diocese, established in every place anniversary festivals and solemnities in honour of the martyrs who had suffered in the late persecution. In the reign of Galienus, about the year 260, upon the irruption of the northern nations into the Roman empire, the Goths breaking into Pontus, Asia, and some parts of Greece, created such confusion, that a neighbouring bishop of those parts wrote to Gregory for advice what to do: our author’s answer, sent by Euphrasymus, is called his “Canonical Epistle,” still extant among his works. Not long afterwards was convened that synod at Antioch, wherein Paul of Samosata, bishop of the place, which he did not care to lose, made a feigned recantation of his heretical opinions. Our St. Gregory was among the chief persons in this synod which met in the year 264, but did not long survive it, dying either this or most probably the following year.

, general of the Augustines 1357, who died in 1358, was a celebrated scholastic divine, surnamed the Authentic Doctor, and wrote a “Commentary on the Master of the Sentences,” Valentia, 1500, fol. with an addition, printed at Venice, 1522, fol.; “A Treatise on Usury,” and other works, Rimini, 1522, fol.

, the first of an eminent family of learned men in Scotland, was the son of the Rev. Mr. John Gregory, minister of Drumoak in the county of Aberdeen, and was born at Aberdeen in November 1638. His mother was a daughter of Mr. David Anderson of Finzaugh, or Finshaugh, a gentleman who possessed a singular turn for mathematical and mechanical knowledge. This mathematical genius was hereditary in the family of the Andersons, and from them it seems to have been transmitted to their descendants of the names of Gregory, Reid, &c. Alexander Anderson, cousin -german of the said David, was professor of mathematics at Paris in the beginning of the seventeenth century, and published there several valuable and ingenious works; as may be seen in our vol. II. The mother of James Gregory inherited the genius of her family; and observing in her son, while yet a child, a itrong propensity to mathematics, she instructed him herself in the elements of that science. His education in the languages he received at the grammar-school of Aberdeen, and went through the usual course of academical studies at Marischal college, but was chiefly delighted with philosophical researches, into which a new door had been lately opened by the key of the mathematics. Galileo, Kepler, and Des Cartes were the great masters of this new method; their works, therefore, Gregory made his principal study, and began early to make improvements upon their discoveries in optics. The first of these improvements was the invention of the reflecting telescope, which still bears his name; and which was so happy a thought, that it has given occasion to the most considerable improvements made in optics, since the invention of the telescope. He published the construction of this instrument in his “Optica promota,” 1663, at the age of twenty-four. This discovery soon attracted the attention of the mathematicians, both of our own and foreign countries, who immediately perceived its great importance to the sciences. But the manner of placing the two specula upon the same axis appearing to Newton to be attended with the disadvantage of losing the central rays of the larger speculum, he proposed an improvement on the instrument, by giving an oblique position to the smaller speculum, and placing the eye-glass in the side of the tube. It is observable, however, that the Newtonian construction of that instrument was long abandoned for the original or Gregorian, which is now always used when the instrument is of a moderate size; though Herschel has preferred the Newtonian form for the construction of those immense telescopes which he has of late so successfully employed in observing the heavens.

About 1664 or 1665, coming to London, he became acquainted with Mr. John Collins, who recommended him to the best optic glass-grinders there, in order to have his telescope executed. But as this could not be done for want of skill in the artists to grind a plate of metal for the object speculum into a true parabolic concave, which the design required, he was much discouraged; and after a few imperfect trials made with an ill-polished spherical one, which did not succeed to his wish, he dropped the pursuit, and resolved to make the tour of Italy, then the mart of mathematical learning, in the view of prosecuting his fa* vourite study with greater advantage.

He had not been long abroad when the same inventive genius, which had before shewn itself in practical mathematics, carried him to some new improvements in the speculative part. The sublime geometry on the doctrine of curves was then hardly passed its infant state, and the famed problem of squaring the circle still continued a reproach to it; when our author discovered a new analytical method of summing up an infinite converging series, by which the area of the hyperbola, as well as the circle, may be computed to any degree of exactness. He was then at Padua; and getting a few copies of his invention printed there in 1667 under the title “Vera Circuli et Hyperbolae Quadratura,” he sent one to his friend Mr. Collins, who communicated it to the royal society, where it met with the commendation of lord Brounker and Dr. Wallis. He reprinted it at Venice, and published it the following year, 1668, together with another piece entitled “Geometric pars universalis, inserviens quantitatum curvarum transmutationi et mensurae,” in which he is allowed to have shewn, for the first time, a method for the transmutation of curves. These works engaged the notice, and procured the author the correspondence of the greatest mathematicians of the age, Newton, Huygens, Wallis, and others. An account of this piece was also read by Mr. Collins before the royal society, of which Gregory, being returned from his travels, was chosen a member, admitted the 14th of January this year, and communicated to them an account of the controversy in Italy about the motion of the earth, which was denied by Riccioli and his followers.

The same year, his quadrature of the circle being attacked by Mr. Huygens, a controversy arose between those two eminent mathematicians, in which our author produced some improvements of his series. But in this dispute it happened, as it generally does in most others, that the antagonists, though setting out with decent temper, yet grew too much heated in the combat. This was the case here, especially on die side of Gregory, whose defence was, at his own request, inserted in the “Philosophical Transactions;” but Leibnitz, who allows Gregory the highest merit for his geniui and discoveries, is of opinion, that Huygens has pointed out, though not errors, some considerable deficiencies in the treatise above-mentioned, and has shewn a much simpler method of attaining the same end. Gregory also received from Mr. Collins, about this time, an account of the series invented by sir Isaac Newton; who in that had actually effected what our author was stiffly contending against Huygens to be utterly impossible: that is, the ratio of the diameter of a circumference, expressed in a series of simple terms, independent of each other, and entirely freed from the magic vinculum of surds, in which they had till then been indissolubly held.

In 1668 our author published at London another work, entitled “Exercitationes Geometricae,” which contributed still much farther to extend his reputation. About this time he was elected professor of mathematics in the university of St. Andrew’s, an office which he held for six years. During his residence there he married, in 1669, Mary, the daughter of George Jameson, the celebrated painter, whom Mr, Walpole has termed the Vandyke of Scotland, and who was fellow disciple with that great artist in the school of Rubens at Antwerp. His fame placed him in so great esteem with the royal academy at Paris, that, in the beginning of 1671, it was resolved by that aca^ demy to recommend him to their grand monarch for a pension; and the design was approved even by Mr. Huygens, though he said he had reason to think himself improperly treated by Mr. Gregory, on account of the controversy between them. Accordingly, several members of that academy wrote to Mr. Oldenburg, desiring him to acquaint the council of the royal society with their proposal; informing him likewise, that the king of France was willing to allow pensions to one or two learned Englishman, whom they should recommend. But no answer was ever made to that proposal; and our author, with respect to this particular, looked upon it as nothing more than a compliment.

The most shining part of Gregory’s character is that of his mathematical genius as an inventor. In this view, particularly, he merits a place in these memoirs; and therefore we shall conclude this article with a list of the most remarkable of his inventions. His reflecting telescope; burning concave mirror; his quadrature of the circle, by an infinite converging series; and his method for transformation of curves, have been already mentioned. Besides these, he was the first who gave a geometrical demonstration of lord Brounker’s series for squaring the hyperbola, as it had been explained by Mercator in his “Logarithmotechnia.” He was likewise the first who demonstrated the meridian line to be analogous to a scale of logarithmic tangents, of the half compliment of latitude . He also invented and demonstrated geometrically, by the help of the hyperbola, a very simple converging series for making the logarithms, and therefore recommended by Dr. Halley as very proper for practice. He also sent to Mr. Collins the solution of the famous Keplerian problem by an infinite series. He found out a method of drawing tangents to curves geometrically, without any previous calculations. He gave a rule for the direct and inverse method of tangents, which stands upon the same principle (of exhaustions) with that of fluxions, and differs not much from it in the manner of application. He likewise gave a series for the length of the arc of a circle from the tangent, and v ice versa; as also for the secant and logarithmic tangent and secant, and vice versa. These, with others, for certifying, or measuring the length of the elliptic and hyperbolic curves, were sent to Mr. Collins, in return for some received from him of sir Isaac Newton’s; and their elegance being admirable, and above whatever he had produced before, and after the manner of sir Isaac, gave room to think he had improved himself greatly by that master, whose example he followed, i delivering his series in simple terms, independent on each other.

We are assured, that at his death he was in pursuit of a general method of quadrature, by infinite series, like that of sir Isaac. This appeared by his papers, which came into the hands of his nephew, Dr. David Gregory, who published several of them; and he himself assured Mr. Collins, he had found out the method of making sir Isaac’s series; who thereupon concluded he must have written a treatise upon it. This encouraged Mr. Stewart, professor of mathematics in Aberdeen, to take the trouble of examining his papers, then in the hands of Dr. David Gregory, the late dean of Christ church, Oxford; but no such treatise could be found, nor any traces of it, and the same had been declared before by Dr. David Gregory; whence it happens, that it is still unknown what his method was of making those serieses. However, Mr. Stewart affirms, that, in turning over his papers, he saw several curious upon particular subjects, not yet printed. On the contrary, some letters which he saw confirmed Dr. David Gregory’s remark, and made it evident, that our author had never compiled any treatise, containing the foundations of this general method, a very short time before his death; so that all that can be known about his method can only be collected from his letters, published in the short history of his “Mathematical Discoveries,” compiled by Mr. Collins, and his letters to that gentleman in the “Commercium Epistolicum.” From these it appears, that, in the beginning of 1670, when Mr. Collins sent him sir Isaac Newton’s series for squaring the circular zone, it was then so much above every thing he comprehended in this way, that after having endeavoured in vain, by comparing it with several of his own, and combining them together, to discover the method of it, he concluded it to be no legitimate series; till, being assured of his mistake by his friend, he went again to work, and after almost a whole year’s indefatigable pains, as he acknowledges, he discovered, at last, that it might be deduced from one of his own, upon the subject of die logarithms, in which he had given a method for finding the power to any given logarithm, or of turning the root of any pure power into an infinite series; and in the same manner, viz. by comparing and combining his own series together, or else by deduction therefrom, he fell upon several more of sir Isaac’s, as well as others like them, in which he became daily more ready by continual practice; and this seems to have been the utmost he ever actually attained to, in the progress towards the discovering any universal method for those series.

Mr. Gregory, the subject of this memoir, while he lived at Kinardie, was a jest among the neighbouring gentlemen for his ignorance of what was doing about his own farm, but an oracle in matters of learning and philosophy, and particularly in medicine, which he had studied for his amusement, and began to practise among his poor neighbours. He acquired such a reputation in that science, that he was employed by the nobility and gentlemen of that county, but took no fees. His hours of study were singular. Being much occupied through the day with those who applied to him as a physician, he went early to bed, rose about two or three in the morning, and, after applying to his studies for some hours, went to bed again, and slept an hour or two before breakfast. He was the first man in that country who had a barometer; and having paid great attention to the changes in it, and the corresponding changes in the weather, he was once in danger of being tried by the presbytery for witchcraft or conjuration. A deputation of that body waited upon him to inquire into the ground of certain reports that had come to their ears; but, affording them ample satisfaction, a prosecution was prevented.

About the beginning of the last century, he removed with his family to Aberdeen, and in the time of queen Anne’s wars employed his thoughts upon an improvement in artillery, in order to make the shot of great guns more destructive to the enemy, and executed a model of the engine he had contrived. The late Dr. Reid, in his additions to the lives of the Gregorys, published in Hutton’s Dictionary, informs us that he conversed with a clockmaker at Aberdeen, who had been employed in making this model; but having made many different pieces by direction without knowing their intention, or how they were to be put together, he could give no account of the whole. After making some experiments with this model, which satisfied him, Mr. Gregory was so sanguine in the hope of being useful to the allies in the war against France, that he set about preparing a field equipage with a view to make a campaign in Flanders, and in the mean time sent his model to his son the Savilian professor, the subject of our next article, that he might have his, and sir Isaac Newton’s opinion of it. His son shewed it to Newton without letting him know that his own father was the inventor of it. Sir Isaac was much displeased with it, saying, that if it had tended as much to the preservation of mankind, as to their destruction, the inventor would have deserved a great reward: but, as it was contrived solely for destruction, and would soon be known by the enemy, he rather deserved to be punished, and urged the professor very strongly to destroy it, and if possible, to suppress the invention. It is probable the professor followed this advice, as he died soon after, and the model was never found. Sir Isaac’s objection, however, appears rather to be fastidious, and might apply with equal force to any improvement in muskeis, &c. or to gunpowder itself. When the rebellion broke out in 1715, Mr. Gregory went a second time to Holland, and returned when it was over to Aberdeen, where he died about 1720, aged ninety-three, leaving behind him a history of his own time and country, which was never published. One of his daughters was mother to the late celebrated Dr. Thomas Reid of Glasgow, by whom the above particulars were first communicated.

He continued at Edinburgh till 1691, when, hearing of Dr. Bernard’s intention to resign the Savilian professorship of astronomy at Oxford, he left Scotland, and, coming to London, was admitted a member of the royal society: and paid his addresses to sir Isaac Newton, who took the first opportunity of recommending him to Mr. Flamstead (master of the mathematical school in Christ’s-hospital, London), with a letter, recommending his mathematical merit above all exception in these terms: “Sir, it. is almost a fortnight since I intended, with Mr. Paget and another friend or two, to have given you a visit at Greenwich; but sending to the Temple coffee-house, I understood you had not been in London for two or three weeks before, which made me think you were retired to your living for a time. The bearer hereof, Mr. Gregory, mathematic professor of Edinburgh college, in Scotland, intended to have given you a visit with us. You will find him a very ingenious person, and a good mathematician, worth your acquaintance.” In proceeding, he mentions our author as a fit person, in case of Mr. Flamstead’s death, to carry on his astronomical views. Thus recommended, the royal astronomer used his best interest to procure him success at Oxford, where he was elected astronomy-professor this year, having been first admitted of Baliol college, and incorporated M. A. February 8, and he was created M. D. on the

who published an English translation of that doctrine. Gen. Diet. vol. IV. p.

tin, entitled “Catoptricae & Dioptric by Dr. Desaguliers, who added an apSpherics Elementa, Oxon.” 8vo, and pendix, containing the history of th

Dr. David Gregory married, in 1695, Elizabeth, the daughter of Mr. Oiiphant of Langtown in Scotland. By this lady he had four sons, of whom, the eldest, David, was elected, from Westminster school in 1714, student of Christ church, Oxford; became rector of Semly in Wiltshire; was installed canon of Christ church, June 8, 1736, and dean, May 18, 1756. He was appointed the first professor of modern history and languages on the foundation of that professorship by George 1. prolocutor of the lower house of convocation, and master of Sherburn hospital, near Durham. He died and was interred in Christ church cathedral, 1767, in the seventy -first year of his age, in the same grave with his wife Mary (Grey), who died in 1762.

When Dr. David Gregory, the Savilian professor, quitted Edinburgh, he was succeeded in the professorship at that university by his brother James, likewise an eminent mathematician; who held that office for thirty-three years, and, retiring in 1725, was succeeded by the celebrated Maclaurin. A daughter of this professor James Gregory, a young lady of great beauty and accomplishments, was the victim of an unfortunate attachment, that furnished the subject of Mallet’s well-known ballad of “William and Margaret.” Another brother, Charles, was created professor of mathematics at St. Andrew’s by queen Anne, in 1707. This office he held with reputation and ability for thirty-two years; and, resigning in 1739, was succeeded by his son, who eminently inherited the talents of his family, and died in 1763.

, professor of medicine in the university of Edinburgh, was born at Aberdeen in 1724. He was the third son of James Gregory, M. D. professor of medicine in King’s college, Aberdeen, by Anne, daughter of the rev. George Chalmers, principal of King’s college there. His grandfather was David Gregory of Kinardie, and his grand-uncle the James Gregory, whose life we have first given, the inventor of the reflecting telescope. Though the father of Dr. John Gregory died when he was very young, his education was carefully superintended, and he made a rapid progress in his studies, and like the rest of his ancestors became deeply versed in mathematical knowledge. He also cultivated an elegant and just taste, clearness -and beauty of expression, with precision of judgment, and extensive knowledge. He was the early, intimate, and constant friend and associate of Drs. Gerard, Beattie, and the other eminent men who belonged to the university of Aberdeen. In 1742, he went to Edinburgh, to prosecute the study of medicine, and thence to Leyden in 1745, and to Paris in 1746, for further improvement. On his return he was appointed professor of philosophy in King’s college, Aberdeen, and had at the same time the degree of M. D. conferred upon him. He held this professorship for a few years. In 1754, he went to London, where he. cultivated the acquaintance, and fixed the esteem and friendship of' some of the most distinguished literati there. Edward Montague, esq. an eminent mathematician, maintained a firm friendship for the doctor, founded on a similarity of manners and studies. His, lady the celebrated Mrs. Montague? and George lord Lyttelton, were of the number of his friends; and it is not improbable that he would have continued in London, and practised there in his profession, if the death of his brother Dr. James Gregory, professor of physic in King’s college, Aberdeen, in 1756, had not occasioned his being recalled to his native university to fill that chair. His occupations in physic now began to be active; he gave a course of lectures in physic, and practised in his profession, with great success. In the above-mentioned year, while at London, he was elected a fellow of the royal society. In 1766, on the death of Dr. Robert Whytt, the ingenious professor of the theory of physic at Edinburgh, Dr. Gregory was called to succeed him, as his majesty’s first physician in Scotland; and about the same time he was chosen to fill the chair of professor of the practice of physic, which was just resigned by Dr. Rutherford. Dr. Gregory gave three successive courses of practical lectures. Afterwards by agreement with his ingenious colleague, Dr. Cullen, they lectured alternate sessions, on the practice and institutions of medicine, with just and universal approbation, till the time of Dr. Gregory’s death.

Dr. Gregory was tall in person, and remarkable for the sweetness of his disposition and countenance, as well as for the ease and openness of his manners. He was an universal and elegant scholar, an experienced, learned, sagacious, and humane physician a professor, who had the happy talent of interesting his pupils, and of directing their attention to subjects of importance, and of explaining difficulties with simplicity and clearness. He entered with great warmth into the interests and conduct of his hearers, and gave such as deserved it every encouragement and assistance in his power: open, frank, social, and undisguised in his life and manners, sincere in his friendships, a tender husband and father: and an unaffected, cheerful, candid, benevolent man.

Dr. Gregory published: 1. “Comparative View of the state and faculties of Man with those of the Animal World,” 8vo. This work was first read to a private literary society at Aberdeen, and without the most distant view to publication. Many hints are thrown out in it on subjects of consequence, with less formality, and more freedom, than if publication had been originally intended. The author put his name to the second edition of this work many additions are also joined to it and it is dedicated to George lord Lyttelton, who always professed a high esteem for the author and his writings. This work, indeed, if the author had left no other, must convince every one, that, as a man of science, he possessed extensive knowledge, exquisite taste and judgment, and great liberality of mind. 2. 4 * Observations on the duties and offices of a Physician, and on the method of prosecuting inquiries in Philosophy,“1770, 8vo, published by one who heard the professor deliver them, in lectures; but they were acknowledged, and republished in a more correct form, by the author, in the same year. 3.” Elements of the practice of Physic for the use of Students," 1772, repubiished 1774, and intended as a text book, to be illustrated by his lectures on the practice of physic; but he died before he had finished it, and before he had finished the first course of lectures which he gave on that text.

But he did not enjoy the benefit of these preferments long being a firm loyalist, as well as his patron > he was deprived or both by the tyranny of the usurpers, and was reduced some years before his death to great distress. In. these circumstances, he was taken into the house of one Sutton, to whose son he had been tutor; this was an obscure ale-house on Kiddington-green, near Oxford, where he died March 13, 1646, of an hereditary gout, with which he had been troubled for above twenty years, and which at last seized his stomach. His corpse was carried to Oxford, and interred, at the expence of some friends, in that cathedral. He was honoured with the acquaintance and favour of the greatest men of the age, and held a correspondence with several eminent persons abroad, as well Jews and Jesuits, as others. His works are, “Notes and Observations on some passages of Scripture,” published a little before his death in 1646, 4to, and besides being reprinted four times in the same form, were translated into Latin, and inserted in the “Critici Sacri.” His posthumous works were published by his friend Mr. John Gurgany, B D. of Merton college, in a quarto volume, entitled “Gregorii Posthuma,” 1650, 1664, 1671, and 1683. This volume contains, I. “A Discourse of the LXX Interpreters; the place and manner of their interpretation.” II. “A Discourse declaring what time the Nicene Creed began to be sung in the Church.” III. “A Sermon upon the Resurrection, from 1 Cor. xv. verse 20.” IV. “Kaivav tievrep-, or, a Disproof of him in the third of St. Luke, verse 36.” V. “Episcopus Puerorum in die Innocentium.” VI. “De JEris & Epochis, shewing the several accounts of time among all nations from the creation to the present age.” VII. “The Assyrian Monarchy, being a description of its rise and fall.” “VIII.” The description and use of the Terrestrial Globe.“Besides these, he wrote a tract entitled” Alkibla,“in which he endeavoured to vindicate the antiquity of worshiping towards the East. There is a manuscript of his entitled” Observationes in loca quaedam excerpta ex Johannis Malelae chronographia,“in the public library at Oxford; and he intended to have published a Latin translation of that author with annotations. He translated likewise from Greek into Latin, 1.” Palladius de Gentibus Indiae & Brachmanibus“2.” S. Ambrosius de Moribus Brachmannorum“3.” Anonymus de Brachmanibus" which translations came after his death into the hands of Mr. Edmund Chilmead, chaplain of Christ church, Oxford, and then into those of Edward Byshe, esq. who published them in his own name at London, 1665, 4to.

, D. D. a divine and miscellanebus writer, was descended from a family, originally from Scotland, but a branch of which was settled in Ireland. His father, who had been educated in Trinity college, Dublin, held, at the time of his son’s birth, the living of Edernin, and a prebend in the cathedral of Ferns. Dr. Gregory was born April 14, 1754, and after his father’s death in 1766, was removed to Liverpool, where his mother fixed her residence. He passed some time under the tuition of an excellent schoolmaster of the name of Holder), by whom he was much distinguished for his proficiency in learning. As it was his mother’s desire that he should be brought up to commerce, he spent some years in mercantile employments; but a taste for literature, which continued to be his ruling propensity, produced a final determination in favour of a learned profession. Although the regular process of education for this purpose had been interrupted, the intervening variety of pursuit and observation proved the foundation of a great store of information relative to the arts and sciences, to commerce, manufactures, and political institutions, that was very useful in his subsequent compilations. When his destination was fixed, he passed an interval of study at the university of Edinburgh, and in 1776 entered into holy orders. He first officiated as a curate at Liverpool, where he distinguished himself as a preacher, and wrote some occasional pieces in the periodical journals and magazines, particularly against the slave trade, which he had the spirit to attack in the principal seat of that traffic. In 1782 he removed to London, and obtained the curacy of St. Giles’s Cripplegate, in which parish he became very popular, both in that capacity and afterwards as their morningpreacher. His other London preferments, if they may be so called, were the curacy and lectureship of St. Botolph’s, the lectureship of St. Lute’s, one of the weekly lectureships of St. Antholin’s, and a small prehend in St. Paul’s, which he relinquished for the rectory of Stapleford in Hertfordshire. He was also some time one of the evening preachers at the Foundling hospital. In 1804 he was presented by Mr. Addington, now lord Sidmbuth, to the valuable living of West Ham in Essex, where in a little time the powers of his constitution, although apparently a strong one, suddenly gave way, and he died, after a short confinement, March 12, 1808.

The greater part of Dr. Gregory’s time, after his arrival in London, was spent in literary employment, and principally in compilations that were successful and useful. He was the first who, about 1782-3, suggested a series of extracts from eminent authors, which were published by the late Mr. Kearsley of Fleet-street, under the name of “Beauties,” and had a very extensive sale. He afterwards published an original work, entitled “Essays historical and moral,” 1785, &vo, which introduced him very favourably to the notice of the public, and reached a second edition in 1788. This was followed by, 1. A translation of Lowth’s Lectures on the sacred poetry of the Hebrews, 1787.“2.” Church History,“1788, and 1795, 2 vols. 3.” Life of Chatterton,“1780, 8vo, inserted afterwards in the” Biographia Britannica,“for which it was originally intended. 4.” Sermons,“1789. 5. A translation of Telemachus, or rather a revisal of Hawkesworth’s translation, 1795, 4to. 6.” The Economy of Nature,“3 vols. 8vo. 7.” A Dictionary of Arts and Sciences,“1806, 2 vols. 4to. To some of these it is supposed he contributed little more than his name; but the number of works which he compiled without his name, would furnish perhaps a more numerous list. Among others he was many years editor of the” New Annual Register,“conducted through the whole of the French war with bitter hostility to the measures of the British government. He took advantage, however, of the short interval of peace, to give it a turn favourable to the then administration, which it is said procured him the living of West Ham. He left in the press” Letters on Natural and Experimental Philosophy,“and a” Series of Letters to his Son," which have since been published.

, descended of an ancient family distinguished by many honourable persons, which took its name from a town so called in Norfolk, was the younger son of sir Richard Gresham, knight, alderman, sheriff, and lord mayor of London, an opulent merchant, and a man of great public spirit, who died in February 1548. His brother, sir John Gresham, was also an opulent merchant, and had served the offices of alderman, sheriff, and lord mayor. He died of a pestilential fever in 1556, after, among other acts of munificence, endowing the free school of Holt in Norfolk, and bestowing the government of it on the fishmongers’ company in London. Thomas, the son of the preceding sir Richard, was born in 1519 at London, and bound apprentice to a mercer there while he was young: but, to enlarge his mind by an education suitable to his birth and fortune, was sent to Caius college, then Gonvil-hall, in Cambridge; where he remained a considerable time, and made such improvements in learning, that Caius the founder of the college styles him “doctissimus mercator,” the very learned merchant. However, the profits of trade were then so great, and such large estates had been raised by it in his own family, that he afterwards engaged in it, and was admitted a member of the Mercers’ company in 1543. About this time he warned Anne, the daughter of William Femley, esq. of West Creting, in Suffolk, und widow of William Heade, of Fulham, in Middlesex, esq., by whom he had a son named Richard, who not long after succeeded his father in the office of agent to king Edward for taking up money of the merchants at Antwerp, and removed to that city with his family in 1551.

In the performance of these services, Gresham often stretched his own credit, and kept up the exchange at his own risk, by which he frequently lost several hundred pounds at a time; and on one particular time he took up 50,000l. for the king’s service. In the course of these transactions, he had frequently occasion to meddle with political affairs, as well as those immediately committed to his charge, through the application of the emperor’s sister, then regent in the Netherlands, as well as that of the Icing his master; so that he made at least forty journeys from England to Antwerp during the remainder of the short reign of Edward VI. These services were so acceptable to the young monarch, that about three weeks before his death, he granted to Mr. Gresham, as a mark of his favour, Iool a year to him and his heirs for ever. Mr. Gresham also obtained, in the course of that reign grants of estates and reversions to the value of about 300l. a year. He was but a young man when first employed by king Edward; and the skill and prudence displayed in the various matters in which he was employed, discovered an uncommon knowledge of mercantile affairs. But notwithstanding his abilities, and the considerable services he had rendered to the crown, he was, upon the accession of queen Mary, removed from his agency. This induced him to draw up a memorial of his services to the late king, which he sent to a minister of state to be laid before her majesty; and the services lepresented as done, not only to the king, but to the nation in general, by the increase both of money and trade, and the advancement of the public credit, being observed to be fact, he was taken soon after into the queen’s service, and reinstated in his former employment, as appears by the commissions given him at different times during that reign. After the decease of queen Mary, in 1558, he was taken immediately into the service of queen Elizabeth, who employed him on her accession to provide and buy up arms; and in 1559 she conferred on him the honour of knighthood, and appointed him her agent in foreign parts. In this state of credit and reputation, he thought proper to provide himself with a mansion-house in the city, suitable to his station and dignity; and with this spirit built a large and sumptuous house for his own dwelling, on the west-side of Bishopsgate-street, London, afterwards called Gresham-college, where he maintained an establishment becoming his character and station. But this flow of prosperity received a heavy check by the loss of his only son, aged 16 years, who died in 1564, and was buried in St. Helen’s church, opposite to his mansion house.

At this time the merchants of London met in Lombardstreet, exposed to the open air and all the injuries of the weather. To remedy wbich inconvenience, sir Thomas’s father during his shrievalty wrote a letter to sir Thomas Audeley then lord-privy-seal, acquainting him that there were certain houses in that street belonging to sir George Monoux, which if purchased and pulled down, a handsome exchange might be built on the ground; he therefore desired his lordship to move his majesty, that a letter might be sent to sir George, requiring him to sell those houses to the mayor and commonalty of the city of London for that purpose. The building he supposes would cost upwards of 2000l., 1000l. of which he doubts not to raise before he was out of his office: but nothing effectual was done in it. Sir Thomas therefore took up his father’s design, and improving upon his spirit, proposed that if the citizens would give him a piece of ground in a proper place large enough for the purpose, he would build ari exchange at his own expence with large and covered walks, where the merchants and traders of all sorts might daily assemble and transact business at all seasons, without interruption from the weather or impediments of any kind. This generous offer was gratefully accepted, and in 1566 several houses upon Cornhill and the back of it, with three alleys, called Swan-alley, New-alley, and St. Christopher’s alley, containing in all eighty houses, were purchased by the citizens for more than 3532l. and sold for 478l. on condition of pulling them down, and carrying off the stuff. This done, the ground-plot was made plain at the charges of the city, and possession given to sir Thomas, who was styled “Agent to the queen’s highness” and who, on the 7th of June, laid the first stone of the foundation and the work was forthwith followed with such diligence, that by Nov. 1567, the same was covered with slate, and the shell shortly after fully finished. It is said that the timber of which this fabric was built, was first framed and put together at Battisford, near Ipswich, in Suffolk, and thence brought to London.

The plan of this edifice, was formed from the exchange at Antwerp, being an oblong square, with a portico supported with pillars of marble, ten on the north and south sides, and seven on the east and west; under which stood the shops each seven feet and a hall' long, and five feet broad, in all 120, twenty-five on each side east and west, and thirty-four and an half north, and thirty-five and an half south, each of which paid sir Thomas 47. 105. a year upon an average. There were likewise other shops fitted up at first in the vaults below, but the dampness and darkness rendered these so inconvenient, that the vaults were soon let out to other uses; upon the roof stood at each earner, upon a pedestal, a grasshopper, which was the crest of sir Thomas’s arms. This edifice was fully completed, and the shops opened in 1569; and Jan. 29, 1570, queen Elizabeth attended by her nobility, came from Somerset-house thither, and caused it by a trumpet and a herald to be proclaimed “The Royal Exchange.” The story, however, of sir Thomas’s having on this day reduced a costly pearl to powder, and drank it up in a glass of wine, seems to rest on very slender foundation, and is very inconsistent with his character, who knew how to unite the magnificence of the nobleman with the prudence of the merchant.

In the mean time he had scarcely entered upon the execution of this noble design, when in 1566, he was sent over to Antwerp to take up the sum of 14,667l. Flemish money, for her majesty, and prolong the time of payment for 34,3S5l. more; and in December of the same year, there was another debt of the queen’s prolonged of S532l. Flemish. Sir Thomas, however, perceiving the disadvantage of borrowing money from foreigners, at an exorbitant interest, advised her majesty to take up what money she wanted of her own merchants; which advice, however, was not immediately adopted, but in 1569 an opportunity occurred which rendered his advice necessary. The quarrel which at this time took place between queen Elizabeth and the king of Spain, obliged the English merchants to send their effects to Hamburgh, on which the duke of Alva, governor of the Netherlands, prohibited all commerce with England. Upon this, secretary Cecil, who was then at the head of the exchequer, had nis tears lot the merchants would not have money enough to carry on their trade, and the queen lest the falling off in the duties on cloth might prevent her paying her debts abroad. Sir Thomas, however, when consulted, told the secretary that in his opinion the queen needed be at no difficulty to pay her creditors, if she saw her merchants well paid in London their first payment, which was half of her debt to them; for by the time the other half should be payable, the merchants would have plenty of money both here and at Hamburgh. He assured him, that the commodities shipped by our merchants from Hamburgh were well worth 100,000l.; and those shipped hence with our goods thither, were worth upwards of 200,000l. so that the duty upon cloths (10,000l. at least) would enable the queen to discharge her debt. As to the secretary’s fears respecting the merchants, sir Thomas observed that there was no foundation for them, considering the great vent our commodities had at Hamburgh already, and were likely to have, and therefore he advised that the first payment agreed on at Hamburgh should above all things be provided for; assuring the secretary, that he knew certainly that the duke of Alva was more troubled with the queen’s great credit, and with the vent of her commodities at Hamburgh, than he was with any thing else, and “quaked for fear;” that this xvas one of the principal hindrances to the payment of the tenth, penny, then demanded by the duke for the sale of any kind of goods in the Netherlands; which he believed would be his undoing. He then renewed his advice respecting borrowing of her own subjects in preference to foreigners, urging many reasons grounded on facts. When, however, the motion of lending money to the queen was first proposed among the merchants by sir Thomas, it met with great opposition, and was negatived in the common-hall; but upon more mature consideration afterwards several of the merchants and aldermen lent her majesty various sumg of money, to the value of 16,000l. for six months, at 6 per cent, interest for that time. She gave bonds to each of them separately for re-payment, and likewise -other accustomed bonds to discharge them of the statute of usury; and when the six months were expired, she prolonged the payment for six month? more, paying the same interest, with brokage. As her majesty was thus enabled to borrow money of her own subjects, instead of foreigners, and the commerce with Flanders, particularly Antwerp, was now prohibited, sir Thomas’s office as agent for her majesty in those parts, ceased of course. But in 1572, to shew her regard for him, she was pleased to appoint him, together with the archbishop of Canterbury, the bishop of London, and other persons of eminence, assistants to the lord mayor for the government of the city of London during her intended progress that summer. This method was afterwards continued on similar occasions, and sir Thomas Gresham was joined in the commission till 1578.

Though sir Thomas had purchased very large estates in several counties of England, yet he thought a country seat near London, to which he might retire from business and the hurry of the city as often as he pleased, would be very convenient. With this view he bought Osterley-park, near Brentford, in Middlesex, where he built a large magnificent seat within the park, which he impaled, being well wooded, and furnished with many ponds stocked with fish and fowl, and of great use for mills, as paper-mills, oilmills, and corn-mills. In 1578, queen Elizabeth visited Osterley, where sir Thomas entertained her magnificently. On this occasion, having given it as her opinion that the court before the house would look better divided with a wajl, sir Thomas in the night sent for workmen from London, who so speedily and so silently performed their task, that before morning the wall was finished, to the great surprize of the queen and her courtiers, one of whom, however, observed, that it was no wonder that he who could build a change should so soon change a building. This became afterwards the property of the family of Child, and is now that of the right hon. the earl of Jersey, by marriage into that family.

Having thus settled his affairs so much to his own honour, the interest of the public, and the regards due to his family, he was at leisure to reap the fruits of his industry and success. But he did not long enjoy this felicity, for Nov. 21, 1579, coming from the exchange to his house in Bishopsgate-street, he suddenly fell down in his kitchen, became speechless, and presently died. He was buried in his own parish church of St. Helen’s. His obsequies were performed in a very solemn manner, the corpse being attended by 100 poor men, and the like number of poor women, whom he had ordered to be cloathed in black gowns of 5s. 8d. per yard at his own expence. The charges of the funeral amounted to 800. His corpse was deposited in a vault at the north-east corner of the church, which he had before provided for himself and family, with a curious marble tomb over it; on the south and west sides of which are his own arms, and on the north and east the same impaled with those of his lady. The arms of sir Thomas, together with the City of London and Mercers company, are likewise painted in the glass of the east window of the church, above the tomb, which stood as he left it without any inscription, till 1736, when the following words, taken from the parish register, were cut on the stone that covers it, by order of the church-wardens: “Sir Thomas Gresham, knight, was buried December 15, 1579.” By his death many large estates in several counties of England, amounting at that time to the clear yearly value of 2300l. and upwards, came to his lady, who survived him many years, and continued to reside after his decease in the mansionhouse at London, in the winter, and at Osterley-park in the summer season, at which last place she died Nov. 23, 1596, very aged. Her corpse was brought to London, and buried in the same vault with her husband.

Mr. Ward has drawn sir Thomas’s character at large, and observes, that he had the happiness of a mind every way suited to his fortune, generous and benign; ready to perform any good actions and encourage them in others. He was a great friend and patron of our celebrated rnartyrologist John Fox. He was well acquainted with the ancient and several modern languages; he had a very comprehensive knowledge of all affairs relating to commerce, whether foreign or domestic; and his success was not less, being in his time esteemed trie richest commoner in England. He transacted queen Elizabeth’s mercantile affairs so constantly, that he was called “The Royal Merchant,” and his house was sometimes appointed for the reception of foreign princes upon their first arrival at London. As no one could be more ready to perform any generous actions which might contribute to the honour of this country, so he very well knew how to make the best use of them for the most laudable purposes. Nor was he less serviceable both to the queen and her ministry on other occasions, who often consulted him, and sought his advice in matters of the greatest importance relating to the welfare of the government. But the most shining part of his character appears in his public benefactions. The royal exchange was not pnly a singular ornament to the city of London, and a great convenience to the merchants, who wanted such a place to meet and transact their affairs in, but likewise contributed very much to the promotion of trade, both by the number of shops erected there, and the much greater number of the poor; who were employed in working for them. And the donation of his own mansionhouse for a seat of learning and the liberal arts, with the handsome provision made for the endowment and support of.it, was such an instance of a generous and public spirit as has been equalled by few, and must perpetuate his memory with the highest esteem and gratitude so long as any regard to learning and virtue is preserved among us. Nor ought his charities to the poor, his alms-houses, and the liberal contributions to the ten prisons and hospitals in London and Southwark, to be omitted.

His public benefactions, the royal exchange, and his mansion-house on the decease of his lady, immediately came into the hands of the two corporations, the City of London and the Mercers’ company, who, according to their trust, obtained a patent from the crown, dated Feb. 3, 1614, 12 Jacobi I. to hold them for ever upon the terms expressed in the will of the donor.

, a French poet of considerable eminence, was born 1709, at Amiens, entered among the Jesuits at 16, and quitted the society at the age of 26, about the end of J735. It was about this time his “Ver Vert” first came out, which has been so justly admired, as the production of a genius (in Rousseau’s judgment) “at once refined, embellished, ornamented;” appearing in short, “in all its perfection.” This great poet considers the author as “displaying in his familiar style, whatever is most brilliant in poetry, and every idea >vith which a complete knowledge of the world could furnish a man who had passed his whole life in it.” He thought the same of the “Chartreuse,” another of his productions, but accused its author of negligence in his other pieces, being of opinion that the familiar style did not exclude the perfection of poetry. M. Cresset was admitted into the French academy in 1748, and gave up poetry that he might devote himself wholly to works of piety, and died June 16, 1777, at Amiens, after having received letters of nobility, and been appointed historiographer of the order of St. Lazore. He married in 1751, mademoiselle Galland, daughter of a merchant of Amiens, but had no children. Besides the pieces above-mentioned, he wrote “Le Lutrin vivant;” Les Ombres;“” Epistles;“66 Odes” a poetical translation of Virgil’s Eclogues “Edward III.” a tragedy “Sidney,” and “Le Mechant,” comedies the latter of which is deservedly admired. They have all been collected in 1748, 2 vols. 12mo. Two little poems in the style of “Ver Vert” were found among his papers, one entitled “Le Gazetin;” the other, “Le Parrain Magnifique,” but not the two cantos which he had added to the Ver Vert. This last poem has been versified in English by Gilbert Cooper, and by Dr. Geddes.

Our author was not then above twenty-two years of age, so that this post may be esteemed an honourable attestation of his merit. But the nature of it did not please him; his ambition prompted him to another course of life. He had already made some advances in the queen’s favour, had attained a competent familiarity with the modern languages, and some expertness in the martial exercises of those times; these were qualifications for a foreign employment, which was more agreeable to the activity of his temper, and promised a quicker access to some of the first posts in the state. In reality he was so eager to advance his fortune in this line, that to gratify his desire, he ventured to incur his royal mistress’s displeasure, and made several attempts in it, not only with, but even without her majesty’s consent. Out of many of these we have an account of the few following from his own pen. First, when the two mighty armies of Don John and the duke Casimire were to meet in the Low-countries, he applied and obtained her majesty’s leave under her own hand, to go thither; but after his horses with all other preparations were shipped at Dover, the queen (who always discouraged these excursions) sent her messenger, sir Edward Dyer, with her mandate to stop him. He was so much vexed at this disappointment, that afterwards, when secretary Walsingham was sent ambassador in 1578, to treat with those two princes, an opportunity of seeing an affair in which so much Christian blood and so many Christian empires were concerned, was so tempting, that he resolved not to risque a denial, and therefore stole away without leave, and went over with the secretary incog. The consequence was, that at his return the queen forbade him her presence for many months. To the same ambition may also be referred his engagement with sir Philip Sidney to accompany sir Francis Drake in his last expedition but one to the WestIndies in 1515, in which they were both frustrated by the same authority. Again, when the earl of Leicester was sent general of her majesty’s forces the same year, and had given Mr. Greville the command of one hundred horse, “Then I,” to use his own words, “giving my humour over to good order, yet found that neither the intercession of this grandee, seconded with my own humble suit, and many other honourable friends of mine, could prevail against the constant course of this excellent lady (the queen) with her servants, so as I was forced to tarry behind, and for this importunity of mine to change my course, and seem to press nothing before my service about her; this princess of government as well as kingdoms made me live in her court a spectacle of disfavour too long as I conceived.”

During his excursions abroad, his royal mistress granted him the reversion of two of the best offices in the court of the marches of Wales, one of which falling to him in 1580, he met with some difficulties about the profits. In this contest he experienced the friendship of sir Philip Sidney, who by a letter written to his father’s secretary, Mr. Molyneux, April 10, 1581, prevailed on him not to oppose his cousin Greville' s title in any part or construction of his patents; and a letter of sir Francis Walsingham to the president, the next day, April 11, put an end to the opposition that had been made from another quarter. This office appears to be clerk of the signet to the council of Wales, which is said to have brought him in yearly above 2000l. arising chiefly from the processes which went out of that court, all of which are made out by that officer. He was also constituted secretary for South and North Wales by the queen’s letters patent, bearing date April 25, 1583. In the midst of these civil employments he made a conspicuous figure when the French ambassadors, accompanied by great numbers of their nobility, were in England a second time to treat of the queen’s marriage with the duke of Anjou, in 1581. Tilts and tournaments were the courtly entertainments in those days; and they were performed in the most magnificent manner on this occasion by two noblemen, beside sir Philip Sidney and Fulk Greville, who with the rest behaved so bravely as to win the reputation of a most gallant knight. In 1586 these two friends were separated by the unfortunate death of the former, who be* queathed to his dear friend one moiety of his books.

During the life of the treasurer Cecil, he obtained no advancement in the court or state; but, in 1615, some time after his death, was made under-treasurer and chancellor of the exchequer; in consequence of which he was called to the board of privy-council. In 1617 he obtained from the king a special charter, confirming all such liberties as had been granted to any of his ancestors in behalf of the town of Alcester, upon a new reserved rent of ten shillings a year; and, in 1620, was created lord Brooke of Beau* champ-court. He obtained this dignity as well by his merit and fidelity in the discharge of his offices as by his noble descent from theNevils, Willoughbys de Brook, and Beauchamps. In September 1621, he was made one of the lords of the king’s bed-chamber; and on this, resigning his post in the exchequer, he was succeeded therein by Richard Weston, afterwards earl of Portland. After the demise of king James, he continued in the privy-council of Charles I. in the beginning of whose reign he founded a historylecture in the university of Cambridge, and endowed it with a salary of lOOl. per annum. He did not long survive this last act of generosity; for, though he was a munificent patron of learning and learned men, he at last fell a sacrifice to the extraordinary outrage of a discontented domestic. The account we have of this fatal event is, that his lordship, neglecting to reward one Ralph Heywood, who had spent the greatest part of his life in his service, this attendant expostulated thereupon with his lordship in his bed-chamber, at Brook-house in Holborn; and, being severely reproved for it, presently gave his lordship a mortal stab in the back with a knife or sword; after which he withdrew into another room, and, locking the door, murdered himself with the same weapon. He died September 30, 1628, and his corpse being wrapt in lead, was conveyed from Brook-house, Holborn, to Warwick; where it was interred on the north side of the choir of St. Mary’s church, there, in his own vault, which had formerly been a chapter-house of the church; and where, upon his monument, there is this inscription: “Fulke Greville, servant to queen Elizabeth, counsellor to king James, and friend to sir Philip Sidney. Tropheum peccati.” He made that dear friend the great exemplar of his life in every thing; and Sidney being often celebrated as the patron of the muses in general, and of Spenser in particular, so we are told, lord Brooke desired to be known to posterity under no other character than that of Shakspeare’s and Ben Jonson’s master, lord-chancellor Egerton and bishop Overal’s patron. His lordship also obtained the office of clarencieux at arms for Mr. Camden, who very gratefulty acknowledged it in his life-time, and at his death left him a piece of plate in his will. He also raised John Speed from a mechanic to be an historiographer.

* Lord Orford erroneously attributes 4to, which was evidently written by to him “Sir Fulke Grevilta’s Five one of the presbyterian party, and was Yeares of king James, or the condition afterwards republishetl, with additions, of the state of England, and the rela- under the title of” The first Fourteen tion it had to other provinces,“1643, Years of king James,” 1651, 4to. died at Turin the 5th of November 1573. There are three plays extant of his: “The Treasurer’s Wife,” a comedy, in 1558; the “Death of Caesar,” a tragedy; and the “Frighted Ones, (Les Esbahis)” a comedy, both acted the same day at the college of Beauvais in 1560. Grevin, though snatched away by a premature death, had acquired a great reputation, not only as a poet, but as a physician. Some of his countrymen, speaking of his dramas, give him this favourable testimony, “that he effaced all who preceded him on the French stage, and that eight or ten such poets as he would have put it on a good footing, his versification being easy and smooth, especially in his comedies, and his plots well contrived.” His poems and plays were printed at Paris, 1561, 8vo. He left also a “Treatise on Poisons,” and another “against Antimony,” both translated into Latin, and printed in 4to. It was by his means that the absurd decree of the faculty of Paris, afterwards confirmed by parliament, against the use of antimony in medicine, was passed. He was a Calvinist, and united with Rochandieu and Florence Christian in their ingenious poem entitled “The Temple,” which they wrote against Ronsard, who had abused the Calvinists in his discourse on the Miseries of Time."

, the first and most universal vegetable anatomist and physiologist of this country, the son of the preceding, was born at Coventry. The year of his birth is not mentioned, but from some circumstances appears to have been 1628. He was brought up a presbyterian, his father having taken the covenant; and on the change of the national form of religion, at the restoration of Charles II. he was sent to study in some foreign university, where he took his degree of doctor of physic. He settled first at Coventry, and probably resided there in 1664, when, as he informs us in tht 1 preface to his Anatomy of Plants, he first directed his thoughts to the subject of that work, “upon reading some of the many and curious inventions of learned men, in the bodies of animals. For considering that both of them came at first out of the same hand, and were therefore the contrivances of the same wisdom; I thence,” says he, “fully assured myself, that it could not be a vain design to seek it in both. That so I might put somewhat upon that side the leaf which the best botanicks had left bare and empty.” Four years afterwards he consulted his brother-in-law, Dr. Henry Sampson, who encouraged him to go on, by pointing out a passage in Glisson’s book “De Hepate,” chap. 1, in which the anatomy of plants is hinted at as an unexplored, but very promising line of study for a practical observer. For some time he resided at Coventry, but determining to settle in London, he came thither about 1672. Before this his first essay on the anatomy of plants was communicated to the royal society in 1670, by bishop Wilkins, under the title of an “Idea of a Philosophical History of Plants.” It was received with the honour and attention it deserved, being ordered to be printed, and its author, in that year also, on the recommendation of the same learned divine, became a fellow of the royal society. He was appointed secretary in 1677, in which capacity he published the Philosophical Transactions from Jan. 1677-8, to Feb. in the following year. In 1680 he was made an honorary fellovr of the college of physicians. He is said to have attained to considerable practice in his profession, nor did his being a nonconformist deprive him of the credit justly due to his piety and philosophical merit, even in the worst times. He lived indeed to see various changes of opinions and professions, apparently with the tranquillity becoming a philosopher and a good man, and died suddenly, March 25, 1711.

Dr. Grew’s Anatomy of Vegetables, of Roots, and of Trunks, originally formed three separate publications in 8vo, but were subsequently collected into a folio volume, and published in 1682, with 83 plates. In this work, truly original, though Malpighi had about the same time, or rather before, pursued the same line of inquiry, scarcely any thing relative to the vegetable anatomy is left untouched. It was the character of Grew to observe every thing, and if a more philosophical observer, more aware of what is best worth remarking, be, in general estimation, a superior character, the latter is more likely to see through the false medium of dazzling theory. The works of Grew are a storehouse of facts, for the use of less original and more indolent authors. They seldom require correction, except where theory is interwoven with observation, and even his theories have passed current till very lately. His chemistry is, of course, that of his time, but his remarks on vegetable secretions, and their multifarious and peculiar properties, abound with ingenuity and originality, as well as his comparative examinations of the various kinds of fruits and seeds. If he had no correct ideas of the propulsion or direction of the sap, we must not forget that he was one of the first who adopted and illustrated the doctrine of the sexes of plants, nor did even the principles of methodical arrangement entirely escape his notice.

In 1681 Dr. Grew published a folio volume, entitled “Museum Regalis Societatis,” or a catalogue and description of the natural and artificial rarities belonging to the Royal Society, and preserved at Gresbam college. This is a scientific and descriptive catalogue, with learned references to preceding writers. It is accompanied by “the Comparative Anatomy of Stomachs and Guts begun, being several lectures read before the Royal Society in 1676.” Twenty-two plates illustrate the first part of this volume, and nine the latter, which were given to him by Daniel Coiwell, esq. the founder of the collection. The latest publication of our author was “Cosmographia Sacra, or a Discourse of the Universe, as it is the creature and kingdom of God.” He was an illustrious proof that it is the fool, and not the philosopher, “who hath said in his heart there is no God” The works of Grew were soon translated into French and Latin, but the latter very incorrectly. His funeral sermon was preached at the meeting in the Old Jewry by the rev. John Shower. It appears by this discourse that Dr. Grew illustrated his learned character by a life of strict piety, humility, and charity.

, was an illustrious personage of the blood royal of England by both parents: her grandmother on her father’s side, Henry Grey marquis of Dorset, being queen-consort to Edward IV.; and her grandmother on her mother’s side, lady Frances Brandon, being daughter to Henry VII. queen-dowager of France, and mother of Mary queen of Scots. Lady Jane was born, 1537, at Bradgate, her father’s seat in Leicestershire, and very early gave astonishing proofs of the pregnancy of her parts; insomuch that, upon a comparison with Edward VI. who was partly of the same age, and thought a kind of miracle, the superiority has been given to her in every respect. Her genius appeared in the works of her needle, in the beautiful character in which she wrote; besides which, she played admirably on various instruments of music, and accompanied them with a voice exquisitely sweet in itself, and assisted by all the graces that art could bestow. These, however, were only inferior ornaments in her character; and, as she was far from priding herself upon them, so, through the rigour of her parents in exacting them, they became her grief more than her pleasure.

Her father had himself a tincture of letters, and was a great patron of the learned. He had two chaplains, Harding, and Aylmer afterwards bishop of London, both men of distinguished learning, whom he employed as tutors to his daughter; and under whose instructions she made such a proficiency as amazed them both. Her own language she spoke and wrote with peculiar accuracy: the French, Italian, Latin, and it is said Greek, were as natural to her as her own. She not only understood them, but spoke and wrote them with the greatest freedom: she was versed likewise in Hebrew, Chaldee, and Arabic, and all this while a mere child. She had also a sedateness of temper, a quickness of apprehension, and a solidity of judgment, that enabled her not only to become the mistress of languages, but of sciences; so that she thought, spoke, and reasoned, upon subjects of the greatest importance, in a manner that surprized all. With these endowments, she had so much mildness, humility, and modesty, that she set no value upon those acquisitions. She was naturally fond of literature, and that fondness was much heightened as well by the severity of her parents in the feminine part of her education, as by the gentleness of her tutor Aylmer in this: when mortified and confounded by the unmerited chicling of the former, she returned with double pleasure to the lessons of the latter, and sought in Demosthenes and Plato, who were her favourite authors, the delight that was denied her in all other scenes of life, in which she mingled but little, and seldom with any satisfaction. It is true, her alliance to the crown, as well as the great favour in which the marquis of Dorset her father stood both with Henry VIII. and Edward VI. unavoidably brought her sometimes to court, and she received many marks of Edward’s attention; yet she seems to have continued for the most part in the country at Bradgate.

Here she was with her beloved books in 1550, when the famous Roger Ascham called on a visit to the family in August; and all the rest of each sex being engaged in a hunting-party, he went to wait upon lady Jane in her apartment, and found her reading the “Phaedon” of Plato in the original Greek. Astonished at it, after the first compliments, he asked her, why she lost such pastime as there needs must be in the park; at which smiling, she answered, “I wist all their sport in the park is but a shadow to that pleasure that I find in Plato. Alas, good folk, they never felt what true pleasure meant.” This naturally leading him to inquire how a lady of her age had attained to such a depth of pleasure both in the Platonic language and philosophy, she made the following very remarkable reply: “I will tell you, and I will tell you a truth, which perchance you will marvel at. One of the greatest benefits which ever God gave me is, that he sent me so sharp and severe parents, and so gentle a schoolmaster. For when I am in presence either of father or mother, whether I speak, keep silence, sit, stand, or go, eat, drink, he merry or sad, be sewing, playing, dancing, or doing any thing else, I am so sharply taunted, so cruelly threatened, yea presently sometimes with pinches, rips, and bohs, and other ways (which I will not name, for the honour I bear them), so without measure misordered, that 1 think myself in hell, till time come that I must go to Mr. Aylmer, who teachfcth me so gently, so pleasantly, with such fair allurements to learning, that I think all the time nothing while I am with him; and, when I am called from him I fall on weeping, because whatsoever I do else but learning is full of grief, trouble, fear, and wholly misliking unto me. And thus my book hath been so much my pleasure, and bringeth daily to me more pleasure and more, and that in respect of it all other pleasures in very deed be but trifles and troubles unto me” What reader is not melted with this speech What scholar does not envy Ascham’s felicity at this interview He was indeed very deeply affected with it, and to that impression we owe the discovery of some farther particulars concerning this lovely scholar.

If lady Jane received this letter in the country, it is probable she did not stay there long after, since some changes happened in the family which must have brought her to town; for, her maternal uncles, Henry and Charles Brandon, both dying at Buckden, the bishop of Lincoln’s palace, of the sweating sickness, her father was created duke of Suffolk, October 1551. Dudley earl of Warwick was also created duke of Northumberland the same day, and in November the duke of Somerset was imprisoned for a conspiracy against him as privy-counsellor. During this interval came the queen-dowager of Scotland from France, who, being magnificently entertained by king Edward, was also, among other ladies of the blood royal, complimented as her grandmother, by lady Jane, who was now at court, and much in the king’s favour. In the summer of 1552 the king made a great progress through some parts of England, during which, lady Jane went to pay her duty to his majesty’s sister, the lady Mary, at Newhall, in Essex; and in this visit her piety and zeal against popery prompted her to reprove the lady Anne Wharton for making a curtesy to the host, which, being carried by some officious person to the ear of the princess, was retained in her heart, so that she never loved lady Jane afterwards; and, indeed, the events of the following year were not likely to work a reconciliation.

The dukes of Suffolk and Northumberland, who were now, upon the fall of Somerset, grown to the height of their wishes in power, upon the decline of the king’s health in 1553, began to think how to prevent thui reverse of fortune which, as things then stood, they foresaw must happen upon his death. To obtain this end, no other remedy was judged sufficient but a ciiange in the succession of the crown, 'and transferring it into their own families. What other steps were taken, preparatory to this bolU attempt, may be seen in the general history, and is foreign to the plan of this memoir, which is concerned only in relating the part that was destined for lady Jane to act in the intended revolution: but this was the principal part; in reality the whole centered in her. Those excellent and amiable qualities, which had rendered her dear to all who had the happiness to know her, joined to her near affinity to the king, subjected her to become the chief tool of an ambition, notoriously not her own. Upon this very account she was married to the lord Guilford Dudley, fourth, son to the duke of Northumberland, without being acquainted with the real design of the match, which was ceJebrated with great pomp in the latter end of May, so much to the king’s satisfaction, that he contributed bounteously to the expence of it from the royal wardrobe. In the mean, time, though the populace were very far from being pleased with the exorbitant greatness of the duke of Northumberland, yet they could not help admiring the beauty and innocence which appeared in lord Guilford and his bride.

But the pomp and splendor attending their nuptials was the last gleam of joy that shone in the palace of Edward, who grew so weak in a few days after, that Northumberland thought it high time to carry his project into execution. Accordingly, in the beginning of June, he broke the matter to the young monarch; and, having first made all such colourable objections as the affair would admit against his majesty’s two sisters, Mary and Elizabeth, as well as Mary queen of Scots, he observed, that, “the lady Jane, who stood next upon the royal line, was a person of extraordinary qualities that her zeal for the reformation was unquestioned that nothing could be more acceptable to the nation than the prospect of such a princess that in. this case he was bound to set aside all partialities of blood and nearness of relation, which were inferior considerations, and ought to be over-ruled by the public good.” To corroborate this discourse, care was taken to place about the king those who should make it their business to touch frequently upon this subject, enlarge upon the accomplishments of lady Jane, and describe her with all imaginable advantages: so that at last, the king’s affections inclining to this disposition of the crown, he consented to overlook his sisters, and set aside his father’s will. Agreeably to which, a deed of settlement being drawn up In form of law' by the judges, was signed by his majesty^ and all the lords of the council.

This difficult affair once accomplished, and the letters patent having passed the seals before the close of the month, the next step was to concert the properest method for carrying this settlement into execution, and till that was done to keep it as secret as possible. To this end Northumberland formed a project, which, if it had succeeded, would have made all things easy and secure. He directed letters to the lady Mary in her brother’s name, requiring her attendance at Greenwich, where the court then was; and she had got within half a day’s journey of that place when the king expired, July 6, 1553; but, having timely notice of it, she thereby avoided the snare which had been so artfully laid to entrap her. The two dukes, Suffolk and ^Northumberland, found it necessary to conceal the king’s decease, that they might have time to gain the city of London, and to procure the consent of lady Jane, who was so far from having any hand in this business, that as yet she was unacquainted with the pains that had been taken to procure her the title of queen. At this juncture, Mary sent a letter to the privy council, in which, though she did not take the title of queen, yet she clearly asserted her right to the crown; took notice of their concealing her brother’s death, and of the practice into which they had since entered; intimating, that there was still room for reconciliation, and that, if they complied with their duty in proclaiming her queen, she could forgive and even forget what was past: but in answer to this they insisted upon the indubitable right, and their own unalterable fidelity to queen Jane, to whom they persuaded the lady Mary to submit.

These previous steps being taken, and the tower and city of London secured, the council quitted Greenwich and came to London; and July 10, in the forenoon, the two last mentioned dukes repaired to Durham-house, where the lady Jane resided with her husband, as part of Northumberland’s family. There the duke of Suffolk with much solemnity explained to his daughter the disposition the late king had made of his crown by letters patent; the clear sense the privy-council had of her right; the consent of the magistrates and citizens of London; and, in conclusion, himself and Northumberland fell on their knees, and paid their homage to her as queen of England, The poor lady, somewhat astonished at their discourse, but not at all moved by their reasons, or in the least elevated by such unexpected honours, returned them an answer to this effect: “That the laws of the kingdom and natural right standing for the king’s sisters, she would beware of burdening her weak conscience with a yoke which did belong to them that she understood the infamy of those who had permitted the violation of right to gain a sceptre that it were to mock God and deride justice, to scruple at the stealing of a shilling, and not at the usurpation of a crown. Besides,” said she, “I am not so young, nor so little read in the guiles of fortune, to suffer myself to be taken bjr them. If she enrich any, it is but to make them the subject of her spoil; if she raise others, it is but to pleasure herself with their ruins what she adored but yesterday is to-day her pastime and, if I now permit her to adorn and crown me, 1 must to-morrow suffer her to crush and tear me to pieces. Nay, with what crown does she present me! a crown which hath been violently and shamefully wrested from Catharine of Arragon, made more unfortunate by the punishment of Anne Boleyn, and others that wore it after her: and why then would you have me add my blood to theirs, and be the third victim, from whom this fatal crown may be ravished with the head that wears it But in case it should not prove fatal unto me, and that all its venom were consumed, if fortune should give me warranties of her constancy, should I be well advised to take upon me these thorns, which would dilacerate, though not kill me outright; to burden myself with a yoke, which would not fail to torment me, though I were assured not to be strangled with it My liberty is better than the chain you proffer me, with what precious stones soever it be adorned, or of what gold soever framed. I will not exchange my peace for honourable and precious jealousies, for magnificent and glorious fetters. And, if you love me sincerely and in good earnest, you will rather wish me a secure and quiet fortune, though mean, than an exalted condition, exposed to the wind, and followed by some dismal fall.”

However, she was at length prevailed upon, by the exhortations ofher father, the intercession of her mother, the artful persuasions of Northumberland, and above all, the earnest desires of her husband, whom she tenderly loved, to yield her assent to what had been and was to be done. And thus, with a heavy heart, she suffered herself to be conveyed by water to the Tower, where she entered with all the state of a queen, attended by the principal nobility, and, which is very extraordinary, her train supported by the duchess of Suffolk, her mother, in whom, if in any of this line, the right of succession remained. About six in the afternoon she was proclaimed with all due solemnities in the city; the same day she also assumed the regal, and proceeded afterwards to exercise many acts of sovereignty; but, passing over the transactions of her short reign, which are the subject of general history, it is more immediately our business to conclude this article with her behaviour on her fall. Queen Mary was no sooner proclaimed, than the duke of Suffolk, who then resided with his daughter in the Tower, went to her apartment, and, in the softest terms he could, acquainted her with the situation of their affairs, and that, laying aside the state and dignity of a queen, she must again return to that of a private person to which, with a settled and serene countenance, she made this answer “I better brook this message than my former advancement to royalty out of obedience to you and my mother, I have grievously sinned, and offered violence to myself. Now I do willingly, and as obeying the motions of my soul, relinquish the crown, and endeavour to salve those faults committed by others (if at least so great a fault can be salved) by a willing relinquishment and ingenuous acknowledgement of them.”

Thus ended her reign, but not her misfortunes. She "saw the father of her husband, with all his family, and many of the nobility and gentry, brought prisoners to the tower for supporting her claim to the crown; and this grief must have met with some accession from his being soon after brought to the block. Before the end of the month, she had the mortification of seeing her own father, the duke of Suffolk, in the same circumstances with herself; but her mother, the duchess, not only remained exempt from all punishment, but had such an interest with the queen as 10 procure the duke his liberty on the last day of the month. Lady Jane and her husband, being stiil in confinement, were Nove'mber 3, 1553, carried from the Tower to Guildhall with Cranmer and others, arraigned and convicted of high treason before judge Morgan, who pronounced on them sentence of death, die remembrance of which afterwards affected him so far, that he died ravingHowever, the strictness of their confinement was mitigated in December, by a permission to take the air in the queen’s garden, and other little indulgences. This might give some gleams of hope; and there are reasons to believe the queen would have spared her life, if Wyat’s rebellion had not happened; but her father’s being engaged in that rebellion gave the ministers an opportunity of persuading the queen, that she could not be safe herself, while lady Jane and her husband were alive: yet Mary was not brought without much difficulty to take them off. The news made no great impression upon lady Jane the bitterness of death was passed she bad expected it long, and was so well prepared to meet her fate, that she was very little discomposed.

But the queen’s charity hurt her more than her justice. The day first fixed for her death was Friday February the 9th; and she had, in some measure, taken leave of the world by writing a letter to her unhappy father, who she heard was more disturbed with the thoughts of being the author of her death than with the apprehension of his own*. In this serene frame of mind, Dr. Feckenham, abbot of Westminster, came to her from the queen, who was very desirous she should die professing herself a papist, as her father-in-law had done. The abbot was indeed a very fit instrument, if any had been fit for the purpose, having, with an acute wit and a plausible tongue, a great tenderiless in his nature. Lady Jane received him with much civility, and behaved towards him with so much calmness and sweetness of temper, that he could not help bein overcome with her distress: so that, either mistaking or pretending to mistake her meaning, he procured a respite of her execution till the 12th. When he acquainted her with it, she told him, “that he had entirely misunderstood her sense of her situation; that, far from desiring her death might be delayed, she expected and wished for it as the period of her miseries, and her entrance into eternal happiness.” Neither did he gain any thing upon her in regard to popery; she heard him indeed patiently, but answered all his arguments with such strength, clearness, and steadiness of mind, as shewed plainly that religion had been her principal care . On Sunday evening, which was the last she was to spend in this world, she wrote a letter in the Greek tongue, as some say, on the blank leaves at the end of a testament in the same language, which she bequeathed as a legacy to her sister the lady Catharine Grey; a piece which, if we had no other left, it is said, were sufficient to render her name immortal. In the morning, the lord Guilford earnestly desired the officers, that he might take his last fare well of her; which though they willingly permitted, yet upon notice she advised the contrary, “assuring him that such a meeting would rather add to his afflictions then increase his quiet, wherewith they had prepared their souls for the stroke of death; that he demanded a lenitive which would put fire into the wound, and that it was to be feared her presence would rather weaken than strengthen him that he ought to take courage from his reason, and derive constancy from his own heart that if his soul were not firm and settled, she could not settle it by her eyes, nor conform it by her words that he should do well to remit this interview to the other world that there, indeed, friendships were happy, and unions indissoluble, and that theirs would be eternal, if their souls carried nothing with them of terrestrial, which might hinder them from rejoicing.” All she could do was, to give him a farewell out of a window, as he passed to the place of his dissolution, which he suffered on the scaffold on Tower-hill with much Christian meekness. She likewise beheld his dead body wrapped in a linen cloth, as it passed under her window to the chapel within the Tower.

And, about an hour after, she was led to a scaffold: she was attended by Feckenham, but was observed not to give much heed to his discourses, keeping her eyes stedfastly fixed on a book of prayers which she had in her hand. After some short recollection, she saluted those who were present, with a countenance perfectly composed: then, taking leave of Dr. Feckenham, she said, “God will abundantly requite you, good Sir, for your humanity to me, though your discourses gave me more uneasiness than all the terrors of my approaching death.” She next addressed herself to the spectators in a plain and short speech; after which, kneeling down, she repeated the Miserere in English. This done, she stood up and gave to her women her gloves and handkerchief, and to the lieutenant of the Tower her Prayer-book. In untying her gown, the executioner offered to assist her; but she desired he would let her alone; and turning to her women, they undressed, and gave her a handkerchief to bind about her eyes. The executioner, kneeling, desired her pardon, to which she answered, el most willingly.“He desired her to stand upon the straw; which bringing her within sight of the block, she said,” I pray dispatch me quickly;“adding presently after,” Will you take it off before I lay me down“The executioner answered,” No, madam.“Upon this, the handkerchief being bound close over her eyes, she began to feel for the block, to which she was guided by one of the spectators. When she felt it, she stretched herself forward, and said,” Lord, into thy hands I commend my spirit;" and immediately her head was separated at one stroke.

Her fate was universally deplored even by the persons best-affected to queen Mary; and, to a woman of any feeling, it must certainly have given much disquiet to begin her reign with such an unusual effusion of blood; especially in the present case of a near relation, one formerly honoured with her friendship and favour, who had indeed usurped, but without desiring or enjoying, the royal diaclem which she assumed, by the constraint of an ambitious father and an imperious mother, and which at the first motion she chearfully and willingly resigned. This made her exceedingly lamented at home and abroad; the fame of her learning and virtue having reached over Europe, excited many commendations, and some express panegyrics in different nations and different languages. Immediately after her death, there came out a piece, entitled, “The precious Remains of Lady Jane Grey,” in 4to.

, an ingenious and learned English divine, the son of John Grey of Newcastle, was born there in 1694, and in 1712 was entered of Lincoln college, Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. May 15, 1716, and that of M. 4- January 16, 1718-19. May 1, he was ordained deacon, and priest April 10, 172Q, by Crew bishop of Durham, to whom he was chaplain and secretary, and who gave him, in 1721, the rectory of Hinton, near Brackley, in Northamptonshire; and obtained for him, from lord Willoughby de Broke, the rectory of Kimcote in Leicestershire. ' He was alsp a prebendary of St. Paul’s. In 1746, he was official and commissary of the archdeaconry of Leicester. In 1730, he published at Oxford a “Visitation-Sermon” and, the same year, '< Memoria Technica or a new Method of artificial Memory“a fourth edition of which came out in 1756. At this time also appeared his” System of English Ecclesiastical Law, extracted from the Codex Juris Ecclesiastic! Anglican!“of bishop Gibson, 8vo. This was for the use of young students designed for orders; and for this the university gave him the degree of D. D. May 28, 1731. He printed an assize sermon in 1732, called” The great Tribunal,“and in 1736, was the author of a large anonymous pamphlet, under the title of” The miserable and distracted State of Religion in England, upon the Downfall of the Church established,“8vo and, the same year, printed another Visitation- Sermon. He also published” A new and easy Method of learning Hebrew without points, 1738;“” Historia Josephi,“and” Paradigmata Verborum, 1719;“” Liber Jobi, 1742;“”Answer to Warburton’s Remarks,“1744;” The last Words of David,“1749;” Nova Methodus Hebraice discendi diligentius recognita & acl Usum Scholarum accornmodata, &c.“1751;” A Sermon at the opening of Steane chapel, Northampt.“1752; and, lastly, an English translation of Mr. Hawkins Browne’s poem” De Animi Immortalitate,“1753. He died Feb. 28, 1771, in his 77th year. He married Joyce, youngest daughter of the rev. John Thicknesse of Brazen-nose-college, Oxford, and sister of the late Philip Thicknesse, esq. by whom he left three daughters, the eldest of whom married Dr. Philip Lloyd, dean of Norwich, and was well-known for her genius in working in worsted, and for her painted windows in that cathedral. Dr. Grey was buried at Hinton, as is his widow, who died Jan. 12, 1794, aged eighty-nine. His” Memoria Technica" was at one time a very popular book, and the system has lately in part been revived by a foreigner, which has been the means of again directing the public attention to Dr. Grey’s book; but it seems agreed that such helps are of very little substantial efficacy, and that attention and exercise are the only means to assist or prolong memory. Dr. Grey was a man of piety and liberality, as appears by his frequent correspondence with Dr. Doddndge.

, LL. D. an English divine, and miscellaneous writer, was of a Yorkshire family, originally from France. He was born in 1687, and was admitted a pensioner in Jesus college, Cambridge, April 18, 1704, but afterwards removed to Trinity-ball, where he was admitted scholar of the house, Jan. 6, 1706-7; LL. B. 1709 LL. D. 1720; and though he was never fellow of that college, he was elected one of the trustees for Mr. Ayloffe’s benefaction to it. He was rector of Houghton Conquest in Bedfordshire: and vicar of St. Peter’s and St. Giles’s parishes in Cambridge, where he usually passed the winter, and the rest of his time at Ampthill, the neighbouring market-town to his living. He died Nov. 25, 1766, at Ampthill, and was buried at Houghton Conquest. Very little of his history has descended to us. How he spent his life will appear by a list of his works. He is said to have been of a most amiable, sweet, and communicative disposition; most friendly to his acquaintance, and never better pleased than when performing acts of friendship and benevolence. Being in the commission of the peace, and a man of reputable character, he was much courted for his interest in elections. He was not, however, very active on those occasions, preferring literary retirement. His works were, 1. “A Vindication of the Church of England, in answer to Mr. Pearce’s Vindication of the Dis^ senters; by a Presbyter of the Church of England.” 1720, 8vo. 2. “Presbyterian Prejudice displayed,” 1722, 8vo. 3. “A pair of clean Shoes and Boots for a Dirty Baronet; or an answer to Sir Richard Cox,” 1722. 4. “The Knight of Dumbleton foiled at his own weapons, &c. In a Letter to Sir Richard Cocks, knt. By a Gentleman and no Knight,” 1723. 5. “A Century of eminent Presbyterians: or a Collection of Choice Sayings, from the public sermons before the two houses, from Nov. 1641 to Jan. 31, 1648, the day after the king was beheaded. By a Lover of Episcopacy,” 1723, 6. “A Letter of Thanks to Mr. Benjamin Bennet,” 1723. This Bennet published “A memorial of the Reformation,” full of gross prejudices against the established church, and “A defence of it.” 7. “A Caveat against Mr. Benj. Bennet, a mere pretender to history and criticism. By a lover of history,” 1724, 8vo. 8. “A Defence of our ancient and modern Historians against the frivolous cavils of a late pretender to. Critical History, in which the false quotations smd unjust inferences of the anonymous author are confuted and exposed in the manner they deserve, la two parts,” 1725, 4vo. In reply, Oldmixon, the critical historian alluded to, published “A Review of Dr. Zachary Grey’s Defence of our ancient and modern historians. Wherein, instead of dwelling upon his frivolous cavils, false quotations, unjust inferences, &c it is proved (to his glory be it spoken) that there is not a book in the English tongue, which contains so many falsehoods in so many pages. Nori vitiosus homo es, Zachary, sed vitium. By the author,” &c. y. “An Appendix by way of Answer to the Critical Historian’s Review,” 1725. 10. * f A Looking-glass for Fanatics, or the true picture of Fanaticism; by a gentleman of the university of Cambridge,“1725. 11.” The Ministry of the Dissenters proved to be null and void from Scripture and antiquity,“1725. 12. In 1732 he wrote a preface to his relation dean Moss’s sermons,” by a learned hand.“Mr. Masters in his history of C. C. C. C. ascribes this to Dr. Snape, who might perhaps have been editor of the sermons, but it was written by Dr. Grey. 13.” The spirit of Infidelity detected, in answer to Barbeyrac, with a defence of Dr. Waterland,“1735, 8vo. 14.” English Presbyterian eloquence. By an admirer of monarchy and episcopacy,“1736, 8vo. 15.” Examination of Dr. Chandler’s History of Persecution,“1736, 8vo. 16.” The true picture of Quakerism,“1736. 17.” Caveat against the Dissenters,“1736, 8vo. 18.” An impartial Examination of the second volume of Mr. Daniel Neal’s History of the Puritans,“1736, 8vo. The first volume of Neal had been examined by Dr. Madox, assisted in some degree by Dr. Grey, who published his examination of the third volume in 1737, and that of the fourth in 1739. J 9.” An examination of the fourteenth chapter of Sir Isaac Newton’s Observations upon the prophecies of Daniel,“1736, 8vo. This is in answer to sir Isaac’s notion of the rise of Saintworship. 20.” An attempt towards the character of the Royal Martyr, king Charles I.; from authentic vouchers,“1738. 21.” Schismatics delineated from authentic vouchers, in reply to Neal, with Dowsing' s Journal, &c. By Philalethes Cantabrigiensis,“1739, 8vo. 22.” The Quakers and Methodists compared,“&c. 1740. 23.” A Review of Mr. Daniel Neil’s History of the Puritans, with a Postscript. In a letter to Mr. David Jennings;“a pamphlet, Cambridge, 174-4. 24.” Hudibras with large annotations, and a prelate,“&c. 1744, 2 vols. 8vo. 2b.” A serious address to Lay Methodists: by a sincere Protestant,“1745, 8vo. 27.” Popery in its proper colours, with a list of Saints invocated in England before the Reformation,“17, 8vo. 28,” Remarks upon a late edition of Shakspeare, with a long string of emendations borrowed by the celebrated editor from the Oxford edition without acknowledgement. To which is prefixed, a Defence of the late sir Thomas Hanmer, bart. addressed to the rev. Mr. Warburton, preacher of Lincoln’s-Inn,“8vo, no date, but about 1745. 29.” A word or two of Advice to William Warburton, a dealer in many words; by a friend. With an Appendix, containing a taste of William’s Spirit of Railing,“1746, 8vo. 30.” A free and familiar Letter to that great refiner of Pope and Shakspeare, the rev. William Warburton, preacher at Lincoln’s-Inn. With Remarks upon the epistle of friend W. E. (query if not T. E. i. e. Thomas Edwards). In which his unhandsome treatment of this celebrated writer is exposed in the manner it deserves. By a Country Curate,“1750, 8vo, 31.” A Supplement to Hudibras,“1752, 8vo. 32.” Critical, historical, and explanatory notes on Shakspeare, with emendations on the text and metre,“1755, 2 vols. 8vo. 33.” Chronological account of Earthquakes,“1757, 8vo. In 1756 he assisted iVIr. Whalley in his edition of Shakspeare; he had also contributed to Mr. Peck’s” Desiderata,“and” Life of Cromwell," and collected some materials for a Life of Baker, the Cambridge antiquary, which were afterwards enlarged and published by the rev. Robert Masters. Dr. Grey left some other Mss. and a collection of letters, now in Mr. Nichols’s possession.

From this copious account of Dr. Grey’s literary employments, an idea may be formed of his character and sentiments. It would appear that in early life he had studied ffce history of the church to which he belonged, particularly during the seventeenth century when she suf* fered the severest shock; and having examined into the personal history of the artful agents, as well as the more artful means by which the hierarchy and civil government were overthrown, conceived an implacable dislike to the whole body of non-conformists, which by an easy transition, he continued towards their immediate successors, the dissenters. Finding the latter frequently employed in vindicating the cause of republican church-government, 'and bestowing all their pity on those who suffered by the restoration, without any notice of those whom they made to suffer by the previous revolution, he directed his power* of controversy to some of those advocates, and by his laborious researches into the private history, annals, and pamphlets of the Cromwell period, was enabled to become a very formidable antagonist. His Examinations of Neal are, in this respect, the most valuable of his writings, and strict impartiality will be found to require a close attention, in the readers of Neal, to what Dr. Grey and his precursor bishop Madox have advanced. The same researches which Dr. Grey had occasion to pursue in answering Neal and others of that party, seem to have furnished him with the matter of the notes by which he afterwards illustrated his edition of Butler’s Hudibras, a work which will probably preserve his memory to a very long date, as his plan was entirely new. Yet, he did not escape attacks, both serious and jocular on this publication. Warburton, in his preface to Shakspeare, “hardly thinks there ever appeared, in any learned language, so execrable an heap of nonsense, under the name of Commentaries, as hath lately been given us on this satiric poet:” and Fielding, in the preface to his “Voyage to Lisbon,” has introduced “the laborious much-read Dr. Zachary Grey, of whose redundant notes on Hudibras he shall only say, that it is, he is confident, the single book extant, in which above 500 authors are quoted, not one of which could be found in the collection of the late Dr. Mead.” But Dr. Warton has very well observed, that, “if Butler is worth reading, he is worth explaining; and the researches used for so valuable and elegant a purpose merit the thanks of genius and candor, not the satire of prejudice and ignorance.”

The above attack by Warburton produced, from Dr. Grey, the pamphlets mentioned above, No. 28, 29, and 30, in which there is much of the grossness as well as the acuteness of the controversial spirit. Warburton’s conduct, however, appears wanton and unprovoked, for he not only was at one time on good terms with Grey, and had himself some thoughts of illustrating Hudibras, but had actually supplied Grey with the result of his own inquiries, and was therefore a contributor to “so execrable an heap of nonsense;” for which Grey makes very grateful acknowledgment in his preface. To account for Warburton’s contempt for a commentator whom he had thus assisted, and for a plan which he meant to have executed (perhaps as he executed his plan on Shakspeare), we are inclined to prefer the conjeeture of a gentleman whom extensive reading, reflection, and taste have constituted an able umpire in literary quarrels. Mr. D'Israeli thinks that V/arburton’s motive was jealousy, and that “though he had naif reluctantly yielded the few notes he had prepared, his proud heart sickened when he beheld the amazing subscription Grey obtained for his first edition of Hudibras he received for that work 1500l. a proof that J;his publication was felt as a want by the public.” Grey, “however, may be entitled to a higher merit than that of gratifying the public taste by his edition of Hudibras. He was unquestionably the founder of that species of commentary which has since been so successfully employed in illustrating Shakspeare, by bringing together all the information, the contemporary writing, and the style, manners, prejudices, and peculiarities of the age, however distant, in which the author to be explained wrote. And although this example has been followed, perhaps in some instances, to a degree of minuteness that exposes the commentator to the ridicule of the wits, and although it must be allowed that some of the Shakspeare commentators have” bestowed all their tediousness“upon us with a too liberal hand, yet it cannot be controverted, that they have pursued the only just and legitimate process for elucidating the writings of distant ages. The merit of this example, therefore, is due to Grey, and is that on which his fame as a writer and literary antiquary will rest, long after his other publications, with the exception perhaps of his Examinations of Neal, are forgotten. He had also made some progress in an edition of Shakspeare upon the plan of his Hudibras, which we presume his advanced age prevented his completing. What he had collected, however, appeared in his” Critical, historical, and explanatory notes“above-mentioned. Of this work Dr. Johnson says that” what Dr. Grey undertook he has well enough performed, but as he neither attempts judicial nor emendatory criticism, he employs rather his memory than his sagacity;“and he adds,” It were to be wished that all would endeavour to imitate his modesty, who have not been able to surpass his knowledge?."

, surnamed Mofa, was a learned civilian of Padua, who, after being a law professor at Padua, Pisa, and Pavia, as far as 1557, left Italy, in order to make a public profession of the Protestant religion; but who, like some other Italian converts, imbibed the heresy of the Antitrinitarians. After having been professor of civil law at Tubingen for some time, he quitted the employment, in order to escape the punishment he would have incurred, had he been convicted of his errors. He was seized at Bern, where he feigned to renounce his opinions, in order to escape very severe treatment; but, as he relapsed again, and openly favoured the heretics, who had been driven from Geneva, he would, as Beza intimates, certainly have been put to death, if he had not died of the plague in September 1567, or as others say in 1564. In a journey to Geneva, during the trial of Servetus, he desired to have a conference with Calvin, which Calvin at first refused, but afterwards granted; and then Gribaldus, though he came according to the appointed time and place, refused to confer, because Calvin would not give him his hand, till they should be agreed on the articles of the Trinity. He was afterwards cited to appear before the magistrates, in order to give an account of his faith; but, his answers not being satisfactory, he was commanded to leave the city. He wrote several works, which are esteemed by the public; as “Commentarii in legem de rerum mistura, & de jure fisci,” printed in Italy. “Commentarii in pandectas juris,” at Lyons. “Commentarii in aliquot praecipuos Digesti,” &c. Francfort, 1577, fol. “Historia Francisci Spira?, cui anno 1548, familiaris aderat, secundum quae ipse viclit & audivit,” Basil, 1550. Sleidan declares, that Gribaldus was a spectator of the sad condition of the apostate Spira, and that he wrote and published an account of his case and sufferings. “De methoclo ac ratione studendi in jure civili libri tres,” Lyons, 1544 and 1556. He is said to have written this last book in a week.

, an eminent professor of law, was born in 1632, at Leipsic. His father, who was minister in that city, dying in 1685, the celebrated Mencke married the widow, and took great care of her son’s education. Gribner assisted in the “Leipsic Journal,” was professor of law at Wittenburgh, then at Dresden, and finally at Leipsic, where he was chosen to succeed M. Mencke. He died in 1734. Besides several academical dissertations, he left < Principia processes Judiciarii“” Principia Juris* prudentite naturalis;^ a small work much esteemed; *' Opuscula Juris public! et privatl," He was also a benefactor to the university of Letpsic, by leaving a considerable legacy co the library, a sum of money as a provision for the widows of the professors, and an annual sum as an exhibition >Y,r a. law student.

, a very extraordinary woman, (whose maiden name is nowhere mentioned), was born in the county of Kilkenny in Ireland, and married to Mr. George Grierson, printer in Dublin. She died in 1733, at the age of twenty-seven; and was allowed to be an excellent scholar, not only in Greek and Roman literature, but in history, divinity, philosophy, and mathematics. She gave a proof of her knowledge in the Latin tongue by her dedication of the Dublin edition of Tacitus to lord Carteret; and by that of Terence to his son, to whom she likewise wrote a Greek epigram. Dr. Harwood esteems her Tacitus one of the best edited books ever published. Among the editions of her husband’s press, is a very fine one of Dupin’s Ecclesiastical History, 1724, 3 vols. folio, a rare book in this country. Mrs. Grierson composed some poems in English, several of which are inserted by Mrs. Barber amongst her own. When lord Carteret was lordlieutenant of Ireland, he obtained a patent for Mr. Grierson, her husband, to be the king’s printer; and, to distinguish and reward her uncommon merit, had her life inserted in it. Besides her parts and learning, she was also a woman of great virtue and piety. Mrs. Pilkington has recorded some particulars of her, and tells us, that, “when about eighteen years of age, she was brought to her father, to be instructed in midwifery; that she was mistress of Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and French, and understood the mathematics as well as most men: and what,” says Mrs. Pilkington, “made these extraordinary talents yet more surprising was, that her parents were poor illiterate country people; so that her learning appeared like the gife poured out on the apostles, of speaking all the languages without the pains of study.” Mrs. Pilkington inquired of her, where she had gained this prodigious knowledge: to which Mrs. Grierson sail, that “she had received some little instruction from the minister of the parish, when she, could spare time from her needle-work, to which she was closely kept by her mother.” Mrs. Pilkington adds, that “she wrote elegantly both in verse and prose; that her turn was chiefly to philosophical or divine subjects; that her piety was not inferior to her learning; and that some of the most delightful hours she herself had ever passed were in the conversation of this female philosopher.” Her son, who was also his majesty’s printer at Dublin, and instructed by her, was a man of uncommon learning, great wit, and vivacity. He died in Germany, at the age of twenty-seven. Dr. Johnson highly respected his abilities, and often observed, that he possessed more extensive knowledge than any man of his years he had ever known. His industry was equal to his talents, he particularly excelled in every species of philological learning, and was perhaps the best critic of his time.

, a lady once of some note a a writer of novels and plays, whose maiden name was Griffith, was of Welch descent, and early in life married Richard Griffith, a gentleman of a good family, but reduced fortune, in Ireland. The first performance by which she became known was entitled “The Letters of Henry and Frances,” which are said to contain the genuine correspondence between her and her husband before their marriage, and for some years after. They were published at the particular request of Margaret countess of Cork, who was one of her friends, and privy to her connexion with Mr. Griffith, which was at first kept secret. From these letters, a few particulars of the private history of the parties may be collected. Mr. Griffith appears to have received no regular education, although in his youth he had evinced some talents for poetry; he introduced himself, however, by degrees into “the genteelest and most reputable company;” but tired of a city life, passed several years with a relation in the country of Ireland, where he read, learned French, and “studied husbandry philosophically.” He then engaged in a farm and the linen manufacture; and about 1760 appears to have received a place from the duke of Bedford, at that time lord lieutenant of Ireland. His acquaintance with Mrs. Griffith was accidental, and commenced on his parr, to use his own phrase, “as an act of gallantry” but rinding “no probability of success,” a strange declaration and being enafrioured with her writings, conversation, and character, became, at last, a real and honourable lover, but declined matrimony for several years, as she had no fortune, and his expectations from his father were much larger than they were likely to turn out. At length, however, they married, about the year 1752; and their first publication was this correspondence, published by subscription, and not very successful with any class of readers, not even the sentimentalists, for whom it was chiefly calculated. Some of the letters, however, are of a superior cast, and contain many sensible remarks on books, men, and manners. Their next publication, which was also written in conjunction, was “Two Novels, in Letters, 4 vols. the first and second, entitled Delicate Distress, by Frances the third and fourth, entitled the Gordian Knot, by Henry,” 1769, 12mo. Both these are of a strict moral tendency; but, like the correspondence of the authors, too much tinged with the pedantry of quotation and philosophizing, instead of natural description and feeling. Previously to this, Mr. Griffith had published in 1764, “The Triumvirate; or the authentic Memoirs of A. B. and C.” 2 vols. 12mo, a novel of so Joose a kind, that even his wife could not venture to recommend it to the fair sex, and yet adds her opinion that “every gentleman will read it with pleasure, and I trust without any injury to his morals.” Of Mr. Griffith’s performances we hear no more, nor have been able to ascertain the time of his death. Mrs. Griffith’s other novels were “Lady Barton,” and “Juliana HarJey.” She also wrote some dramas which had various success, but none of them have preserved their station on the stage. One of her most agreeable publications svas “The Morality of Shakspeare’s Drama illustrated,” 1775, 8vo. She published also some translations, “The Adventures of Pierre Viaud,” and the “Letters of Ninon de L'Enclos,” c. She died Jan. 3, 1793, at Millecenr, in the county of Kildare. She was unquestionably a woman of considerable literary talents, but does not appear to have found in her lover and husband the judgment which could give them a proper direction. Nor did he contribute much to bar happiness in his latter days. He had long accustomed himself to the cant of sentiment, which is too frequently mistaken for genuine moral feeling. When in his grand climacteric, he seduced a girl of fortune and consequence, with whom he lived the reminder of his days. The libehine notions in his “ Triumvirate” appear to have been more predominant sense he affected to entertain of pure morals in his “Letters.”

, called Bolognese, was born at Bologna in 1606, and studied under A. Caracci, to whom he was related. He was a good designer of figures, but became chiefly distinguished for his landscapes. When he arrived at Rome, Innocent X. did justice to his merit, employed him to paint in the Vatican and the Q,uirinal, and even in churches. This pope used to visit him when at work, and talk familiarly with him. His reputation reached cardinal Mazarine at Paris, who sent for him, settled a large pension on him, and employed him for three years in embellishing hi? palace and the Louvre, by the order of Lewis XIII. The troubles of the state, and the clamours raised against the cardinal, whose party he warmly espoused, put him so much in danger, that his friends advised him to retire among the Jesuits, for whom he painted a decoration for the exposition of the sacrament during the holy days, according to the custom of Rome. This piece was much relished at Paris: the king honoured it with two visits, and commanded him to paint a similar piece for his chapel at the Louvre. Grimaldi after that returned to Italy, and at his arrival at Rome found his great patron Innocent X. dead; but his two successors Alexander VII, and Clement IX. honoured him equally with their friendship, and found him variety of employment. His chief power lay in landscape, though he designed figures well, and his pencil equalled his design, light, and flowing with great depth of colour, bolder in the masses and the dash of bushy foliage than Caracci’s, but perhaps tc-o green. The gallery Colon n a, at Rome, has many of his views, which remained chiefly in Italy, less known on this side of the Alps than those of Poussin and Claude. He understood architecture, and has engraved in aqita fortis forty-two landscapes in an excellent manner, five of which are after Titian. Grimaldi was amiable in his manners, as well as skilful in his profession: he was generous without profusion, respectful to the great without meanness, and charitable to the poor. The following instance of his benevolence may serve to characterise the man. A Sicilian gentleman, who had retired from Messina with his daughter, during the troubles of that country, was reduced to the misery of wanting bread. As he lived over-against him, Grimaldi was soon informed of it; and in the dusk of the evening, knocking at the Sicilian’s door, without making himself known, tossed in money and retired. The thing happening more than once, raised the Sicilian’s curiosity to know his benefactor; who, finding him out, by hiding himself behind the door, fell down on his knees to thank the hand that had relieved him: Grimaldi remained confused, offered him his house, and continued his friend till his death. He died of a dropsy at Rome in 1G60, and left a considerable fortune among six children; of which the youngest, named Alexander, was a pretty good painter.

, a learned cardinal, was born at Venice in 1460. His father being procurator of St. Mark, and afterwards doge of the city, the son was soon brought into public notice, and employed by the state in important offices. In 1493 he was raised to the purple by pope Alexander VI. having previously acquired great fame on account of the piety which he displayed towards his father, who was commander of a fleet, and being defeated by the Turks, was imprisoned and treated with great rigour. The son offered to take his place, which being refused, he attended him in prison, and rendered him all the service in his power. Grimani was also an eminent patron of the fine arts: he collected a choice and valuable library, consisting of eight thousand volumes in all languages, which, at his decease, in 1523, he bequeathed to the canons regular of St. Salvadore, in Venice. It was afterwards increased by the addition of many valuable works by the cardinal patriarch Marino Grimani, and was preserved until nearly the end of the seventeenth century, when it was unfortunately destroyed by fire. Dominick Grimani also made a fine collection of statues, and other remains of antiquity. In 1509, he was visited by Erasmus, who relates the particulars of. his reception, in one of his letters, with interesting minuteness, and afterwards dedicated to him his “Paraphrasis in hlpistol. Pauli ad Romanes.” On another occasion we find Erasmus soliciting cardinal Grimani for a copy of Origen’s commentary on the Psalms, a translation of which he had been urged to undertake by Warham, archbishop of Canterbury. Grimani is said to have transiated irom the Greek some homilies of Chrysostom.

, a poet of considerable rank in his time, was a native of Huntingdonshire, and received the first part of his academical education at Christ’s college in Cambridge, where he became B. A. in 1539 or 1540. Removing to Oxford in 1542, he was elected fellow of Merton college; but, about 1547, having opened a rhetorical lecture in the refectory of Christ church, then newly founded, he was transplanted to that society, which gave the greatest encouragement to such students as were distinguished for their proficiency in criticism and philology. The same year he wrote a Latin tragedy, which probably was acted in the college, entitled “Archipropheta, sive Joannes Baptista,” dedicated to the dean, Richard Cox, and printed Colon. 1548, 8vo. In 1548, he explained all the four books of Virgil’s Georgics in a regular prose Latin paraphrase, in the public hall of his college, which was printed at London in 1591, 8vo. He wrote also explanatory commentaries, or lectures, on the <c Andria“of Terence, the Epistles of Horace, and many pieces of Cicero, perhaps for the same auditory. He translated Tully’s Offices into English, which he dedicated to the learned Thirlby, bishop of Ely, printed at London, 1553, 8vo, and reprinted in 1574 and 1596. He also made translations from some of the Greek classics; but these, Mr. Warton thinks, were never published; among others was the” Cyropaedia.“Bale mentions some plays and poems, but not with sufficient precision to enable us to know whether they were in Latin or English. It is allowed, however, that he was the second English poet after lord Surrey who wrote in blank verse, and added to Surrey’s style new strength, elegance, and modulation. In the disposition and conduct of his cadences, says our poetical historian, he often approaches to the legitimate structure of the improved blank verse, although he is not quite free from those dissonancies and asperities, which in his time adhered to the general character and state of English diction. Both Mr. Warton and Mr. Ellis have given specimens of his poetry from” The Songes written by N. G.“annexed to the” Songes and Soanettes of uncertain Auctours“in TottelPs edition of lord Surrey’s Poems (reprinted in the late edition of the English poets). As a writer of verses in rhyme, Mr. Warton thinks that Grimbold yields to none of his contemporaries, for a masterly choice of chaste expression, and the concise elegancies of didactic versification; and adds that some of the couplets in his” Praise of Measure-keeping,“or moderation, have all the smartness which mark the modern style of sententious poetry, and would have done honour to Pope’s ethic epistles. It is supposed that he died about 1563. Wood and Tanner, and after them, Warton, are decidedly of opinion that he is the same person, called by Strype” one Grimbold," who was chaplain to bishop Ridley, and who was employed by that prelate while in prison, to translate into English Laurentius Valla’s book against the fiction of Constantine’s Donation, with some other popular Latin pieces against the papists. In Mary’s reign, it is said that he was imprisoned for heresy, and saved his life by recantation. This may be true of the Grimbold mentioned by Strype, but we doubt whether he be the same with our poet, who is mentioned in high terms by Bale, on account of his zeal for the reformed doctrines, without a syllable of his apostacy, which Bale must have known, and would not have concealed.

, a celebrated lawyer, and master of the rolls in the seventeenth century, descended from a very ancient family, was born at Brad fieldball, near Manningtree, in Essex, about 1594. Where he had his early education is not known, but he studied law in Lincoln’s-inn, and practised with considerable success. In August 1638 he was chosen recorder of Colchester, and representative for that place in the parliament which met at Westminster April 13, 1640, and again in the parliament which met Nov. 3 of the same year. The measures he at first supported were those of the party which finally overthrew the government, and although he argued chiefly against such abuses as might have been reformed by a better understanding between the conflicting parties, yet his violence against the court, and particularly a bitter speech he made against archbishop Laud, seem to prove that he was too much swayed by the popular clamour of the times, and too readily became one of the committees for the redress of grievances, real or imaginary, as well as for bringing those to punishment who were most obnoxious to the people. In 1642 he was made one of the lieutenants of the county of Essex, in pursuance of the parliament’s ordinance for the militia, and in August the same year, came down to Colchester and proclaimed sir John Lucas a traitor, for intending to assist the king. When he came, however, to penetrate more deeply into the designs of the reformers, he began to withdraw his countenance from them, and when in 1647 he was appointed one of the commissioners to treat with the king at Newport, in the isle of Wight, his majesty had every reason to be pleased with his candour and moderation. On his return to parliament, he argued for accepting the king’s concessions, and being at the same time one of the commissioners for disbanding the army, was, among others, forcibly excluded from the house by a party of soldiers. After the murder of the king, he went abroad for some time, but in 1656 we find him elected to Cromwell’s parliament as one of the sixteen, representatives for the county of Essex, but not approved by the council, against whose decision he signed a spirited re* monstrance. In February 1659-60 he was chosen one of the new council of state, in whom the executive power was lodged by the remains of the long parliament that restored Charles II.; and a few months after, he was also chosen speaker of the house of commons in what was called the “Healing parliament” which met April 25, 1660. In May following, he waited on the king at Breda, and on his majesty’s arrival, and the settlement of the government, was appointed master of the roils Nov. 3, 1660, which office he filled for nearly twenty-four years with great ability and integrity. He was aiso appointed in the same year chief steward of the borough or St. AlbanV, and recorder of Harwich, and from the restoration to the time or his death, continued to represent Colchester in parliament. For several years he entertained Dr. Gilbert Burntt, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, as his chaplain, or preacher at the rolls; and much assisted him in his “History of the Reformation.” Burnet in his “Own Times” has given an affectionate and probably faithful character of sir Harbottle, who appears to have been a man of real worth, piety, and moderation in his latter days. Sir Harbottle died Dec. 31, 1683, aged about ninety, and was buried in the chancel of St. Michael’s church, St. Alban’s. He was twice married, first to Mary, daughter of sir George Croke, an edition of whose “Reports” he published, 3 vols. folio; and secondly to Anne, daughter of sir Nathaniel Bacon, of Culford-hall, in Suffolk. Other particulars of his family may be seen in our authorities.

Thus distinguished in the university, his merit was observed by Hid ley, bishop of London, who made him his chaplain in 1550; perhaps by the recommendation of Bucer, the king’s professor of divinity at Cambridge, who soon after his removal to London, in a letter to that prelate, styles our divine “a person eminent for his learning and piety.” And thus a door being opened to him into church -preferments, he rose by quick advances. tiis patron the bishop was so much pleased with him, that he designed for him the prebend of Cantrilles, in St. Paul’s church, and wrote to the council (some of whom had procured it for furnishing the king’s stables) for leave to give this living, as he says, “to his well deserving chaplain, who was without preferment, and to whom he would grant it with all his heart, that so he might have him continually with him and in his diocese to preach,” adding, that “he was known to be both of virtue, honesty, discretion, wisdom, and learning.” What effect this application had does not appear, but the praecentor’s place becoming vacant soon after, his lordship on August 24, 1551, collated him to that office, which was of much greater value, and likewise procured him to be made one of his majesty’s chaplains, with the usual salary of 40l. in December of the same year. On July 2, 1552, he obtained a stall in Westminster-abbey; which, however, he resigned to Dr. Bonner, whom he afterwards succeeded in the bishopric of London. In the mean time, there being a design on the death of Dr. Tonstall, to divide the rich see of Durham into two, Grindal was nominated lor one of these, and would have obtained it, had not one of the courtiers got the whole bishopric dissolved, and settled as a temporal estate upon himself.

In July the same year, he was nominated to the bishopric of London, vacant by the deposition of Bonner. The juncture was very critical, and the fate of the church revenues depended upon the event. An act of parliament had lately passed, whereby her majesty was empowered to exchange the ancient episcopal manors and lordships for tithes and impropriations; a measure extremely regretted by these first bishops, who scrupled whether they should comply in a point so injurious to the revenue of their respective sees, which must suffer considerably by these exchanges; and which too would cut off all hope of restoring the tithes, so long unjustly detained from the respective churches, for the maintenance of the incumbents. In this important point our new-nominated bishop consulted Peter Martyr in a letter dated August of this year; nor did he accept of the bishopric till he had re* ceived an opinion in favour of it from that divine, who said that the queen might provide for her bishops and clergy in such manner as she thought proper, that being none of GrindaPs concern. He also communicated to that divine his scruples concerning the habits and some customs then used in the church, on both which Martyr gave him the advice of a sensible and moderate man who regarded more weighty matters. Before this answer could be received, Grindal was consecrated Dec. 1, but the exchange of lands with the queen not being fully settled, he could not compound for his first fruits, and consequently he was hindered from exercising his episcopal function, and was obliged to have the queen’s express authority for that purpose. We may here remark that Cox bishop of Ely, Barlow of Chichester, and Scory of Hereford, were consecrated at the same time by archbishop Parker, with whom they all joined in a petition to her majesty to stop these exchanges, and they offered her as an equivalent, 1000 marks a year during their lives. In 1560, he was made one of the ecclesiastical commissioners, in pursuance of an act of parliament to inspect into the manners of the clergy, and regulate all matters of the church; and the same year he joined with Cox and Parker, in a private letter to the queen, persuading her to marry. In 1561, he held his primary visitation. In 1563 he assisted the archbishop of Canterbury, together with some civilians, in preparing a book of statutes for Christ church, Oxford, which as yet had none fixed. This year he was also very serviceable, in procuring the^ English merchants, who were ill used at Antwerp and ether parts of the Spanish Netherlands, and who had been very kind to the English exiles in the late reign, a new settiemeut Embden, in East-Frieslaml; and the same year, at the request of sir William Cecil, secretary of state, he wrote animadversions upjn a treatise entitled “Christiani Hominis Norma,” &c. “The Rule of a Christian Man,” the author of which, one Justus Velsius, a Dutch enthusiast, had impudently, in some letters to the queen, used menaces to her majesty; hut being at last cited before the ecclesiastical commission, was charged to depart the kingdom.

On April 15, 1564, he took the degree of D. D. at Cambridge, and the same year executed the queen’s express command, for exacting uniformity in the clergy; but proceeded so tenderly and slowly, that the archbishop thought fit to excite and quicken him; whence the puritans supposed him inclined to their party. However, he brought several nonconformists to comply; to which end he pub* Jished a letter of Henry Bullinger, minister of Zurich, in Switzerland, to prove the lawfulness of compliance, which had a very good effect. The same year, October 3, on the celebration of the emperor Ferdinand’s funeral, he preached a sermon at St. Paul’s, afterwards printed, from which Strype has given extracts. In 1567 he executed the queen’s orders in proceeding against the prohibited and unlicensed preachers; but was so treated by some with reproaches and rude language, that it abated much of his favourable inclinations towards them, which was felt and resented on their part. Even although some years afterwards he both procured the liberty of some separatists who had been imprisoned according to law, and indulged their ministers with a licence to preach on their promising not to act against the laws, yet they immediately abused that liberty, and when he proceeded against them for it, they had the boldness to lodge a complaint in the privy council representing his dealings with them. The archbishop, touched with their ingratitude, joined with the council in opinion that such men ought to be severely punished as a warning to others. Grimial was also threatened with a premunire by some of his clergy for raising a contribution upon them the preceding year for the persecuted Protestants abroad, without the queen’s licence. But this did not discourage him, and having procured a commission from her majesty to visit the Savoy, the hospital appointed for the relief and entertainment of poor travellers, he deprived the master, who had almost ruined the charity by his abuses and mismanagement. This was the last piece of service he performed for his diocese, being on May I, 1570, translated to the see of York. He owed this promotion to secretary Cecil and archbishop Parker, who liked his removal from London, as not being resolute enough for the government there. The same year he wrote a letter to his patron Cecil, that Cartwright the famous nonconformist might be silenced; and in 1571, at his metropolitical visitation, he shewed a hearty zeal, by his injunctions, for the^discipline and good government of the church. In 1572 he petitioned the queen to renew the ecclesiastical commission. In 157* he held one for the purpose of proceeding against papists, whose number daily diminished in his diocese, which he was particularly careful to provide with learned preachers, as being in his opinion the best method of attaining that end. He rejected therefore such as came for institution to livings if they were found deficient in learning, and in this policy he was encouraged by the queen, to whom it was highly agreeable. In other respects he had frequently to contend with the avarice of the courtiers, some of whom, would have greatly impoverished the church, if he and Other prelates had not opposed them.

These prophesyings had been used for some time, the rules of which were, that the ministers of a particular division at a set time met together at some church, and there each in their order explained, according to their abilities, some portion of scripture allotted to them before; this done, a moderator made his observations on what had been said, and determined the true sense of the place, a certain time being fixed for dispatching the whole. The advantage was the improvement of the clergy, who hereby coiisiderabiy profited in the knowledge of the scripture; but this mischief ensued, that at length confusions and disturbances took place at those meetings, by an ostentation of superior parts in some, by advancing heterodox opinions, and by the intrusion of some of the silenced se* paratists, who took this opportunity of declaiming against the liturgy and hierarchy, and even speaking against states and particular persons. The people also, of whom there was always a great conflux as hearers, fell to arguing and disputing much about religion, and sometimes a layman would take upon himself to speak. In short, the exercises degenerated into factions.

This refusal was dated December 20, 1576. The queen therefore having given him sufficient time to consider well his resolution, and he continuing inflexible, she sent letters next year to the bishops, to forbid all exercises and prophesyings, and to silence all preachers and teachers not lawfully called, of which there were no small number; and in June the archbishop was sequestered from his office, and confined to his house by an order of the court of starchamber. In November the lord-treasurer wrote to him about making his submission, with which he not thinking fit to comply, his sequestration was continued; and iri January there were thoughts of depriving him, which* how-­ever, were laid aside. June 1579, his confinement was either taken off, or else he had leave to retire to his house at Croydon; for we find him there consecrating the bishop of Exeter in that year, and the bishops of Winchester, and Lichfield and Coventry, the year following. This part of his function was exercised by a particular commission from the queen, who in council appointed two civilians to manage the other affairs of his see, the two of his nomination being set aside. Yet sometimes he had special commands from the queen and council to act in person, and issued out orders in his own name; and in general was as active as he could be, and vigilant in the care of his diocese as occasion offered. In 1580, for instance, when there happened a violent earthquake, our archbishop having issued an order for prayer and humiliation, composed a prayer for families throughout his diocese, which was allowed by the council, who in a letter to him commended his great zeal, and required him to enjoin the observation of his new order of prayer in all other dioceses. The council also referred to him the decision of a dispute that happened the same year at Merton college, Oxford, of which he was visitor, as archbishop; and soon after he was employed by the lord treasurer in a controversy between the university and town of Cambridge.

Strype has ably vindicated his memory from the misrepresentations of Fuller and Heylin, who consider him as too much inclined to puritanism; and observes, that in the times in which he lived, when he was better known, his episcopal abilities, and admirable endowments for spiritual government, as well as his great learning, were much celebrated. He was a man, says Strype, of great firmness and resolution, though of a mild and affable temper, and friendly disposition; in his deportment courteous and engaging, not easily provoked, well spoken, and easy of access; and in his elation not at all affecting grandeur or state, always obliging in his carriage, as well as kind and grateful to his servants, and of a free and generous spirit. Strype allows, what indeed is obvious, that he used great moderation towards the puritans, to whose interest in the cabinet, joined to his own merits, his preferment was in a great measure owing; and had they repaid this moderation by a corresponding behaviour, he would have less seldom incurred the displeasure of the court , who thought his favours ill-bestowed on men of restless and turbulent dispositions. He had a great respect for the eminent reformers abroad, Calvin, Luther, Melancthon, Bucer, Peter Martyr, Bullinger, Zanchius, and others, with whom he had contracted a friendship during his exile, and always carried on a correspondence; and he was very instrumental in obtaining a settlement for the French protestants in their own way of worship, approaching to the Genevan, who were allowed to assemble in the Walloon church in Threadneedle-street, which has ever since been a French church.

Besides what have already been noticed, Grindal assisted Fox in his Marty rology, in which is printed a composition of his entitled a “Dialogue between Custom and Truth,” written in a very clear manner, in refutation o the doctrine ^of the corporal presence in the sacrament. He lived and died unmarried, yet does not seem to have amassed much wealth amidst all his preferments. At his death, however, he became a considerable benefactor to learning. He left 30/, per annum for the maintenance of a free grammar-school at St. Begh’s, in Cumberland, near the place of his birth and for the building, &c. of it 366l. 13s. 4d', various sums to several colleges at Cambridge, and cups, pictures, &c. to various friends. It may be worth noticing, that Grindal, who, by the way, is the Algrind of Spenser, first brought the tamarisk to England, so useful in medicine, when he returned from his exile.

, a. physician, astronomer, and mathematician, and like his countryman, friar Bacon, violently suspected of magic, lived in the fourteenth century, He studied at Merton college, Oxford; and, probably to escape the disagreeable consequences of such suspicions, went into France, where he devoted himself entirely to the study of medicine, first at Montpelier, and then at Marseilles. In this eity he fixed his residence, and lived by the practice of his profession, in which he acquired much skill and eminence. There is no greater proof of his genius, besides the imputations he laboured under in his youth, than his assiduously pursuing the method instituted by the Greek physicians, of investigating the nature and cause of the disease and the constitution of the patient. The time of his death is not known; but we are told that he was an old man in 1350, and that he had a son, who was first an abbot of canons regular at Marseilles, and at length arrived at the pontificate under the name of Urban V. Bale and Pits both give lists of his works, none of which are known to be extant.

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

Grocyn died at Maidstone in 1519, of a stroke of the palsy, which he had received a year before, and which made him, says Erasmus, “sibi ipsi superstitem;” that is, outlive his faculties. Linacre, the celebrated physiciaa just mentioned, was his executor, to whom he left a con. siderable legacy, as he did a small one fo William Lilly, the grammarian, who was his godson. His will is printed in the appendix to Knight’s “Life of Erasmus.” He had indeed but little to leave, having never enjoyed preferment equal to his worth *; yet he was a man of great generosity, which at one time obliged him to pawn his plate to Dr. Young, who generously returned it by his will without taking principal or interest. A Latin epistle of Grocyn’s to Aldus Manutius is prefixed to Linacre’s translation of“Proclus de Sphaera,” printed at Venice in 1449, fol. Erasmus says, that “there is nothing extant of his but this epistle: indeed a very elaborate and acute one, and written in good Latin.” His publishing nothing more seems to have been owing to too much delicacy; for, Erasmus adds, “he was of so nice a taste, that he h^d rather write nothing than write ill.” Some other things, however, of his writing are mentioned by Bale, Leland, and Tanner, as “Tractatus contra hostiolum Joannis Wiclevi;” “Epistolae ad Erasmum et alios” Grammatica;“” Vulgaria puerorum;“”Epigrammata“” Nota ia Terentium,“and” Isagogicum quoddam."

, an eminent civilian, historian, and critic, was born at Hamburgh in 1613. He had a strong inclination to learning, which induced him to apply to books with indefatigable diligence from his infancy; and, having made great progress in his studies in his own country, he travelled into Germany, Italy, and France, where he searched all the treasures of literature that could be found in those countries, and was returning fcome by the way of the United Provinces, when he was stopt at Deventer in the province of Over-Issel, and there made professor of polite learning. After acquiring great reputation in this chair, he was promoted to that of Leyden in 1658, vacant by the death of Daniel Heinsius. He died at Leyden in 1672, much regretted. By his wife, whom he married at Deventer, he had two sons that survived him and were both eminent in the republic of letters: James, who is the subject of the ensuing article; and Theodore Laurent, who died young, having published “Emendationes Pandectarum, &c. Leyden, 1605,” 8vo, and “A Vindication of the Marble Base of the Colossus erected in honour of Tiberius Caesar, ibid. 1697,” folio.

Frederic Gronovius was the author of many critical works. Besides his edition of Casaubon’s Epistles, Hague, 1638, in 4to, he published the following 1. “Diatribe in Statii Poetce Sylvas,” Hague, 1637, 8vo. This being attacked by Emeric Crucaeus, who ander the name of Mercurius Frondator published an “Anti-Diatribe” at Paris, 1639j 24mo, Gronovius published, 2. “Elenchus AntiDiatribes Mercurii Frondatoris ad Statii Sylvas,” Paris, 1640, 8vo. This occasioned Crucaeus to publish “Muscarium ad Statii Sylvas,” Paris, 1640, 8vo. 3. “De Sestertiis, sive subsecivorum Pecunise veteris Graecae & Romanae Libri IV. Accesserunt Lucius Volusius Maecianus, J. C. & Balbus Mensor de Asse,” &c. Deventer, 1643, 6vo, Amsterdam, 1656, 8vo, and Leyden, 1691, 4to, in which last edition, published by his son James Gronovius, are added “Paschasii Grosippi, (i. e. Casparis Schioppii) Tabulo3 Numerarije; Johannis Freder. Gronovii Mantissa pecunise veteris, & tres 'AvreZnyweis de Fcenere Unciario & centesimis Usuris; item de Hyperpyro; Salmasii Epistola & ad earn Responsio; & Aoyaoiw Tlateua ua\ Nea, Græcè & Latinè.” 4. “Notæ in Senecam Philosophum & Rhctorein;” first printed separately at Leyden, 1649, 12mo, and afterwards reprinted in the Elzevir edition of “Seneca cum Notis Variorum,” 1673, 3 vols. 8vo. 5. “Monobiblos Ecclesiasticarum Observationum,” 1651, 12mo. 6. Observationum Lib. IV.“Deventer, 1652, i'2mo. 7.” Statins ex recensione J. F. Gronovii, cum ejusdem Notis,“Amsterdam, 1653. Our author’s notes were reprinted in the edition of Statius published by John Veenhusius at Leyden, 1671, in 8vo. And Statius as revised by him was published by Christian Daumius with the Commentaries of Barthius in 2 vols. 4to, at Zwickaw in 1664. 8.” Senecae Tragcedise cum Notis Johannis Frederici Gronovii & variip aliorum,“Leyden, 1661, 8vo. His Notes were reprinted with improvements in the edition of Seneca’s tragedies published by his son James Gronovius at Amsterdam, 1682, 8vo. 9.” Observationum Libri tres,“Leyden, 1662, 8vo. 10.” Plautus ex recensione Joh. Fred. Gronovii, cum Notis Variorum,“Leyden, 1664, and 1684, 8vo. 11.” Titus Livius ex recensione & cum Notis Joh. Frid, Gronovii, additis integris Caroli Sigonii & selectis Variorum Notis,“Amsterdam, 1665, and 1679, 3 vols. 8vo; which last edition of 1679 is preferable to the former, on account of the notes of Henry Valesius and James Gronovius, which were added to it. Our author had published an edition of Livy revised by him at Leyden in 1645 and 1654 in 3 vols. 12mo, and in 1661 and 1678, in one volume, 12mo. His Notes upon Livy were printed separately at Leyden in 1645, 12mo. But several things in this edition of 1645 are omitted in the larger editions of 1675 and 1679. 12.” Plinii Historia Naturalis,“Leyden, 1669, 3 vols. 8vo. 13.” Tacitus,“Amsterdam, 1673, 2 vols. 8vo, reprinted at Amsterdam, 1685, 2 vols. 8vo. 14.” Notae in Hugonis Grotii Libros tres de Jure Belli & Pacis,“Amsterdam, 1680, 8vo. 15.” Observationes ad Bened. Petrocorii de Vita B. Martini carminum libros sex,“published in Daumius’s edition of Petrocorius, Leipsic, 1682, 8vo. 16.” Auli Gellii Noctes Attics,“Leid. 1687, 8vo. His notes are reprinted in his son’s edition, Leid. 1706. 17.” Nota3 in Phsedri Fabulas,“published by his son in the edition of Leyden, 1703, 8vo. 18.” De Musseo Alexandrino Dissertatio,“inserted in his son’s” Thesaurus.“19.” Oratio tie lege regia, &c.“Leyden, 1678. A translation of this in French was published by Barbeyrac with Noodt’s treatise upon liberty of conscience, Amst. 1714, 8vo. A great many of Gronovius’s Letters are published in Burman’s *' Sylloge Epistolarum.”

, son of the preceding, was born October 20, 1645, at Deventer, and learned the elements of the Latin tongue there; but, going with the family in, 1658 to Leyden, he carried on his studies in that university with incredible industry under the eye of his father, who had the greatest desire to make him a complete scholar. In this view he not only read to him the best classic authors, but instructed him in the civil law. About 1670 he made the tour of England, and visited both the universities, consulting their Mss.; and formed an acquaintance with several eminent scholars, particularly Dr. Edward Pocock, Dr. John Pearson, and Dr. Meric Casaubon, which last died in his arms. He was much pleased with the institution of the royal society, and addressed a letter to them in approbation of it. After some months’ stay in England, he returned to Ley den, where he published an edition of Macrobius that year in 8vo, and another of Polybius the same year at Amsterdam, in '2, vols. 8vo. The same year he was also offered the professorship held by Hogersius but, not having finished the plan of his travels, he declined, though the professor, to engage his acceptance, proposed to hold the place till his return.

He had apparently other views at that time, for having experienced many advantages to his literary pursuits by his visit to England, he resolved to see France. In his tour thither, he passed through the cities of Brabant and Flanders; and arriving at Paris, was received with all the respect due to his father’s reputation and his own merit, which presently brought him into the acquaintance of Chaplain, d'Herbelot, Thevenot, and several other persons of distinguished learning. This satisfaction was somewhat damped by the news of his father’s death in 1672 soon after which he left Paris to attend Mr. Paats, ambassador extraordinary from the States-general to the court of Spain. They set out in the spring of 1672; and our author went thence into Italy, where, visiting Tuscany, he was entertained with extraordinary politeness by the great duke, who, among other marks of esteem, gave him a very considerable stipend, and the professor’s place of Pisa, vacant by the death of Chimentel. This nomination was the more honourable, both as he had the famous Henry Norris, afterwards a cardinal, for his colleague; and as he obtained it by the recommendation of Magliabecchi, whom he frequently visited at Florence, where he had an opportunity of consulting the Mss. in the Medicean library.

He was revising Tacitus in order to a new edition, when he lost his youngest daughter, September 12, 1716, and he survived her not many weeks. The loss proved insupportable; he fell sick a few days after it, and died of grief, October 21, aged seventy-one. He left two sons, both bred to letters; the eldest being a doctor of physic, and the youngest, Abraham, professor of history at Utrecht. His valuable library, long retained in the possession of the family, and for which 30,000 florins had been offered by the late empress of Russia, was sold by auction at Leyden about 1785, and produced only 5000 florins. It is remarked of James Gronovius, that he fell short of his father, in respect of modesty and moderation, as far as he exceeded him in literature: in his disputes, he treated his antagonists with such a bitterness of style as procured him the name of the second Scioppius, the justness of which censure appears throughout his numerous works, although they must be allowed to form a stupendous monument of literary industry and critical acumen. The following list is probably correct: 1. “Macrobius, cum notis variorum,” Leyd. 1670, 8vo, London, 1694, 8vo. 2. “Polybius cum suis ae ineditis Casauboni, &c. notis,” Gr. & Lat.“Amst. 1670, 2 vols. 8vo. 3.” Tacitus/* ibid. 1672, 2 vols, 8vo, and Utrecht, 1721, 4to, enlarged by his son Abraham. Hanvood says it is an infinitely better and more useful edition than that of Brotier. 4. “Supplementa lacunarum in ^nea Tactico, Dione Cassio, et Arriano,” Leyden, 1675, 8vo. 5. “Dissertationes Epistolicae,” Amst. 1678, 8vo, consisting of critical remarks on various authors. Those he made on Livy involved him in a dispute with Fabretti, who having attacked our critic in his work “De Aquis et Aqureductibus veteris Romoe,” Gronovius answered him in, 6. “Responsio ad cavillationes R. Fabretti,” Leyden, 1685, 8vo. Fabretti, who is treated here with very little ceremony, took his revenge in a work, the title of which is no bad specimen of literary railing, “Jasithei ad Gronovium Apologema, in ej usque Titivilitia seu de Tito Livio somnia animadversiones,” Naples, 1686, 4to. 7. “Fragmentum Stephani Byzantini Grammatici de Dodone, &c.” Leyden, 1681, 4to. 8. “Henrici Valesii Notae, &c. in Harpocrationem,” Leyden, 16&2, 4to, reprinted in Blancard’s edition of Harpocration, in 1683. 9. “Senecae Tragediae,” Amst. 1682, 12mo. This is the edition which his father was preparing when he died. 10. “Exercitationes aca­<Jemicae de pernicie et casu Judoe,” Leyden, 1683, 4to, an endeavour to reconcile the accounts of St. Matthew and St. Luke of the death of Judas. This involved him in a quarrel with Joachim Feller, against whom Gronovius defended himself in a second edition of this tract published at Leyden in 1702, and opened there a controversy with Perizonius. This produced from Gronovius, 11. “Notitia et illustratio dissertationis nuperse de morte Juda?,” Leyden, 1703, 4to; to which Perizonius replied, but the combatants became so warm that the curators of the university of Leyden thought proper to silence them both. 12. “Castigationes ad paraphrasim Graeeam Enchiridii Epicteti ex codice Mediceo,” Delft, 1683, 8vo. This includes the notes published in Berkelius’s edition of 1670. 13. “Dissertatio de origine Romuli,” Leyden, 1684, 8vo, in which he treats the commonly received notion of the origin of Romulus and Remus, and their being nursed by a wolf, as fabulous. 14. “Gemmae et sculpturae antiquse, &c.” a Latin translation of Leonard Augustini’s Italian description of these antiquities, with a learned preface by our author. 15. “Pomponii Melae libri tres de situ orbis,” Leyden, 1685, 8vo, without his name, and containing an on Vossius’s observations on that author. Vossius having defended himself in an appendix to his “Observationes ad Melam,” printed at London in 1685, 4to, Gronovius replied in, 16. “Epistola de argutiolis Isaaci Vossii,” 1687, 8vo, with his usual severity, which he increased in his notice of Vossius in a new edition of P. Mela, in 1696. This edition, besides the extracts of the cosmography of Julius and Honorius, and that ascribed to Æthicus, which were inserted in the former edition, contains the anonymous geographer of Ravenna. 17. “Epistola ad Johannem Georgium Graevium V. Cl. de Pallacopa, ubi Descriptio ejus ab Arriano facta liberatur ab Isaaci Vossii frustrationibus,” Leyden, 1686, 8vo. 18. “Notae ad Lucianum,” printed in Graevius’s edition of Lucian in 2 vols. Amst. 1686, 8vo. 19. “Variae Lectiones &, Notae in Stephanum Byzantinum de Urbibus:” inserted in the edition of that author published by Abraham Berkelius at Leyden in 1683, folio. 20. “Cebetis Thebani Tabula Graece & Latine,” Amst. 1689, 8vo. 21. “Auli Gellii Noctes Atticae, cum Notis & Emendationibus Johannis Frederici Gronovii,” Leyden, 1687, 8vo, 1706, 4to. 22. “M. T. Ciceronis Opera quae extant omnia,” Leyden, 1692, 4 vols. 4to, and 11 in 12mo. 23. “Ammiani Marcellini Rerum gestarum, qui de XXXI supersunt, Libri XVIII.” Leyden, 1693, in folio and 4to. 24. “Johannis Frederici Gronovii de Sestertiis seu subsecivarum Pecuniae veteris Graecae & Romance Libri IV. &c.” Leyden, 1691, 4to, with several additions. 25. “De Icuncula Smetiana qua Harpocratem indigitarunt,” Leyden, 1693, 4to. 26. “Memoria Cossoniana; id est, Danielis Cossonii Vita breviter clescripta, cui annexa nova Editio veteris Monument! Ancyrani,” Leyden, 1695, 4to. 27. “Abraham! Gorlaei Dactylotheca cum Explicationibus,” Leyden, 1695, 4to. 28. “Harpocrationis tie Vocibus Liber; accedit Diatribe Henrici Stephani ad locos Isocrateos,” Leyden, 1696, 4to. 29. “O ratio de primis Incrementis Urbis Lugduni,” Leyden, 1696, 4to. 30. “Thesaurus GriEcarum Antiquitatum,” Leyden, 1697, &c. 13 vols. folio. Gronovius cannot be sufficiently commended for having undertaken this work after the example of Graevius, who published a body of the Roman antiquities. Laurent Beger, having found some things to object to in the three first volumes of this work, published at Berlin in 1702, in folio, “Colloquii quorundam de tribus primis Thesauri Antiquitatum GriEcarum voluminibus, ad eorum Auctorem Relatio.” 31. “Geographia antiqua; hoc est, Scylacis Periplus Maris Mediterranei, &c. &c.” Leyden, 1697, 4to. 32. “Appendix ad Geographiam antiquani,” Leyden, 1609, 4to. 33. “Manethonis Apotelesmaticorum Libri sex, nunc primum ex Bibliotheca Medicea eruti,” Leyden, 1698, 4to. 34. “De duobus LapU dibus in agro Dnyvenvoordiensi repertis,” Leyden, 1696, 4to. 35. “Rycquius de Capitolio Romano, cum Notis Gronovii,” Leyden, 1696, 8vo. 36. “.Q. Cnrtius cum Gronovii & Variorum Notis,” Amsterdam, 1696, 8vo. 37. “Suetonius a Salmasio recensitus cum Emendationibus J. Gronovii,” Leyden, 1698, 12mo. 33. “Phredri Fabulae cum Joan. Fred. Gronovii & Jac. Gronovii Notis & Nicolai Dispontini collectaneis,” Leyden, 1703, 8vo, 39. “Arriani Nicomediensis Expeditionis Alexandri Libri septem, & Historia Indica,”“Leyden, 1704, folio. This edition is a very beautiful one; and Gronovius displays in it the same extent of learning, which he does in all his other writings, and the same rude censure of all men of learning, who are not of his opinion. 40.” Minutii Felicis Octavius: accedunt Csecilius Cyprianus de Idolorum Vanitate, & Julius Firmicus Materuus de Errore profanarum Religionum,“Leyden, 1709, 8vo. 41.” Infamia Emendationum in Menandri Reliquias nuper editarum. Trajecti ad Rhenum, auctore Phiieleuthero Lipsiensi. Accedit Responsio M. Lucilii Profuturi ad Epistolam Caii Veracii Philelienis, qua; extat parte IX Bibliothecae selectte Jo. Clerici,“Leyden, 1710, 12mo. In this he attacks Dr. Bentley, who had assumed the name of Phileleutherus Lipsiensis; and Le Clerc, who had published an edition of the fragments of Menander and Philander, and to whom he ascribes the letter inserted in the” Bibliotheque choisie,“which he animadverts upon. 42.” Decreta Romana & Asiatica pro Judseis ad cultum divinum per Asios Minoris urbes secure obeundum, a Josepho coliecta in Libro XIV. Archseologiae, sed male interversa & expuncta, in ^ublicam lucem restituta. Accedunt Suidae aliquot loca a vitiis purgata,“Leyden, 1711, 8vo. The notes on Suidas are levelled against Ludolfus Knster, who had published an edition of Suidas at Cambridge in 1705 in 3 vols. folio, and who wrote in vindication of himgelf,” Diatriba L. K. in qua Editio Suidse Cantabrigiensis contra Cavillationes Jacobi Gronovii Aristarchi Leydensis defenditur,“inserted in the 24th tome of the Bibiiotheque choisie, p. 49, and printed separately in 12mo. There was likewise a new edition with additions published at Amsterdam in 1712, 8vo, under the title of” Diatriba Anti-Gronoviana.“43.” Ludibria malevola Clerici, vel Prose riptio pravse Mercis ac Mentis pravissimae, quam exponit in Minutio Felice Joannes Clericus torn. 24. Bibliothecse selectae,“Leyden, 1712, 8 vo. 44.” Recensio brevis Mutilationum, quas patitur Suidas in Editione nupera Cantabrigise anni 1705, ubi varia ejus Auctoris loca perperam intellecta illustrantur, emendantur, & supplentur,“Leyden, 1713, 8vo. 45.” Severi Sancti, id est, Endeleichii Rhetoris de Mortibus Bourn Carmen ab Elia Vineto & Petro Pithseo servatum, cum Notis Job. Weitzii & Wolfgangi Seberi,“Leyden, 1715, 8vo, with a preface, though without his name. 46.” Herodoti Halicarnassei Historiarum Libri IX. Greece & Latine, cum Interpretatione Laurentii Vallx ex Codice Mediceo^“Leyden, 1715, folio. This edition had not the general approbation of learned men, who discovered very gross errors in it. The reader may see upon this subject a piece of Kuster, entitled” Examen Criticum Editionis novissimae Herodoti Gronovianae," inserted in the 5th tome of M. le Clerc’s Bibliotheque ancienne & moderne, p. 383, and another of Stephen Bergler in the Acta Eruditorum of Leipsic for 1716, p. 201, 337, and 417. Gronovius in this edition has attacked in the most furious manner several of the greatest men in the republic of letters, particularly Laurentius Valla, ^milius Portus, Henry Stephens, Holstenius, Dr. Thomas Gale, Ezechiel Spanheim, Salmasius, Isaac Vossius, Tanaquii Faber, John le Clerc, Kuster, Bochart, Grsevius, &c. He had a very extensive correspondence with the men of learning in Europe, and the utmost that can be said for his intemperate treatment of so many learned contemporaries, is, as we have been told, that his thoughts of many of them were kinder than his words.

In 1755, came out his “Flora Orientalis,” 8vo, the materials of which were afforded by the collection made by llau wolf, in his travels in the East during 1573, 1574, and 1575, and which, by favour of queen Christina of Sweden, came afterwards into the hands of the learned Vossius, who allowed the chief British botanists of his day to study and quote it. Gronovius determined by it above 330 species of oriental plants, which was a valuable addition to the knowledge of that day. The work is arranged after the Linnaean method, but trivial names, though invented and published in the first edition of the “Species Plantaruin,” two y?ars before, are not adopted, nor does the author appear to have used this publication. He was, however, in frequent correspondence with Linnæus, whom he furnished with numerous specimens of American plants sent by Clayton, and with whom he conferred on the subject of fishes amongst others, Haller mentions him as having written learned notes to the 20th and following books of Pliny. He continued to enrich his museum, and to devote it to the use of all who were desirous of consulting it, as long as he lived. In 1750 Gronovius is represented as labouring under the gout, as well as a hernia, but he lived to the age of seventy-two, dying in 1762. His herbarium was, after the death of his son, purchased by sir Joseph Banks.

, a learned French theologian, was born in December 1675, at Rheims, of obscure and poor parents. The religious of St. Genevieve, who served the parish of St. Denis at Rheims, undertook his education, and he was admitted doctor of divinity in that city in 1702, and became successively chaplain at Notre Dame, canon of the collegiate church of St. Symphorien, and, in 1704, canon of the cathedral at Rheims. He was also made governor of the little seminary of St. James by M Le Tellier, but was deprived of that office on this gentleman’s death in 1710, and forbidden to preach or confess, on account of his zealous opposition to the bull Unigenitus. Being afterwards excommunicated by M. de Maille, who succeeded M. le Tellier as archbishop of Rheims, he went to Paris, and afterwards to Holland, where he remained ubout a year with father Quesnel and Messrs. Petitpied and Fouillou; but when Louis XIV. died, the proceedings at Rheims were declared null, and M. le Gros returned thither in 1716. He was a zealous promoter of the appeal to a future council, and was the soul of the faculty of theoJogy; but M. de Mailli obtained a lettre dt cachet against him in 1721, by which he was banished to St. John de Luz. This sentence, however, he evaded, by living concealed four or five years. In 1725, he went into Italy to observe what passed in the council appointed by Benedict XIIL and at length retired to Holland, and there spent the last twenty-five years of his life, excepting a voyage he made to England. The archbishop of Utrecht chose him professor of divinity in his seminary at Amersfort, and he died at Rhinwick, near Utrecht, December 4, 1751, aged 76. His principal works are, 1. “Le Renversement des Libenes de l'Eglise Gallicane dans r affaire de la Constitution Unigenitus,” 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “La Sainte Bible traduite sur les textes originaux, avec les differences de la Vulgate,” 1739, 8vo. M. Rondet published a new edition of this work 1756, in 6 small vois. 12mo.; but, on account of some alterations, it is not esteemed. 3. “Sept Lettres Theolo^iques contre le Traite des Prets de Commerce, et en ge‘ne’ral contre toute Usure,” 4to. 4. “Dogma Ecclesiae circa Usurum expositum, et vindicatum;” with several other pieces in Latin against usury, 4to. 5. “Observations sur une Lettre attribute a ieu M. de Launoi sur l'Usure,” 4to. 6. “Eclaircissement historique et dogmatique sur la Contrition,” 12mo. 7. “Motifs invincible* d‘Attachement a l’Eglise Romaine pour les Catholiqnes, ou de Re-union pour les pretendus Reformes,” 12mo. 8. “Meditations sur la Concorde des Evangiles,” 3 vols. 12mo. 9. “Sur l'EpStre aux Remains,” 2 vols. 12mo. 10. “SurlesEpitrescanoniques,” 2 vols. 12mo. ll.“Memoire sur les Droits du second Ordre,” 4to. 12. “Me”­moire sur l'Appel au futur Concile,“4to; several tracts on the Constitution, the Miracles, ascribed to M.Paris; the Convulsions, &c. 13.” Manuel du Chretien,“which contains the Psalms, the New Testament, and the Imitation, 24to. A book in twelves, entitled” Eclaircissement sur les Conciles genéraux," is also attributed to M. le Gros.

, an eminent English antiquary, was the son of Mr. Francis Grose, of Richmond, jeweller, who died in 1769. He was born in 1731, and having a taste for heraldry and antiquities, his father procured him a place in the college of arms, which, however, he resigned in 1763. By his father he was left an independent fortune, which he was not of a disposition to add to, or even to -reserve. He early entered into the Surrey militia, of which he became adjutant and paymaster; but so much had dissipation taken possession of him, that in a situation which above all others required attention, he was so careless as to have for some time (as he used pleasantly to tell) only two books of accounts, viz. his right and left hand pockets. In the one he received, and from the other paid; and this too with a want of circumspection which may be readily supposed from such a mode of book keeping. His losses on this occasion roused his latent talents: with a good classical education he united a fine taste for drawing, which he now began again to cultivate; and encouraged by his friends, he undertook the work from which be derived both profit and reputation: his Views of Antiquities in England and Wales, which he first began to publish in numbers in 1773, and finished in 1776. The next year he added two more volumes to his English views, in which he included the islands of Guernsey and Jersey, which were completed in 1787. This work, which was executed with accuracy and elegance, soon became a favourite with the public at large, as well as with professed antiquaries, from the neatness of the embellishments, and the succinct manner in which he conveyed his information, and therefore answered his most sanguine expectations; and, from the time he began it to the end of his life, he continued without intermission to publish various works, generally to the advantage of his literary reputation, and almost always to the benefit of his finances. His wit and good-humour were the abundant source of satisfaction to himself and entertainment to his friends. He visited almost every part of the kingdom, and was a welcome guest wherever he went. In the summer of 1789 he set out on a tour in Scotland the result of which he began to communicate to the public in 1790, in numbers. Before he had concluded this work, he proceeded to Ireland, intending to furnish that kingdom with views and descriptions of her antiquities, in the same manner he had executed those of Great Britain; but soon after his arrival in Dublin, being at the house of Mr. Hone there, he suddenly was seized at table with an apoplecticfit, on the 6th May 1791, and died immediately. He was interred in Dublin.

Mr. Grose married Catherine, daughter of Mr. Jordan, of Canterbury, by whom he had two sons and five daughters; 1. Francis Grose, of Croydon-Crook in Surrey, esq. a colonel in the army, governor in 1790 of New South Wales; 2. Onslow Grose, esq. captain of the pioneer corps on the Madras establishment, who died very lately in India; and four daughters, one of whom married to Anketel Singleton, esq. lieutenant-governor of Landguard-Fort, in Essex.

, an English prelate, and the most learned ecclesiastic of his time, was born probably about 1175, of obscure parents at Stradbrook in Suffolk. He studied at Oxford, where he laid the foundation of his skill in the Greek tongue, and was thus enabled to make himself master of Aristotle, whose works had been hitherto read only in translations: at Oxford too he acquired a knowledge of the Hebrew. He afterwards went to Paris, where he prosecuted his studies of Greek and Hebrew, and made himself master of French. Here he also studied the divinity and philosophy of the age, his proficiency in which was so remarkable as to draw upon him the suspicion of being a magician. At Oxford, on his return, he became celebrated as a divine, and was the first lecturer in the Franciscan school in that university. In 1235 he was elected, by the dean and chapter, bishop of Lincoln, which see was then, and continues still, the largest in England, although Ely, Oxford, and Peterborough have been since taken from it. Grosseteste, who was of an ardent and active spirit, immediately undertook to reform abuses, exhorting 'both clergy and people to religious observances, and perhaps would have been in a considerable degree successful, had he not confided too much in the Dominican and Franciscan friars, as his helpers in the good work. But they being appointed by him to preach to the people, hear their confessions, and enjoin penance, abused these op-­portunities by exercising dominion over the superstitious minds of the laity, and enriched themselves at their expence. Although, however, the hypocrisy of the Dominicans and Franciscans in this instance escaped his penetration, he could not be deceived in the dissolute character and ignorance of the more ancient orders, and was very strict in his visitations, and very severe in his censures of their conduct. Partly through this sense of his duty, and his love of justice, and partly from his warmth of temper, he was frequently engaged in quarrels with convents, and other agents of the pope. At one time he was even excommunicated by the convent of Canterbury; but treating this with contempt, he continued to labour in promoting piety, and redressing abuses with his usual zeal, firmness, and perseverance. Although the friars continued to be his favourites, and he rebuked the rectors and vicars of his diocese, because they neglected to hear them preach, and be^ cause they discouraged the people from attending and confessing to them, in time he began to see more clearly into the character of those ecclesiastics. In 1247, two English Francisqans were sent into England with credentials to extort money for the pope; and when they applied, with some degree of insolence, to Grosseteste, for six thousand marks, as the contribution for the diocese of Lincoln, he answered them that (with submission to his holiness), the demand was as dishonourable as impracticable; that the whole body of the clergy and people were concerned in it as well as himself; and that for him to give a definitive answer in an instant to such a demand, before the sense of the kingdom was taken upon it, would be rash and absurd.

At home he still opposed the lazy Italians, who had procured the pope’s letters for provisions, and were the objects of Grosseteste 1 s greatest detestation, for he said “if he should commit the care of souls to them, he should be the friend of Satan.” Upon such principles he would often, with indignation, cast the bulls out of his hand, and absolutely refused to comply with them. He was suspended at one time for disobeying a papal mandate of this kind. Pope Innocent, persisting in his old courses, notwithstanding all the fair promises and assurances he had given to the contrary, commanded the bishop to admit un Italian, entirely ignorant of the English language, to a rich benefice in his diocese, and be refusing to comply, was suspended for it the Lent following. This sentence, however, seems to have been soon relaxed, as we find the bishop singing mass at Hales the same year. A more remarkable instance of Grosseteste’s spirited opposition to the papal usurpations occurred in 1253, when Innocent ordered his nephew, aa Italian youth, to be promoted to the first canonry that should be vacant in the cathedral of Lincoln, and declared that any other disposal of the canonry should be null and void; and that he would excommunicate every one who should dare to disobey his injunction. The pope also wrote to the archdeacon of Canterbury, and to one Mr. Innocent, both Italians, to see this business completed, with a clause of non obstante and to cite all coiuraveners to appear before him without any manner of plea or excuse and under another clause of non obstante^ in two months time.

The pope, on receiving this flat denial, which he little expected, written, as our readers may perceive, in a sarcastic styje implying much more than is expressed, fell into a furious passion, exclaiming, with a stern countenanc, and with all the pride of Lucifer, “Who is this old dotard, deaf, and absurd, that thus rashly presumes to judge of my actions? By Peter and Paul, if the goodness of my own heart did not restrain me, I should so chastise him, as to make him an example and a spectacle to all the world. Is not the king of England my vassal, my slave, and for a word speaking, would throw him into prison, and load him with infamy and disgrace?” And, when the cardinals interposed, they had much ado to mollify him, by telling him, “it was little for his interest to think of animadverting on the bishop; since, as they must all own, what he said was true, and they could not condemn or blame him, &c.” giving the bishop, at the same time, a most noble testimony, in respect of his piety, learning, and general character, as acknowledged by all the world: in all which, they confessed frankly, they were none of them to be compared to him. The pope, however, excommunicated the bishop, and even named a successor to his see; but the bishop, on his part, contented himself with appealing from the sentence to the tribunal of Christ, after which he troubled himself no more about it, and remained quietly in possession of his dignity.

Towards the end of this summer (1253) he fell sick at his palace at Buckden, and sent for friar John de St. Giles, who was a physician and a divine, in both which capacities he wanted his assistance, as he foresaw, to the great uneasiness of his mind, the troubles that would shortly befall the church. He then gave orders to the clergy of his diocese to renew the sentence of excommunication upon all who should infringe the magna charta concerning the liberties of the kingdom, which made the incumbents very obnoxious to many of the courtiers. In all his conversations on this subject in his last illness, he appears to have retained the strength of his understanding, and conscious of the uprightness of his conduct towards the pope, he still fully approved it in his heart; nor was his courage in the least broken, or his spirits dejected, by any fulminations that had Hfcen launched against him from that quarter. His conversations on this occasion, given by his biographer, display his real sentiments on the depraved and corrupt state of the papacy in his time, the particulars or articles on which he grounded his charge, and that abhorrence of its proceedings which does him so much honour.

He died at Buckden, Oct. 9, 1255, and the corpse was carried to Lincoln, where it was met by archbishop Boniface, who attended the funeral. He was interred in the upper south transept. For an account of his tomb, &c. we must refer to our principal authority. The pope, who rejoiced at his death, ordered a Letter to be written to king Henry, enjoining him to take up the bishop’s bones, cast them out of the church, and burn them, but this letter was not sent. As Grosseteste was a person of acknowledged piety and strictness of manners, he easily arrived at the beatitude, or title of Beatus, and even at sanctity 9 in the general estimation; but he could never obtain these jhonours from the church, though they were solicited for him in the strongest terms. Indeed, as l>r. Pegge observes, it would have been improper and absurd for the popes to repute and proclaim a person to be now an holy beatified saint in heaven, who in their opinion had so openly traduced, insulted, and vilified both the see and court of Rome, which were still pursuing the very same measures he condemned, and continued to be invariably the same depraved, venal, and corrupt body. It is, however, for the honour of bishop Grosseteste, that for his piety and integrity, his learning and abilities, he still lives valued and revered in the breasts of all sober and reasonable men. It is plain that he did not suffer the least in the esteem of the world, any more than he did in his own opinion, by the anathema which pope Innocent had denounced against him. Indeed the papal censures, of which our prelates stood so much in dread at Lyons, in 1245, had been of late so infamously prostituted, that they seem to have lost their efficacy. Grosseteste, in particular, paid no regard to that which was denounced against him, for he still continued to exercise his function; his clergy also made no scruple of obeying him when under the sentence; and his exequies were solemnized not only by the secular but even by the regular clergy of his diocese.

, a pious dissenting divine, was born in London Jan. J, 1675, where his father was an upholder. In 1693 he was placed under the tuition of the rev. Mr. Jollie, of Attercliffe, in Yorkshire, with whom he went through a course of studies preparatory to ordination among the dissenters; and afterwards studied Hebrew under Capell, formerly professor of oriental languages at Saumur, but at this time a refugee ii> London. In 1699 Mr. Grosvenor was admitted into the ministry, and officiated first as assistant to Mr. Oldfield, in Southwark, and afterwards was joint preacher of a lecture in the Old Jewry meeting. His biographers seem all unwilling to tell us that he was at first of the baptist persua-; sion, and having been baptised in 1689 by Mr. Benjamin Keach, became a member of his meeting for about seven or eight years; but in the course of his studies he changed his opinions, and was “dismissed in a general manner from his membership with” the baptists. In 1703 or 1704 he was chosen to succeed Mr. Slater in the meeting in Crosby-square, to which he was formally ordained in July 1704. In 1716 he was chosen one of the lecturers at Salter’s-hall, which added much to his reputation, but which he resigned in 1740. In 1730 the university of Edinburgh conferred the degree of D. D. upon him. After this he continued to preach until 1749, when the increasing infirmities of age obliged him to desist from all public services. He continued, however, his private studies, and kept up an amicable intercourse with his friends until his death, Aug.7, 1758. Dr. Grosvenor possessed great mildness of temper, lively and brilliant wit, a candid disposition towards those who differed from him, and an habitual cheerfulness which rendered his visits peculiarly acceptable. He published various single sermons preached on funeral and other occasions an “Essay on Health,” 1748, 8vo; and a treatise on consolation, entitled “The Mourner,” which has been repeatedly printed, and still preserves his memory.

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

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

In 1603, the glory which the United Provinces had obtained by their illustrious defence against the whole power of Spain, after the peace of Vervins, determined them to transmit to posterity the signal exploits of that memorable war; and for this purpose they sought out a proper historian. Several made great interest for the place, and among others Baudius, the professor of eloquence at Leyden. But the States thought young Grotius, who had taken ao steps to obtain it, deserved the preference; and, what is singular, Baudius himself did not blame their choice, because he looked upon Grotius to be already a very great man. In the execution of this office, he undertook his “Annals,” which were begun in 1614, though not finished long before his death, and not published until twelve years after. All this while his principal employment was that of an advocate, in which he acquired great honour; but, upon the whole, the profession did not please him, though the brilliant figure he made at the bar procured him the place of advocate-general of the fisc for Holland and Zealand, which, becoming vacant, was immediately conferred on him by those provinces. He took possession of this important office in 1607, and filled it with so much reputation, that the States augmented his salary, and promised him a seat in the court of Holland. Upon this promotion, his father began to think of a wife for him, and fixed upon Mary Reigesberg, a lady of great family in Zealand, whose father had been burgomaster of Veer. The marriage was solemnized in July 1608, and celebrated by him in some Latin and French verses, the former of which he translated into Dutch. On this occasion his father likewise wrote an epithalamium, and another was composed by Heinsius. At the time of his marriage he was employed in writing his “Mare liberum,” i. e. “the Freedom of the Ocean, or the Right of the Dutch to trade to the Indies.” The work was printed in 1609, without his knowledge or consent. Indeed he appears not to have been quite satisfied with it: and though there came out seveial answers, particularly that of Selden, entitled “Mare clausum, seti de dominio maris,” yet, being soon after disgusted with his country, he took no farther concern in the controversy. The ensuing year, he published his piece “De antiquitate ReipublieiE Batavae,” designed to shew the original independence of Holland and Friesland against the Spanish claim; and he accordingly dedicated it to those States^ March 16, 1610, who were es-tremely pleased with it, returned thanks to the author, and made him a present. While it was in the press, Grotius and his father, who usually assisted him in his writings, translated it into Dutch.

At this time a dispute arose between the English and the Dutch, concerning the right of fishing in the Northern seas. Two Amsterdam vessels, having caught some whales in the Greenland ocean, were met by some English ships bound to Russia; who, finding that the Dutch had no passports from the king of England, demanded the whales, which the Dutchmen, unable to resist, were obliged to deliver. On their arrival in Holland, they made their complaint; and the affair being laid before the States, it was resolved that Grotius, who had written on the subject, and was more master of it than any one, should be sent to England, where his demands were refused. On this the Dutch determined not to send to Greenland for the future without a force sufficient to revenge themselves on the English, or at least to have nothing to fear from them. The dispute growing serious, to prevent any acts of hostility, a conference was held, in 1615, between the commissioners of England and Holland, in which the debate turned chiefly on the whale-fishery; but, the English still insisting on the right to Greenland, which the Dutch refused, the conference broke up without any success. Grotius, who was one of the commissioners from Holland, gives the history of this conference, in a letter to Du Maurier, dated at Rotterdam, June 5, 1615. On this occasion, however, he had reason to be well satisfied with the politeness of king James, who gave him a gracious reception, and was charmed with his conversation. But the greatest pleasure he received at this visit, was the intimate friendship he contracted with Casaubon. Their esteem for each other was increased by a similarity of studies and sentiments, and they both entertained hopes of a scheme, which human agency at least will never render practicable, that of uniting all Christians in one faith. In the midst of these occupations, Du Maurier, the French ambassador in Holland, and his particular

Hitherto Grotius had passed his life with uninterrupted honour and fame; but a reverse was now approaching The United Provinces had been kindled into a warm dis*­pute about grace and predestination, from 1603, when Arminius first broached his opinions. His doctrines, being directly opposite to those of Calvin, gave great offence to that party, at the head of which appeared Gomar, who accused his antagonist before the synod of Rotterdam. Gomar’s party prevailing there, Arminius applied to the States of Holland, who promised the disputants to have the affair speedily discussed in a synod. The dispute still continuing with much bitterness, in 1611 the States ordered a conference to be held between twelve ministers on each side: but the consequence of this was, that men’s minds were the more inflamed. Arminius died October 19, 1609, some time before this conference; and Grotius made his eulogium in verse. He had hitherto applied little to these matters, and ingenuously owns he did not understand a great part of them, being foreign to his profession; and certainly every admirer of his unrivalled talents must wish that he never had involved himself; but having once studied the controversy, he embraced the Arminian doc* trine. In 1610, the partisans of Arminius drew up a remonstrance, setting forth their belief; first negatively against their adversaries, and then positively their own sentiments, each comprehended in six articles. This remonstrance was drawn up by Utengobard, minister at the Hague, and was probably made in concert with Grotius, the intimate friend and quondam pupil of that minister. To this the Gomarists opposed a contra-remonstrance: the former proposed to end the matter by a toleration, the latter to decide it by a national synod; and, the disputes increasing, the StateSj at the motion of the grand pensionary, with the view of putting an end to them, revived an obsolete law made in 1591, placing the appointment of ministers in the civil magistrates. But this was so far from answering the purpose, that the Contra-remoustrants resolved not to obey it. Hence grew a schism, which occasioned a sedition, and many riots. It was at this time that Grotius was nominated pensionary at Rotterdam, as mentioned above; and ordered to go to England, with secret instructions, as is thought, to persuade the king and principal divines of that kingdom to favour the Arminians, and approve the conduct of the States. He had several conferences with king James on that subject, and while here he wrote his tract in favour of the Arminians, entitled “A reconciliation of the different opinions on Predestination and Grace,” which is printed among his theological works. On his return to Holland he found the divisions increased: Barnevelt and he had the direction of the States’ proceedings in this matter; and he was appointed to draw up an edict which might restore tranquillity, the draught of which was approved by the States; but it was so favourable to the Arminians that it gave great offence to the Contra-remonstrants, who determined to pay no regard to it. Hence this edict serving to increase the troubles, by driving the Gomarists to despair, the grand pensionary Barnevelt, in hourly expectation of fresh riots, proposed to the States of Holland, that their magistrates should be empowered to raise troops for the suppression of the rioters, and the security of their towns. Dort, Amsterdam, and three others of the most favourable to the Gomarists, protested against this step, which they regarded, and in fact it was, as a declaration of war against the Contra-remonstrants. Barnevelt’s motion however was agreed to, and, August 4, 1617, the States issued a placart accordingly. This fatal decree occasioned the death of the grand pensionary, and the ruin of Grotius, by incensing prince Maurice of Nassau against them, who looked upon the resolution of the States, taken without his consent, to be derogatory to his dignity, as governor and captain-general.

Amsterdam, almost as powerful singly as all Holland, favoured the Gomarists, and disapproved the toleration which the States wanted to introduce. These resolved therefore to send a deputation to that city, in order to reconcile them to their sentiments. Grotius was one of. these deputies: they received their instructions April 21, 1616; and, arriving at Amsterdam next day, met the town-council on the 23d, when Grotius was their spokesman. But neither his speech nor all his other endeavours could avail any thing. The burgomasters declared their pinion for a synod, and that they could not receive the cachet of 1614 without endangering the church, and risquing the ruin of their trade. The deputies wished to answer, but were not allowed. Grotius presented to the States on his return an account in writing of all that had passed at this deputation, and he flattered himself for some time with the hopes of good effects from it; hut his disappointment chagrined him so much, that he was seized with a violent fever, which had almost proved fatal. He was removed to Delft, where he recovered, but, being forbid to do any thing which required application, he wrote to Vossius, desiring his company, as the best restorative of his health. The time of his recovery he employed in examining the part he had acted in the present" disputes; and, the more he reflected on it, the less reason he had for altering his sentiments; and although he foresaw the danger he incurred, his resolution was, not to change his conduct, but to refer the event to Providence. The States of Holland, wholly employed in endeavouring to compound matters, came to a resolution, February 21, 1617, to make a rule or formula, to which both parties should be obliged to conform; and such an instrument was accordingly drawn up at their request by Grotius, who presented it to prince Maurice. But the project did not please him; he wanted a national synod, which was at length determined by the States General, and to be convoked in Holland at Dort. In the mean time the prince, who saw with the utmost displeasure several cities, agreeably to the permission given them by the particular States, levy a new militia, under the title of attendant soldiers, without his consent, engaged the States General to write to the provinces and magistrates of those cities, enjoining them to disband the new levies. This injunction not being complied with, he considered the refusal as a rebellion; concerted with the States General, that he should march in. person with the troops under his command, to get the attendant soldiers disbanded, depose the Arminian magistrates, and turn out the ministers of their party. He accordingly set out, accompanied by the deputies of the States^General, in 1618; and, having reduced the province of Gueldres, he was proceeding to Utrecht, when the States of Holland sent thither Grotius, with Hoogerbetz, pensionary of Leyden, to put that city into a posture of defence against him. But, their endeavours proving ineffectual, the prince reduced the place; and soon aftervyards sent Grotius and Hoogerbetz to prison in the castle at the Hague, where Barnevelt also was confined, August 29th this year. After this the States of Holland consented to the national synod, which was opened at Dort, Nov. 15, 1618, which, as is well known, ended in a sentence, condemning the five articles of the Arminians, and in imprisoning and banishing their ministers. This sentence was approved by the States General, July 2, 1619.

Time seemed to pass away very fast amidst these several projects. In a letter dated Dec. 5, 1619, he writes to Vossius, that the muses, which were always his delight, even when immersed in business, were now his consolation, and appeared more amiable than ever. He wrote some short notes on the New Testament, which he intended to send Erpenius, who was projecting a new edition of it; but a fit of illness did not suffer him to finish them. When he was able to resume his studies he composed, in Dutch verse, his “Treatise of the truth of the Christian Religion,” and sent it to Vossius, who thought some places obscure. In 1620 he promises his brother to send him his observations on Seneca’s tragedies, which he had written of Vossius’s desire, In 1621 his friend Du Maurier losing. his lady, Grotius wrote to him, February 27, a very consolatory letter, in which he deduced with great eloquence, every topic of support that philosophy and religion can suggest on that melancholy occasion. It would appear that the only method he took to unbend himself, was to go from one work to another. He translated the “Phenissce of Euripides,” wrote his “Institutions of the Laws of Holland in Dutch,” and composed some short “Instructions for his Daughter” Cornelia, in the form of a catechism, in Flemish verse, containing 185 questions and answers. This was printed at the Hague in 1619, and he afterwards translated it into Latin verse, for the use of his son. This seems to be the catechism mentioned in our account of Nicholas Grey, master of Merchant Taylors’ school. He wrote also, while under confinement, a dialogue in Dutch verse, between a father and a son, on the necessity of silence.

He had been above 18 months shut up at Louvesteih, when, January 11, 1620, Muys van-Halli, his declared enemy, who had been one of his judges, informed the States general, that he had advice from good authority, that their prisoner was seeking to make his escape. Some persons were sent to examine into this matter; but, notivithstanding all the inquiry that could be made, they found no reason to believe that he had contrived any means to escape. H s wife, however, was very industriously and ingeniously employed in contriving it, which she effected in the following manner. He had been permitted to borrow books of his friends, and when he had done with them they were carried back in a chest with his foul linen, which was sent to Gorcum to be washed. The first year his guards were very exact in examining the chest; but, being used to find nothing in it besides books and linen, they grew tired of searching, and even did not take the trouble to open it. His wife, observing their negligence, proposed to take advantage of it. She represented to her husband, that it was in his power to get out of prison when he pleased, if he would put himself into this chest; and not to endanger his health, she caused holes to be bored opposite where his face was to be, to breathe at, persuading him to try if he could continue shut up in that confined posture, as long as it would require to go from Louvestein to Gorcum. Finding it might be done, she resolved to seize the first favourable opportunity; which very soon offered. The commandant of Louvestein going to Heusden to raise recruits, she paid a visit to his lady, and told her in the course of conversation, that she was desirous of sending away a chest of books; for, her husband was so weak, that it gave her great uneasiness to see him study with such application. Having thus prepared the commandant’s wife, she returned to her husband’s apartment, and in concert with a valet and a maid who were in the secret, shut him up in the chest; and at the same time, that the people might not be surprised at not seeing him, she spread a report of his being ill. Two soldiers carried the chest; one of them, finding it was heavier than usual, said there must be “an Arminian in it.” Grotius’s wife, who was present, said with great coolness, “There are indeed Arminian books in it.” The chest was brought down on a ladder with great difficulty; the soldier insisted on its being opened, to see wiiat was in it; he even went and informed the commandant’s wife, that the weight of the chest gave him reason to suspect the contents, and that it would be proper to have it opened. She told him that Grotius’ s wife had said there was nothing but books in and that they might carry it to the boat. It is even said that a soldier’s wife, who was present, reminded them there was more than one example of prisoners making their escape in boxes. In this way, however, eiither by negligence, or connivance, which there seems no reason to suspect, the chest was brought down, and put into the boat; and Grotius’s maid, who was in the secret, had orders to go to Gorcum with it, and put it into a house there. When it came to Gorcum, they wanted to put it on a sledge; but the maid telling the boatman that there were some brittle things in it, and begging of him to take care how it was carried, it was put on a horse, and carried by two chairmen to David Dazelaor’s, a friend of Grotius, and brother-in-law to Erpenius; and, when every body was gone, the maid opened the chest. Grotius had felt no inconvenience in it, though its length was not above three feet and a half. He got out, dressed himself like a mason with a rule and a trowel; and was secretly conveyed in this disguise to Valvic in Brabant. Here he made himself known to some Arminians, and hired a carriage to Antwerp; and, at Antwerp, he alighted at the house of Nicolas Grevincovius, who had been formerly a minister at Amsterdam., but did not make himself known to any other person. It was on March 22, 1621, that he thus recovered his liberty.

In the mean time, his wife’s account, that he was ill, gained credit at Louvestein and, to give him time to get out, she gave out that his illness was dangerous but as soon as she learnt by the maid’s return that he was at Brabant, and consequently in safety, she told the guards what had happened. They informed the commandant, by this time returned from Heusden, who, finding it true, confined Grotius’s wife more closely; but upon her petition to the States-General, April 5, 1621, she was discharged two days after, and suffered to carry away every thing that belonged to her in Louvestein. From Antwerp, Grotius wrote to the States-General, March 30, that, in procuring his liberty, he had employed neither violence nor corruption with his keepers; that he had nothing to reproach himself with in what he had done; that he gave those counsels which he thought best for appeasing the troubles that had arisen in public business; that he only obeyed the magistrates of Rotterdam his masters, and the States of Holland his sovereigns; and that the persecution he had suffered would never diminish his love for his country, for whose prosperity he heartily prayed. He continued some time at Antwerp, deliberating what course to take; and at length, principally by the advice of Du Maurier, determined to go to France, where he had many friends. He arrived at Paris, April 13, 1621, and his wife in October following; but their expences had so much exceeded the small revenue she had still left, that in the beginning of December, he wrote to Du Maurier, that if something was not soon done, he must seek a settlement in Germany, or hide himself in some corner of France. At length the king coming to Paris in January 1621, Grotius was presented to him by the chancellor and the keeper of the seals, in the beginning of March, and on a day when the court was very numerous. His majesty received him graciously, and granted him a pension of 3000 livres, and upon his account granted a protection to all the Dutch refugees, a very singular exchange of the principles of toleration between the two countries. But, notwithstanding the king’s grant, he could not touch the money; they had forgot to put it on the civil list, and the commissioners of the treasury found daily some new excuse for delaying the payment; and at length, when by the solicitation of some powerful friends, he received it, it continued to be paid as grants were paid at that time, that is to say, very slowly. These difficulties did not diminish his passion for literature, “I persist,” he says in a letter to Vossius, dated Sept. 29, 162], “in my respect for sacred antiquity; there are many people here of the same taste. My six books in Dutch will appear soon (i. e. his book on the truth of the Chr.stiau religion.) Perhaps 1 shall also publish my disquisition on Pelagianism, with the precautions hinted to me by you and some other persons of learning. In the mean time, I am preparing an edition of Stobrcus; and to render it more perfect, 1 collate the Greek Mss. with the printed copies.” Thus he spent the greatest part of his time; and as the ministers of Charenton, who had accorded with the decisions of the synod of Dort, would not admit him into their communion, he resolved to have divine service performed at home in his family.

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

He had now lived a year in the noise of Paris, and began to think of retiring into the country, when the presiDe Meme offered him one of his seats at Bologne, near Senlis. Grotius accepted the offer, and passed there the spring and summer of 1623. In this castle he began his great work, which alone is sufficient to render his name immortal, his “Treatise of the Rights of Peace and War.” He had visited the most distinguished men of learning; among others Salmasius and Rigault, and had the free use of de Thou’s library: he sometimes also made excursions to St. Germain’s, where the court was; but, having learned that De Meme wanted to reside at Bologne, he returned to Paris in October. Btirigny informs us, which somewhat diminishes our respect for Grotius’s firmness of mine!, that he took particular care not to offend De Meme, who was a zealous catholic, and was even so submissive as to eat meagre on Fridays, to receive none of his Dutch refugee ministers, and to abstain from every public or private exercise of the protestant religious worship. In April 1625, prince Frederic Henry succeeding to the post of stadtholder on the death of his brother Maurice, Grotius’s friends conceived great hopes of obtaining leave for his return to Holland and, at their request, he wrote to the new stadtholder for this purpose, but without effect as he had before conjectured. However, he was now in the height of his glory by the prodigious success of his book “De Jure Belli Si Pacis,” which was published this year. In the mean time he began to grow tired of that city. His pension was ill-paid, and his revenue insufficient to keep him decently with a wife and a family. He had an offer of being professor of law in a college at Denmark; but, though he was satisfied with the salary, he thought the place beneath his acceptance. While he remained in suspense, cardinal Richelieu was nominated prime minister in 1626, and being very desirous of becoming acquainted with Grotius, invited him to his house at Limours. Here it is supposed that he wished to engage Grotius to devote himself entirely to him, and that Grotius’s reservations gave offence. It is certain that from this time his pension was unpaid, which greatly distressed him, but his love for Paris induced him to bear with such a privation as long as it was possible.

But no city ventured publicly to protect him; and the States-General, thinking themselves affronted by this boldness in continuing in the country without their leave, and by the repugnance he shewed to ask them pardon, issued an ordinance, December 10, 1631, enjoining all bailiffs of the country to seize his person, and give them notice: yet such was the general sympathy of his countrymen, that no person would execute it; and, to employ himself till his fate should be determined, he resolved to follow the business of a chamber-counsel. With this view he desired his brother, in a letter dated February 16, 1632, to send him what law books he might want for that office but of these he could make no long use; for, the States-General on March 10 renewed their ordinance, upon pain to those who would not obey, of lo.sing their places, and with a promise of 2000 florins to any one who should deliver him into the hands of justice. Upon this he thought proper to seek for an asylum elsewhere; and, on March 17, he set out from Amsterdam on his way to Hamburgh, and passed the fine season at an agreeable seat called Okenhuse, near the Elbe, belonging to William Morth, a Dutchman. On the approach of winter, he went to Hamburgh, and lodged with one Van Sorgen. a merchant: but the town did not prove agreeable to him, and he passed his time but heavily till the return of his wife from Zealand in autumn 1633. She had always been his consolation in adversity, and rendered all his sufferings more tolerable, not more by her affection, than by her good sense, and resources of mind. Her business at Zealand was to collect the remains of their fortune, which she probably brought with her to HambufgnY While he continued here, some advantageous proposal? were made him from Spain, Poland, Denmark, the duke 1 of Holstein, and several other princes; but still entertaining the thought of a reconciliation with his native country, it was long before he could be prevailed upon to abandon it, to which measure the following circumstances at last contributed.

He had always entertained a very high opinion of Gustavus king of Sweden; and that prince having sent to Paris Benedict Oxenstiern, a relation of the chancellor, to bring to a final conclusion the treaty between France and Sweden, this minister became acquainted with Grotius, and resolved, if possible, to draw him to his master’s court: and Grotius writes, that if that monarch would nominate him ambassador, with a proper salary for the decent sup* port of the dignity, the proposal might be accepted. In this situation Salvius, vice-chancellor of Sweden, a great statesman, and a man of learning, being then at this city, Grotius was introduced to him, and saw him frequently. Polite literature was the subject of their conversation. Salvius conceived a great esteem for Grotius, and the favourable report he made of him to the high-chancellor Oxenstiern determined the latter to write to Grotius to come to him, that he might employ him in affairs of the greatest importance. Grotius accepted of this invitation; and setting out for Francfort on the Maine, where that minister Avas, arrived there in May 1634. He was received with the; greatest politeness by Oxenstiern, who did not yet, how-> ever, explain his intentions. In confidence of the highchancellor’s character, and apparent sincerity, he sent for his wife, who arrived at Francfort with his daughters and son, in the beginning of August The chancellor after for some time continuing to heap civilities upon him, without mentioning a word of business, ordered that he should follow him to Mentz, and at length declared him counsellor to the queen of Sweden, and her ambassador to the court of France.

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

Stockholm, therefore, he went to a. sea-port two leaguus distant, in order to embark for Lubeck. The queen, being informed of his departure, sent a gentleman to tell him she wanted to see him once more, otherwise she should think he was displeased with her. He returned therefore to Stockholm, and explained himself to the queen, who seemed satisfied with his reasons, and made him a large present in money, amounting to 12 or 13,000 imperials; adding to it some silver plate which was not finished sooner, and which he was assured had delayed the granting of his passport. That was afterwards issued; and the queen gave him a vessel, on-board which he embarked, August 12, for Lubeck.

But the vessel was scarce sailed when a violent storm arose, which obliged her after three days tossing to put in, August 17, on the coast of Pomerania, fourteen miles from Dantzic. Grotius set out in an open waggon for Lubeck, and arrived at Rostock, August 26, very ill, having travelled about sixty miles through wind and rain. He lodged with Balleman, and sent for Stochman the physician, who, from the symptoms, judged he could not live long. Ou the 28th he sent for Quistorpius, minister of that town, who gives the following account of his last moments: “You are desirous of hearing how that phoenix of literature, Hugo Grotius, behaved in his last moments; I am going to tell you.” He then proceeds to give an account of his voyage, and his sending for Stochman, a Scotch physician, after which he goes on as follows: “he sent for me about nine at night; I went, and found him almost at the point of death. I said, * There was nothing I desired more than to have seen him in health, that I might have had the pleasure of his conversation;‘ he said, ’ God hath ordered it otherwise. 7 I desired him t to prepare himself for a happier life, to acknowledge he was a sinner, arrd repent of his faults;‘ and happening to mention the publican, who acknowledged he was a sinner, and asked God’s mercy, he answered, * I am that publican.’ I went on, and told him that ‘ he must have recourse to Jesus Christ, without whom there is no salvation.’ He replied, * I place my hope in Jesus Christ.‘ I began to repeat aloud in German the prayer that begins ’ Holy Jesus;‘ he followed me in a very low voice with his hands clasped. When I had done, I asked him if he understood me he answered, < I understand you very well.’ I continued to repeat to him those passages of the word of God, which are commonly offered to the remembrance of dying persons; and, asking if he Understood me, he answered me, * I heard your voice, but did not understand what you said.'. These were his last Words; soon after he expired, just at midnight. His body was delivered to the physicians, who took out his bowels, and easily obtained leave to bury them in our principal church, dedicated to the Virgin Mary.”

His theological works, printed in 3 vols. fol. but usually bound in four, include his Commentaries on the Bible, concerning which there have been various opinions. Some esteem him one of the best general commentators, and plead for him that he must not be thought to oppose a doctrine because he rejects some of the texts which have been quoted in support of it. This is plausible; but others conceive that doubts as to his orthodoxy are well founded, and it is evident that none of his biographers have been able to set up a good defence of him in this respect. Calmet has justly remarked the ambiguity of his notions respecting the divinity of Christ, and the doctrine of original sin the indecency of his prefaces and explanation of the Canticles and objects to him that he weakens or reduces almost to nothing the prophecies relating to Jesus Christ. Nor was he less offensive to protestants for his notions conr cerning the pope’s not being antichrist, and concerning St. Paul’s expectation of living until the general judgment. With regard to the prophecies, he is said to have been the first interpreter of Scripture (though some are inclined to doubt this priority) who endeavoured to prove that the greater part of the prophecies of the Old Testament had a double sense, and have received a double accomplishment. He maintains that the predictions even of the evangelical prophet Isaiah, related in their primary and literal sense to the times and circumstances of the Jewish people, but that they respected the Messiah in a secondary and allegorical sense. It is unnecessary to inform such of our readers as are acquainted with the history of theological controversy, that these notions have met with able opponents both in the churches of Rome and England, and it is perhaps as unnecessary to add that they sufficiently account for the general suspicion entertained of Grotius’s religious principles, as well as for the various systems to which his friends or enemies wished, or suspected him to be at one time or other attached.

It seems universally allowed that Grotius’s treatise “On the Truth of Christianity” is the most valuable of his theological writings. This has been translated into almost every European, and into some of the Eastern languages, and is still used at schools and universities as a text book. In English we have at least five translations of it. But the work on which his fame principally rests is his treatise “De Jure Belli ac Pacis,” in which he first reduced the law of nations to a system. It wns by the advice of lord Bacon and Peiresc that he undertook this arduous task. “Few works,” says an elegant modern writer, “were more celebrated than that of Grotius in his own days, and in the age which succeeded. It has, however, been the fashion of the last half century to depreciate his work as a shapeless compilation, in which reason lies buried under a mass of authorities and quotations. This fashion originated among French wits and declaimers, and it has been, I know not for what reason, adopted, though with far greater moderation and decency, by some respectable writers among ourselves. As to those who first used this language, the most candid supposition that we can make with respect to them is, that they never read the work; for, if they had not been deterred from the perusal of it by such a formidable display of Greek characters, they must soon have discovered that Grotius never quotes on any subject till he has first appealed to some principles, and often, in my humble opinion, though not always, to the soundest and most rational principles.

“But another sort of answer is due to some of those who have criticised Grotius, and that answer might be given in the words of Grotius himself. He was not of such a stupid and servile cast of mind, as to quote the opinions of poets or orators, of historians and philosophers, as those of judges, from whose decision there was no appeal. He quotes them, as he tells us himself, as witnesses whose conspiring testimony, mightily strengthened and confirmed by their discordance on almost every other subject, is a conclusive proof of the unanimity of the whole human race on the great rules of duty and the fundamental principles of morals. On such matters poets and orators are the most unexceptionable of all witnesses for they address themselves to the general feelings and sympathies of mankind they are neither warped by system, nor perverted by sophistry; they can attain none of their objects; they can neither please nor persuade if they dwell on moral sentiments not in unison with those of their readers. No system of moral philosophy can surely disregard the general feelings of human nature and the according judgment of all ages and nations. But where are these feelings and that judgment recorded and preserved In those very writings which Grotius is gravely blamed for having quoted. The usages and laws of nations, the events of history, the opinions of philosophers, the sentiments of orators and poets, as well as the observation of common life, are, in truth, the materials out of which the science of morality is formed; and those who neglect them are justly chargeable with a vain attempt to philosophise without regard to fact and experience, the sole foundation of all true philosophy. “If this were merely an objection of taste, I should be willing to allow that Grotius has indeed poured forth his learning with a profusion that sometimes rather encumbers than adorns his work, and which is not always necessary to the illustration of his subject. Yet, even in making that concession, I should rather yield to the taste of others than speak from my own feelings. I own that such richness and splendour of literature have a powerful charm for me. They fill my mind with an endless variety of delightful recollections and associations. They relieve the understanding in its progress through a vast science, by calling up the memory of great men and of interesting events. By this means we see the truths of morality clothed with all the eloquence (not that could be produced by the powers of one man, but) that could be bestowed on them by the collective genius of the world. Even virtue and wisdom themselves acquire new majesty in my eyes, when I thus see all the great masters of thinking and writing called together, as it were, from all times and countries, to do them homage, and to appear in their train.

“But this is no place for discussions of taste, and I am very ready to own that mine may be corrupted. The work of Grotius is liable to a more serious objection, though I do not recollect that it has ever been made. His method is inconvenient and unscientific. He has inverted the natural order. That natural order undoubtedly dictates that we should first search for the original principles of the science in human nature then apply them to the regulation of the conduct of individuals and lastly, employ them for the decision of those difficult and complicated questions that arise with respect to the intercourse of nations. But Grolius has chosen the reverse of this method, tie begins with the consideration of the states of peace and war, and he examines original principles only occasionally and incidentally as they grow out of the questions which he is called upon to decide. It is a uecessary consequence of this disorderly method, which exhibits the elements of the science in the form of scattered digressions, that he seldom employs sufficient discussion on these fundamental truths, and never in the place where such a discussion would be most instructive to the reader. This defect in the plan of Grotius was perceived, and supplied by Puffendorff, who restored natural law to that superiority which belonged to it, and with great propriety treated the law of nations as only one main branch of the parent stock,” &c.

, an Italian poet, commonly called, from his misfortune, Cieco D‘Adria, was born Sept. 7, 1541, in the ancient town of Adria, which gives name to the gulph called the Adriatic. His parents were of a noble but decayed family. He lost his sight a few days after his birth, and never recovered it. Yet this did not check his proficiency in learning; able masters were provided, under whom he made astonishing progress, although we may conceive with considerable difficulty to his instructors. He lays, indeed, in one of his orations, that when a new master visited him, he used to say, *’ you must teach me how I am to teach you." His talents and acquirements, however, procured him very early fame, and such was his natural eloquence, that at the age of fourteen he was chosen on two very solemn occasions, the one when the queen of Poland visited Venice, and the other on the election of the Doge Lorenzo Priuli, to give a public harangue in that city, where Casa and other orators had been so much celebrated, and acquitted himself with the greatest credit. His youth and his blindness might probably procure him favour, but according to his biographer, he was received with equal applause at other times and places, and under other circumstances. Having an early turn for poetry as well as oratory, he attempted to write for the stage, and although inferior to the other dramatic poets who then flourished at Ferrara, Rome, and Florence, he became a favourite with the people of Adria. In other cities to which he was invited as a public speaker, at Ferrara, Bologna, and Rovigo, he was received with every mark of distinction. Several princesses, as Laura of Este, and Laura Gonzaga, who patronized genius, frequently visited him, and made him rich presents. Yet he remained poor, fortune being in general more liberal of honours than of riches. Although blind, he appears to have felt the tender passion, which he has often introduced in his lyric poetry and in his dramas; in the latter, indeed, he treats of love matters in a style which gives but an unfavourable idea of his delicacy. In 1585 he acquired much reputation at Vincenza by playing the part of CEdipus when represented by the academicians in the famous Olympic theatre of Palladio. He did not, however, appear on this occasion, until the last act, when CEdipus appears blind. He was at this time in full health, but was suddenly attacked with a disorder at Venice, which proved fatal Dec. 13 of that year. His remains were carried to his own country, and interred with great funeral honours. His works consist of orations, published at Venice 1598, 4to, and tragedies, two pastorals, and other pieces of poetry, printed separately. They are distinguished rather by genius than judgment, and abound in that play of words, and those extravagant metaphors which were so much the taste of the subsequent age, and which appear most out of place in his pastorals.

, a learned divine among the disseners, was descended from the Groves of Wiltshire, and the Jlowes of Devonshire. His grandfather Grove was ejected from a living in Devonshire for nonconformity in 1662; his father suffered much in the same cause for lay-nonconformity under Charles and James II. The eminent piety of Mr. Rowe, his grandfather by the mother’s side, may be known by the account of his life by Mr. Theophilus Gale. His father, in particular, filled a life of eighty years honourably and usefully, and died universally esteemed and lamented. From such parents our author was born at Taunton, in Somersetshire, January 4, 1683, and at fourteen years of age, being possessed with a sufficient stock of classical literature, he went through a course of jacademical learning under the rev. Mr. Warren, of Taunton, who was for many years at the head of a flourishing academy. Having finished here his course of philosophy and divinity, he removed to London, and studied some time under the rev. Mr. Rowe, to whom he was nearly related. At this time he contracted a friendship with several person^ of merit, and particularly with Dr. Watts, which continued till his death, though they differed in their judgment upon several points.

In 1725 he lost his partner in the academy, the rev. Mr. James; and was now obliged to take the students in, divinity under his direction. In the execution of this, task he confined himself to no system in divinity, but directed his pupils to the best writers on natural and revealed religion, and an impartial consideration of the chief controversies. He likewise succeeded Mr. James in his pastoral charge at Fullwood^ near Taunton, in which he continued till his death. In 1730 he published “The Evidence of our Saviour’s Resurrection considered,” and the same year, “Some Thoughts concerning the Proof of a future State from Reason,” in answer to the rev. Mr. Hallet, junior, which drew him into a dispute on the point with that divine. In this controversy he was thought to disparage the necessity of revelation in regard to that proof. In 1732 he printed “A Discourse concerning the Nature and Design of the Lord’s Supper,” where he set that institution in the same light with bishop Hoadly. In 173-1he published, without his name, “Wisdom the first Spring of Action in the Deity,” which was animadverted on, as to some particulars, by Mr. Balguy, who, however, allowed the discourse in general to abound in solid remarks and sound reasonings. In 1736 he published “A Discourse on saving Faith.” The same year he met with a heavy affliction, in the death of his wife; and a little more than a year after this, he died himself; for, having preached on February 19, 1737-8, and with such an uncommon flow of spirits as he said he could hardly govern, he was violentlyseized at night with a fever, which carried him off upon the 27th. His friends erected a handsome monument over his grave, on which is a Latin inscription composed by the late Dr. Ward, rhetoric-professor at Gresham-college, who has also obliged the world with an English version of it. Besides the works already mentioned, he published many sermons upon several occasions, and also a volume of (i Miscellanies in prose and verse.“After his death came out by subscription his” Posthumous Works,“1740, in 4 vols. 8vo. Gruchius, or Grouciii (Nicholas), an eminent antiquary in the sixteenth century, descended from a noble family of Rouen, was the first who explained Aristotle in Greek. He taught with reputation at Paris, Bourdeaux, and Coimbra, and, on his return to France, went to Rochelle, where a college was intended to be established, and where he died in January 1572, leaving many works. The most known are, a translation of F. L. de Castagneda’s” History of the Indies,“Paris, 1554, 4to; a treatise” De Comitiis Romanorum," 1555, fol.; and some pieces against Sigonius, fol. which Sigonius did not answer till he heard of the author’s death.

, a celebrated philologer, was born December 3, 1560, at Antwerp. He was the son of John Walter Gruter, burgomaster of Antwerp; who, having, among others, signed the famous petition tq the duchess of Parma, the governess of the Netherlands, which gave rise to the word Gueux (Beggars), was banished his country. He crossed the sea to Norwich in England, taking his wife (who was an English woman) and family along with him. Young Gruter was then but an infant; he had the peculiar felicity, like Cicero, of imbibing the elements of learning from his mother, Catharine Tishem; who, besides French, Italian, and English, was complete mistress of Latin, and so well skilled in Greek that she could read Galen in the original. The family found an hospitable asylum in England, where they resided several years, and at a proper age sent their son to complete his education at Cambridge. His parents, after some time, repassing the sea to Middleburg, the son followed them to Holland and, going to Leyden, studied the civil law, and took his doctor’s degree there in that faculty but, applying himself at the same time to polite literature, he became an early author, as appears by some Latin verses which he published, under the title of “Ocelli,” at twenty years of age.

After taking his degree, he went to Antwerp, to his fa ther, who had returned thither as soon as the States had possessed themselves of it; but, when the city was threatened with a siege by the duke of Parma in 15S4-, was sent to France, where he resided some years, and then visited other countries. The particular route and circumstances of his travels afterwards are not known; but it appears that he read public lectures upon the Classics at Rostock, particularly on Suetonius. He was in Prussia, when Christian, duke of Saxony, offered him the chair of hi story -professor in the university of Wittemburg; which place he enjoyed but a few months: for, upon the death of that prince, his successors desiring the professors to subscribe the act of concord on pain of forfeiting their places, Gruterus chose rather to resign than subscribe a confession of faith which he could not reconcile to his conscience. He was treated with particular seventy on this occasion for, while two others who were deprived on the same account, had half a year’s salary allowed them by way of gratification, according to the custom of those countries, with regard to persons honourably discharged; yet in the case of Gruterus, they did not defray even the expences of his journey. Where he went immediately after this does not appear; but we are told, that, being at Padua at the time of Riccoboni’s death, that professor’s place was offered to him, together with liberty of conscience: the salary too was very considerable, yet he refused all these advantages. He was apprehensive that so profitable and honourable an employment would expose him to the attacks of envy, and he would not submit to the bare exercise of his religion in private. He was therefore much better pleased with an invitation to Heidelberg, where he filled the professor’s chair with great reputation for many years; and, in 1602, had the direction of that famous library, which was afterwards carried to Rome.

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

Gruterus had left Heidelberg before it was taken, and retired to his son-in-law’s at Bretten, whence he went to Tubingen, where he remained some time. He made several removes afterwards, and received invitations to read lectures at various places, and particularly one from Denmark, to enter into the service of the constable D'Esdiguieres. The curators also of the university of Frauecker offered him the professorship of history in 1624; but, when the affairs of the palatinate were a little settled, he returned to Bretten; where, however, he found himself very mucli teazed by some young Jesuits who were fond of disputing. Gruterus, who never loved controversy, especially upon religious subjects, could think of no other way of getting rid of their importunities than by living at a distance from them. He retired therefore to a country-house, which he purchased near Heidelberg, where he used to make visits occasionally. He came from one of these, September 1627, and going to Bernhelden, a country seat belonging to his son-in-law Smendius, about a league’s distance from Heidelberg, he fell sick Sept. 20, and expired. His corpse was carried to Heidelberg, and interred in St. Peter’s church.

He had a son, Samuel Grynaeus, born at Basil in 1539, who was made professor of eloquence there at the age of twenty-five. He had also a nephew, Thomas, who was born in 1512. He pursued his studies under the auspices of his uncle, and taught the Latin and Greek languages at Berne. He also read public lectures at Basil, and was a great supporter of the reformed religion. He left four sons, all of whom were eminent for their learning. One of them is the subject of our next article.

, was born at Bern in 1540, was educated at Basil, and m 1551 was admitted into the university. In 1559 he was ordained deacon, and began to preach the doctrines of the reformers. In 1563 he went to Tubingen, and the year following was created doctor in divinity, and soon after succeeded his father, as pastor of Rotelen, where, besides his more public services, he lectured twice a week to the deacons. About this time the “Form of Concord' 7 between the Lutheran and Zuingtiaft parties, respecting the corporal presence of Christ’s body in the Lord’s Supper^ was a matter of deep controversy. Grynasus, who had hitherto been a Lutheran, now studied the controversy more closely, the result of which was his declaring his opinion in favour of Zuinglius, and this lost him many friends of. the contrary party. In 1575 he was invited to Basil, to lecture upon the Old Testament, in the course of which employment he was happily instrumental in healing the differences between the Lutheran and Zuinglian churches; and his instructions were so much approved, that many noblemen and gentlemen came from other countries, and boarded with him for the sake of tuition and conversation. After the death of Lewis, the elector palatine, prince Casimir invited him to Heidelberg, where he read divinity and history almost two years^ but was then recalled to Basil to succeed Sulcer in his pastoral office and professorship; both which offices he discharged with faithfulness and success for the remainder of his life, In the latter part of it he became very infirm and blind, and outlived all his children, except one daughter. These calamities he bore with pious resignation, and expired Aug. 30, 1617. He was a man of extensive learning, and highly respected by his conteai<­poraries. Among his writings are, 1.” A Summary of the Old Testament.“2. An Outline of Divinity.” 3* “The Character of Christians.” 4. Expositions on the Psalms, and other parts of Scripture; and various theological theses, and disputations. 5. “A Commentary upon Irenaeus.” 6. “An Ecclesiastical History.” 7. “Chronology of the Gospel History.” His “Letters” to his friends are highly praised by Melchior Adam.

, a celebrated printer of Lyons, in France, was a German, and born at Suabia, near Augsburg, in 1493. He performed the duties of his profession with so much honour as to receive the approbation of the most learned men. Conrad Gesner has even “dedicated one of his books, namely, the twelfth of his pandects, to him and takes occasion to bestow the following praises on him” You, most humane Gryphius, who are far from meriting the last place among the excellent printers of this age, came first into my mind: and especially on this account, because you have not only gained greater fame than any foreigner in France, by a vast number of most excellent works, printed with the greatest beauty and accuracy, but because, though a German, you seem to be a countryman, by youV coming to reside amon<r us.“Baillet says, that Julius Scaliger dedicated also to him his work” De Causis Linguae Latinae:“but this seems a mistake. Scaliger wrote a kind letter to Gryphius, which is printed at the head of the work: but the dedication is to Silvius Scaliger, his eldest son, to whom he also addressed his” Ars Poetica." Gryphius is allowed to have restored the art of printing at Lyons, which was before exceedingly corrupted; and the great number of books printed by him are valued by the connoisseurs. He printed many books in HebreV, Greek, and Latin, with new and very beautiful types; and his editions are no less accurate than beautiful. He was himself a very learned man, and perfectly versed in the languages of such books as he undertook to print. Vulteius, of Reims, an epigrammatist, has observed, that Robert Stephens was a very good corrector, Colinaeus a very good printer, but that Gryphius was both an able printer and corrector.

, a learned French abbé, prior of St. George de Vigou, a member of the royal society of London (1742) and of the French academy of sciences, was born in Languedoc, in 1712, and was the son of John de Gua, baron of Halves, whose property was swallowed up in the unfortunate Missisippi Scheme. He was educated for the church, but appears to have had less ambition for promotion in that, than to render himself distinguished for scientific knowledge. When admitted into the academy of sciences in 1741, he gave a specimen of his skill in mathematics by publishing “Usages de l'analyse de Descartes,” and was the author of other papers on mathematical subjects in the Memoirs of the Academy, in one of which he endeavours to vindicate Descartes against our Wallis, who, in the abbe’s opinion, wrote his history of algebra for no other purpose than to bestow upon his coun ­tryman Hariot, the discoveries that belong to Viete and Descartes. (See Hariot.) The abbe* was, however, chiefly distinguished in France for having first given the plan of the Encyclopedic, although he wrote very little in it. In 1764 he presented a plan for exploring the mines of Languedoc, and was the author of some other projects whick bad little success. His necessities sometimes drove him to the business of translating for the booksellers. Amonothese publications we find bishop Berkeley’s “Hylas and Philonous,” “Locke’s Essay,” Anson’s Voyage, and Decker on trade. He died at Paris, June 2, 1735, leaving the character of a man of considerable learning and industry, but not very happy in his temper, and often pursuing trifling difficulties, which he made a great merit in surmounting, such as complicated anagrams; and on one occasion, in consequence of a sort of challenge, he perplexed himself in writing a very long poem, in which words only of one syllable were admitted.

, an eminent Swiss divine, and one of the first reformers, was born at Zurich in 1529. In his youth he attained an accurate knowledge of Greek and Latin, and acquired much fame as an orator and Latin poet. He married the daughter of Zuinglius, and being admitted into orders, preached at Zurich from 1542 to 1575, when he was chosen to succeed Bullinger, as first minister of the protestant church there. His writings also, which consisted of homilies, or sermons on the prophets, evangelists, and apostles, procured him great fame both at home and abroad, and were long regarded as standard books among the protestant churches. He died Nov. 25, 1586. In the early part of queen Elizabeth’s reign we find him corresponding with the English divines who had been exiles in the preceding reign, and brought over an attachment to the simple forms of the Genevan church, which Elizabeth wished to discourage. His works, as enumerated by Verheiden, consist of Latin poems, commentaries on various books of the Scripture, works on grammar and history, and some translations. His son, of the same names, spent some years in Merton college, Oxford, where he took his degree of M. A. in 1573, and returning to Zurich, became minister of St. Peter’s church there. Wood attributes several Latin poems to him, some of which we suspect were the production of his father: but this young man died in 1577, when oniy twenty five years of age.

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

, or more commonly Guarini (Battista), an eminent pastoral poet, descended in the fourth degree from Guarino Veronese, was born at Ferrara in 1537. We know but little of his early years and studies; but it is said that in the course of his education he spent some time at Pisa, and at Padua, where he was much esteemed by the rector of the university; but at an early age he went to Rome, and was still young when, on his return to Ferrara, he lectured for about a year with great reputation, on Aristotle’s Morals, in the same university in which the memory of his ancestors continued to be highly venerated. He was professor of belles lettres there in 1563, when he sent one of his sonnets to Annibal Caro, who in his answer complimented him as a young man of the greatest hopes. In his twenty-eighth year he was admitted into the academy of the Eterei of Padua, founded by the young prince Scipio of Gonzaga, afterwards cardinal. Tasso was at the same time admitted, and between him and Guarino a friendship commenced, which was afterwards disturbed by rivalship.

Guarino had the misfortune to be early involved in family law-suits, and had to apply for the heritage of his grandfather and grand- uncle in opposition to francis Guahuo, his father, who has left no other character than that of a keen sportsman, and who was the only one of the family that had no taste for literature. Having lost his first wife, he married again to injure his son’s interest; hut the duke Hercules II. interposed, and assigned to our poet a proportion of the family property, which was very considerable. Battista married himself about this time Taddea Bendedei, a lady of a noble family of Ferrara.

On his return, he was appointed counsellor and secretary of state, but had scarcely been invested with these honours before he was obliged again to go to Poland, which Henry of France had left in order to succeed his brother Charles IX. on the throne of France. Guarino’s business in Poland now was to manage the affairs of his master, who aspired to the crown of Poland; but this employment was very difficult and even dangerous. In one of his letters to his wife, he says that he was obliged to travel all day more like a courier than an ambassador, and spend the night in writing his memorials, which proved too much for his health. Anxiety of mind and fatigue of body threw him into a fever, which made him despair of his life, and in that fear, he wrote a very affectionate letter to his wife, taking leave of her, and recommending his children to her care. It appears by his correspondence that it was not entirely on account of his ^aierits that he was employed in these distant and intricate missions, and that he had enemies at Ferrara, who made use of his reputation and the confidence the prince had in him, to get him removed. This, however, did not abate his zeal for the interests of his master, although the negociation was not successful, nor was he ever rewarded suitably to his exertions.

After his return to Ferrara, he spent his time in the service of his prince, in study, and in managing some lawsuits, from which it was his misfortune to be seldom free; but finding still more fatigue and uneasiness in attending the court, he made these law-suits a pretext for asking leave to resign, which was granted. Become now his own master, at the age of forty-five years, fifteen of which he had spent in a service by no means of any advantage to himself, he retired in 1582, with his family to la Guarina, a pleasant country-seat at Polesina de Itovigo, which duke Borso had presented to his grand-father, as a reward for his services as envoy in France. Here he determined to pass the five finest months of the year, and the rest at Padua. He had now eight children, three sons and five daughters; he was also involved in lawsuits and in debts; all his time and every effort appeared necessary to recover from such a situation, and he seems at one time to have despaired of finding any leisure to cultivate polite literature. After he had been, however, quietly settled at this country seat, he found that he could relax a little from his more serious and pressing occupations. The fame which accompanied the publication of Tasso’s “Aminta” recalled Guarino’s attention to a work which he had sketched many years before, and had occasionally touched and re-touched, but without completing it. Tasso and he, we have already observed, were friends in their youth, but when they met at the court of Ferrara, rivulship in, court gallantries and poetry had separated them. Some satirical sonnets passed between them, but here their animosity ended, and they henceforth had the liberality to do justice to each other’s talents. Tasso’s misfortunes were now begun, and Guarino, shocked at the incorrect manner in which the first editions of the “Jerusalem delivered” were printed without the knowledge of the author, took every pains to prepare it for a correct edition, and bestowed the same care on the other published works of that poqt. The only thing be would not yield toTasso was superiority, and though unable to rival him in his larger poems, he thought he could surpass him in pastoral, and his “Pastor Fido” was to be the criterion. Besides submitting the manuscript to some men of taste, he read it before the duke Ferdinand II. of Gonzaga, at Guastalla, and a large company, composed of poets, admirers of poetry, and ladies of the first rank and taste, who were unbounded in their applauses. It is said to have been first performed at Turin in 1585, where were celebrated the nuptials of Charles Emmanuel to the infanta Catherine, daughter of Philip II. of Spain. This, however, appears doubtful, although it is more clear that it was much read on this occasion, and that the fame which it required reached the ears of Guarino’s old master, duke Alphonso, who invited him most pressingly, to return to Ferrara, with the title of secretary of state.

Having accepted this offer, he was employed, as formerly, on missions to Umbria, Milan, and other places, but now his tranquillity was disturbed by a domestic affair, in which he fancied he had been improperly treated;Alexander, his eldest son, who, in 1587, had married a rich heiress, niece to cardinal Canani, being weary of living under the subjection of his father, and disgusted, whether justly or not, with the treatment he met with from him, resolved to leave his house, and live apart with his wife. Guarino was so highly offended at their departure, that he immediately seized their income, on pretence of debts due to him for money expended at their marriage. His son, deprived of his income for nine months, at last applied to the duke of Ferrara to interpose his authority, which he did, commanding the chief judge to take cognizance of the affair, who immediately decided it in favour of Alexander. This sentence exasperated the father still more; so that, looking on it as a proof that the duke had no regard for him, he addressed a letter to him in the most respectful but strongest terms, to be dismissed the service; which the duke granted, though not without intimating some displeasure at Guarino, for shewing so little regard to the favours he had conferred on him. The treatment, however, which Tasso had suffered was a recent lesson for the poets who iiad the misfortune to be patronized by Alphonso, and Guarino immediately went into the service of the duke of Savoy, where he had some reason to expect a better lot; but here he did not remain many months; and during a year of repose in the country, he resumed his labours on his favourite pastoral, which at length was published in 1590, at Venice, 4to, and the same year at Ferrara, in 12mo. The great applause which he received from this poem, was followed by a most severe loss in the death of his wile, Dec. 25, 1590, at Padua. This misfortune appears to have greatly affected him. His two eldest sons had left him two of his daughters were married three others he had placed in convents and from being surrounded by a numerous family, he was now left with one boy only often years old. In this desolate state he appears to have entertained thoughts of going to Home and becoming an ecclesiastic. He was, however, diverted from this step by an invitation received in 1592 from the duke of Mantua, who sent him to Inspruck to negociate some affairs at the archduke’s court. But he afterwards was dismissed this service, as he had been that of Ferrara, by the solicitations of duke Alphonso; who, it is said, could not bear that a subject of his, of Guarino’s merit, should serve other princes. Thus persecuted, he went to Rome apparently with the design just mentioned, but was again prevented from executing it by a reconciliation with Alphonso, which brought him back to Ferrara in 1595. This reconciliation was obtained by his son Alexander, who was very much beloved at court. However, fresh quarrels between father and son soon broke out again, which were afterwards carried to a great height; and, great changes happening upon the death of Alphonso in 1597, Guarino thought himself ill used, and left Ferrara to go to Ferdinand de Medicis, grand duke of Tuscany, who expressed a great esteem for him.

, a French naval officer, born at St. Malo in 1673, was the son of a merchant who had been French consul at Malaga, and who commanded armed vessels, either for war or trade, as circumstances required. Young Du Guay, led by his example, went on board a privateer, and performed a number of heroic actions. In 1691, when he was only in his eighteenth year, he had the command of an armed sloop, carrying fourteen guns, with which he obtained much success on the coast of Ireland. Three years after he entered the river of Limerick, and carried off several vessels but falling in with four English ships, he was obliged to yield, and was taken a prisoner into Plymouth. In confinement he won the aifootions of a female, who enabled him to make his escape, and in a short time he appeared again on the coast of England, where he captured some prizes. In 1695 he took three rich vessels on the Irish coast, and two Dutch ships on th coast of Spain: these successes were followed by others still more important. In 1696 he fell in with baron de Wassenaer, who with three ships was escorting a fleet of merchant-men, and took the baron with a part of his convoy. He presented, in person, his prisoner to the king, and thereupon was removed to the royal navy, and appointed to the command of a frigate. In a few years afterwards he was made captain of a fifty-four gun ship, with which, it is said, he took an English man-of-war of seventytwo gnus. So brilliant was his career of success, that in 1709 he was rewarded with letters of noblesse, the preamble to which records his having captured more than 300 merchant ships, and 20 ships of war. The most important f all his exploits was the taking of Rio Janeiro in 1711, which occasioned a loss to the Portuguese of at least a million sterling. A pension was now forced on him, he having in 1707 refused one that was then offered, requesting that it might be granted to his second captain, whose thigh had been shot off. “I,” said the gallant officer, “am sufficiently rewarded, if I obtain the advancement of my friends. 7 ' In 1728 he was made commander of the order of St. Louis, and lieutenant-general, and in 1731 went at the head of a squadron to curb the insolence of Algiers and Tunis, and promote a good understanding between France and Tripoli. After many other important services, he died at Paris Sept. 27, 1736, leaving” Memoirs," partly written by his own hand, and partly by a nephew, which were printed in one vol. 4to. 1740.

, a French writer who attained some share of reputation among the encyclopedists, was born at Paris June 6, 1738, in which city he died Feb. 26, 1812. His countrymen have as yels given us very little of his history, except that he was, either by talents or interest, advanced to be a member of the academies of Marseilles and Lyons, an associate of the Frencij institute, and a member of that of Auxerre. He was intimately connected with Beaumarehais, whom he often assisted with his pen, and passed for his secretary. In political sentiments he was a disciple of Rousseau, and eagerly promoted those opinions which led to the revolution. Besides three tragedies of no great merit, he published, i. “Graves observations stir les bonnes moeurs,” in poetical tales, published under the name of Frere Prul, Paris> 1777. 2. “Discours,” likewise in verse, o h abolition of slavery, Paris, 1781, in which he compli acnti Henry IV. as

, a learned critic, was of Hoistein, in Germany, but we know nothing of his parents, nor in what year he was born. He laid the foundation of his studies at Rensburg, under Jonsius, and went afterwards to Jena, where he was in 1654. He continued some years in this city, manifesting a strong inclination for letters, and making diligent search after ancient inscriptions. He was at Francfort in July 1658, when the emperor Leopold was crowned; and went thence to Holland, where John Frederic Gronovius recommended him to Nicolas Heinsius, as a young man of uncommon parts and learning, who had already distinguished himself by some publications, and from whom greater things were to be expected. His parents in the mean time wanted to have him at home, and offered at any price to procure him a place at court, if he WQuld but abandon letters, which they considered as a frivolous and unprofitable employment. But he remained inexorable preferring a competency with books to any fortune without them and above all, was particularly averse from a court, where “he should,” he said, “be constantly obliged to keep the very worst of company.”

1661, where they both were attacked with a dangerous illness; but recovering, they went to Italy, where they remained all 1662, and part of 1663. At Rome, at Florence, and at Capua, they were introduced to Leo Ailatius, Carolus Dati, and other men of talents. In 1663, they returned to France, and continued there the remaining part of the year. Gudius. who seems to have been a provident man, had desired his friends at parting, to watch for some place of settlement for him at his return: and accordingly Heinsius, Gronovius, and Graevius, were very attentive to his interest. But his pupil Schas wished to make another tour, and Gudius preferred accompanying him, as Schas was a lover of letters, and, though immensely rich, resolved to spend his life in studious pursuits. He was also very partial to Gudius, whom he dissuaded from accepting any place; and pressed to accompany him through &e libraries of Germany, as he had already done through those of France and Italy.

In 1678, he was irretrievably disgraced with his prince, which created him much affliction, as his learning had not freed his mind from avarice and ambition. However, he was a little comforted afterwards, by being made counsellor to the king of Denmark. He died, somewhat immaturely, in 1689 Burman calls his death immature; and it is certain he could not be old. Though it was constantly expected from him, yet he never published any thing of consequence. At Jena, in 1657, came out a thesis of his, “De Clinicis, sive Grabatariis veteris Ecclesise:” and in 1661, when he was at Paris, he published “Hippolyti Martyris de Antichristo librum, Grace,” a piece never printed before. His Mss. however, with his own collations, he communicated to Gronovius, Graevius, Heinsius, and others, who all considered him as excellent in philology and criticism. “Ingenio & doctrina recondita in primis hujus saeculi conspicuus Marquardus Gudius,” are the words of Graevius, in his preface to “Florus:” and Burman, who was far from being lavish of praise, speaks of him in the highest terms, in the preface to “Phaedrus,” which he published at Amsterdam in 1698, merely for the sake of Gudius’s notes. To this edition are added four new fables, which Gudius extracted from a ms. at Dijon, Burman had published in 4to, the year before, at Utrecht, “A Collection of Epistles of Gudius and his Friends/* whence these memoirs of him are taken: and, in 1731, came out” Antiquae Inscriptiones, cum Graecae torn Latinae, olim a Marquardo Gudio collectae, nuper a Joanne Koolio digestae, hortatu consilioque Joamiis Georgii Graevii; nunc a Francisco Hesselio edit*, cum annotationibus eofum," Leuwardiae, folio. About the beginning of the last century, the duke of Wolfenbutel purchased Gudius’s manuscripts, and employed Leibnitz in making the bargain, as well as in transporting them to his library. They consisted of a vast number of early Mss. of Greek and Latin authors, many of which had never been used.

, an elegant French writer, was born in 1641, at Paris, and admitted advocate to the parliament in that city, and although he seldom pleaded, was much consulted as a chamber counsel, in which rank he met with great success. He died April 22, 1688, at Paris. His principal works are, 1. “Les sept Sages de la Grcce.” 2. “Entretiens sur l'Eloquence de la Chaire et du Barreau.” 3. “Le Parnassus reforme.” 4. “La Guerre des Auteurs.” 5. “Le Journal du Palais,” a well-digested collection of the decrees of parliament, in the compilation of which he was assisted by Claude Blondeau, 1755, 2 vols. folio. 6. La Carte de'la Cour.“7.” La Promenade de St. Cloud, ou Dialogues sur les Auteurs,“a small work, but elegantly written, and full of wit; which the abbe” Joly, chanter of the chapel aux Riches at Dijon, having copied at the abbe L'Avocat’s house from the original ms. published without the abbe’s knowledge in the “Mcnioires historiques de Bruys.” M. Gueret published an edition of “Le Prester,” “Arrets notable du parlement,” with learned notes and additions, 1679, folio, &c. All his works discover an excellent taste, great penetration, and judicious criticism. Messrs. Gueret, doctors of the house and society of the Sorbonne, one curate of St. Paul, who died 1773, the other late grand vicar of lihodez, were sons of this celebrated author, and have supported their father’s reputation with distinction. The latter, named Lewis Gabriel, was author of a “Memoire sur l'Immunite du Clerge*,” 1751, 12mo; “Sur les Refus des Sacremens,” 1752, 12mo; “Sur le Droit qu'ont les Cures de commettre leur Vicaires, et les Confesseurs, dans leur Paroisses,” 1759, 12mo. He died 1759, aged eighty.

, a Spanish writer, was born in the province of Alaba, towards the end of the fifteenth century, and was brought up at court. After the death of Isabella, queen of Castile, he turned Franciscan monk, but afterwards having made himself known at court, became preacher and historiographer to Charles V. He was much admired for his politeness, eloquence, and great parts, but his preaching and conversation proved very superior to his writing. His style was found to be extravagantly figurative, and full of antitheses, but this was trifling, compared with his notions of writing history, and the liberty he took to, falsify whatever he pleased, and to advance as matter of fact the inventions of his own brain, and when censured for it, alleged by way of excuse, that no history, excepting the Holy Scripture, is certain enough to be credited. Being in the emperor’s retinue he had an opportunity of visiting a great part of Europe, an4 was made bishop of Guadix, in the kingdom of Granada, and then bishop of Mondonedo, in Galicia. He died in 1544, or 1548. He was the author of several works in Spanish, the most famous of which is his “Dial of Princes, or Life of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus,” which has been translated into all the languages of Europe. Vossius says it “has nothing in it of Antoninus, but is all a fiction, and the genuine offspring of Guevara himself, who scandalously imposes upon the reader, plainly against the duty of an honest man, but especially of a bishop. In the mean time he has many things not unuseful nor unpleasant, especially to a prince, whence it is entitled The Dial of Princes’.” Those who may be supposed to have spoken of Guevara in the most indulgent manner, have yet been forced to set him in a most scandalous light. “It deserves our pity rather than our censure,” says Nicolas Antonio, “that a writer of such fame should think himself at liberty to forge ancient facts, and to play with the history of the world, as with Æsop’s Fables or Lucian’s Monstrous Stories.” Among Guevara’s works must be ranked his “Epistles,” with which some have been so charmed, that they have not scrupled to call them Golden Epistles; but Montaigne says, “Whoever gave them this title, had a very different opinion of them from what I have, and perhaps saw more in them than I do.” Bayle had such a contempt for Guevara as an author, as to speak with surprize of “the eagerness of foreigners in translating some of his works into several languages.” Mr. Hay ley, however, remarks, that if we may judge of his personal character from his “Letters,” he appears to have been an amiable man. In one he reproves a female relation, with good nature, for intemperate sorrow on the death of a little dog and in another he draws the character of a true friend, with great energy of sentiment and expression. One of Guevara’s sayings, that heaven is filled with those that have done good works, and hell with those that have resolved to do them," has been, under a different form of expression, ascribed to other writers.

, a French writer on military affairs, was born at Montauban, Nov. 12, 1743. His father, who was a very intelligent officer, ook great pains in forming his son for the army, in which, Design he so perfectly succeeded, that at the school at which young Guibert was placed, his name was honourably quoted as an example to others, long after he left it. At the age of thirteen he followed his father to the field, and served six campaigns in the German war; three as a captain in the regiment d'Auvergne, and the three other upon the staff, where he gave frequent proofs of his judgment and spirit. After the peace in 1763, he assiduously devoted himself to the study of the theory of his profession till the expedition to Corsica took place, where he obtained the rank of colonel for his services in the action of Ponte Nuovo, and at the end of the campaign was rewarded with the cross of St. Louis. In 1770, two years after his return to France, he published his celebrated “Essai general de Tactique,” a work which though known and admired over all Europe, drew upon its author the envy too often attendant on merit, which embittered a great part of his days. But his pride disdaining to answer his enemies, as much as his mild spirit disliked controversy, he therefore determined to travel, and leave his work to answer for itself. So says his panegyrist, without informing us that his unsparing censures and conceited style had proyoked the hostilities of those enemies.

Guibert was afterwards appointed a member of the council of war, formed to establish a regular system in the French army. Here envy and malice again most vehemently pursued him, and being at last persuaded to write in his own justification, he was first attacked by the people for his arbitrary sentiments, then by the court for his popular principles, and was again driven into retirement. At the commencement of the late revolution, he wrote several interesting papers; but, aware of the prejudices existing against him, he assumed the name of G. T. Raynal; under which he obtained all the fame that was refused to Guibert. The chief of these works, was “De la force publique considered sous tous ses rapports.” In his last illness, the injustice done to him still preyed on his mind, and he frequently exclaimed “They will one time know me, and do me justice!” He died May 6, 1790, of an almost broken heart, at the early age of forty-seven. A most flattering mark of esteem and respect was paid to his memory, by the regiment of Neustrie, which he had commanded ten years; the officers and men unanimously voting a letter of condolence to his widow, who published his “German Tour,” in 1803.

, the celebrated historian of Italy, was descended of an ancient and noble family at Florence, where he was born March 6, 1482. His father, Peter Guicciardini, an eminent lawyer, bred up his son in his own profession; in which design he sent him, in 1498, to attend the lectures of M. Jacobo Modesti, of Carmignano, who read upon Justinian’s Institutes at Florence, but his son submitted to this resolution with some reluctance. He had an uncle who was archdeacon of the metropolitan church of Florence, and bishop of Cortona; and the prospect of succeeding to these benefices, which yielded near 1500 ducats a year, had Bred the ambition of the nephew. He had hopes of rising from such a foundation through richer preferments by degrees to the highest, that of a cardinal; and the reversion of the uncle’s places might have been easily obtained. But, though his father had five sons, he could not think of placing any of them in the church, where he thought there was great neglect in the discipline. Francis proceeded therefore with vigour in the study of the law, and took his degrees at Pisa, in 1505; but, looking upon the canon law as of little importance, he chose to be doctor of the civil law only. The same year he was appointed a professor of the institutes at Florence, with a competent salary for those times. He was now no more than twenty-three years of age, yet soon established a reputation superior to all the lawyers his contemporaries, and had more business than any of them. In 1506 he married Maria, daughter of Everardo Salviati, by far the greatest man in Florence; and, in 1507, was chosen standing counsellor to several cities of the republic. Two years after he was appointed advocate of the Florentine chapter, a post of great honour and dignity, which had been always filled with the most learned counsellors in the city; and, in 1509, he was elected advocate of the order of Calmaldoli.

In 1531 the pope made him governor of Bologna, contrary to all former precedents, that city having never before been committed to the hands of a layman. He was in this post when his holiness met Charles V. there, in December 1532; and he assisted at the pompous coronation of the said emperor, on St. Matthias’s day following. This solemnity was graced with the presence of several princes, who all shewed our governor particular marks of respect, every one courting his company, for the sake of his instructive conversation. He had at this time laid the plan of his history, and made some progress in it; which coining to the ears of the emperor before he left Bologna, his imperial majesty gave orders, when Guicciardini should attend his levee, to admit him into his dressing-room, where he conversed with him on the subject of his history. So particular a distinction gave umbrage to some persons of quality and officers of the army, who had waited many days for an audience. The emperor, being informed of the pique, took Guicciardini by the hand, and, entering into the drawing-room, addressed the company in these terms: “Gentlemen, I am told you think it strange that Guicciardini should have admission to me before yourselves; but I desire you would consider, that in one hour I can create a hundred nobles, and a like number of officers in the army; but I shall not be able to produce such an historian in twenty years. To what purpose serve the pains you take to discharge your respective functions honourably, either in the camp or cabinet, if an account of your conduct is not to be transmitted to posterity for the instruction of your descendants Who are they that have informed mankind of the heroic actions of your great ancestors, but historians? It is necessary then to honour them, that they may be encouraged to convey the knowledge of your illustrious deeds to futurity. Thus, gentlemen, you ought neither to be offended nor surprised at my regard for Guicciardini, since you have as much interest in his province as myself.”

Guicciardini did not remain continually at Bologna, but divided his time between that city and Florence. In February this year, he sent a letter of instructions to Florence; and in April received orders from the Pope to reform the state there, and to put Alessandro in the possession of the government. Wise and prudent, however, as he was, discontents and faction at length arose. As long as Clement sat in the papal chair, the discontented murmured only in private; but upon that Pope’s death, in 1534, the disgust shewed itself openly: two noblemen in particular, Castelli and Pepoli, who till then had been fugitives, entered the city at noon-day, with a retinue of several of their friends, and some outlawed persons, well armed. The governor, looking upon this as done in contempt of his person, meditated how to revenge the affront. One evening two proscribed felons, under Pepoli’s protection, were taken up by the officers as they were walking the streets, and carried to prison: and Guicciardini, without any farther process, ordered them to be immediately executed. Pepoli, highly incensed, assembled a number of hrs friends, and was going in quest of the governor to seek his revenge, when the senate sent some their members to desire him to return home, and not to occasion a tumult, which> for fear of disobliging that body, he complied with. It was this good disposition of the senate towards him, which prevailed with Guicciardini to remain in the government after the death of Clement. He foresaw that the people would no longer submit to his commands, and therefore had resolved to quit the government; but the senate, considering that many disorders might happen, if they were left without a governor in the time of the vacant see, begged him to continue, promising that he should have all the assistance requisite. To this he at last consented; and, with true magnanimity and firmness of mind, despising the danger that threatened him, remained in the city, till he understood that a new governor was appointed, when he resolved to quit the place. Some time after his arrival in Florence, upon the death of the duke, he had influence enough in the senate to procure the election of Cosmo, son of John de Medici, to succeed in the sovereignty. But, though he had interested himself so much in the election, yet he soon quitted the court, and meddled in public affairs no farther than by giving his advice occasionally, when required. He was now past fifty, an age when business becomes disgusting to persons of a reflecting turn. His chief wish was, that he might live long enough, in a quiet recess, to finish his history. In this resolution he retired to his delightful country-seat at Emma, where he gave himself up entirely to the work; nor could he be drawn from it by all the intreaties and advantageous offers that were made him by pope Paul III. who, in the midst of his retirement, passing from Nice to Florence, earnestly solicited our historian, first in person, then by letters, and at last by the mediation of cardinal Ducci, to come to Rome. But he was proof against all solicitations, and, excusing himself in a handsome manner to his holiness, adhered closely to his great design; so that, though he enjoyed this happy tranquillity a few years only, yet in that time he brought his history to a conclusion; and had revised the whole, except the four last books , when he was seized with a fever, May 27, 1540, of which he died.

Guicciardini has, however, some defects. He is accused of being tedious and particular, and that he now and then indulges reflections, and retards the events which, in history, should be ever hastening towards the catastrophe. Yet although fastidious or indolent readers may complain, of this, there is throughout the whole work, especially in the first five books, "preparation of incidents, that, instead of being prolix, the reader can scarce lay down the book without an ardent desire or' knowing what follows next; and the worst that can be said of his speeches is, that they are fine political harangues, improperly placed. Another objection, however, has been thought to have more weight, if indeed it be not as sir William Jones fears a correct picture of society at that time, namely, that he represents all the actions of his personages as arising from bad motives, and the persons who figure most in his drama are almost all knaves or fools, politic betrayers, or blustering ideots. Upon the whole, however, Guicciardini must be allowed the first of the historians of Italy, a country which has produced Machiavelli and Davila, Nani and Muratori.

Guicciardini wrote several other pieces, as “The Sacking of Rome;” “Considerations on State-Affairs;” “Councilu and Admonitions,” and there are extant several of his “Law-Cases,” with his opinion, preserved in the famous library of Signior Carlo Tomaso Strozzi and an epistle in verse, which has given him a place among the Tuscan poets, in the account of them by Crescimbeni. It were to be wished, that we could look into his correspondence but all his letters, by fatal negligence, have perished our curiosity in that point can only be satisfied by some written to him: part of these are from cardinal Pietro Bern bo, secretary to pope Leo X. and are to be seen in his printed letters; and oners from Barnardo Tasso. Berabo’s letters shew, that his correspondent possessed the agreeable art of winning the affections both of private persons and princes. Guicciardini was survived by his wife (who lived till 1559) and three daughters. Two married into the family of Capponi, and the third into that of Ducci.

His abode in this city was highly advantageous to him; for, being received into the academy which was held at the queen of Sweden’s, he became acquainted with several of the learned who were members of it. He began then to read the poems of Dante, Petrarch, and Chiabrara; which reformed the bad taste he had contracted. The reading of these and other good authors entirely changed his manner of writing; and the pieces he wrote afterwards were of quite a different style and taste. Though the queen of Sweden was very kind to him, and obtained a good benefice for him from Innocent XI. yet he did not cease to feel the esteem of his master the duke of Parma, but received from him a pension, which was paid very punctually. The death of his royal patroness happened in 1689, but he did not leave Rome; lor the duke of Parma gave him an apartment in his palace there, and his loss was abundantly recompensed by the liberality of many persons of quality. In July 1691, he was made a member of the academy of Arcadi at Rome, under the name of Erilo Cleoneo, nine months after its foundation, and was one of its chief ornaments. Clement XI. who knew him well, and did him kind offices while he was a cardinal, continued his favours to him after he was raised to the pontificate.

In 1709, he took a journey to his own country, to settle some private affairs. He was there when the emperor made a new regulation for the state of Milan, which was very grievous to it; and having political talents, was employed to represent to prince Eugene of Savoy the inconveniences and burden of this regulation, prince Eugene being then governor of the country, and deputed by the emperor to manage the affair. For this purpose Guidi drew up a memorial, which was thought so just and argumentative, that the new regulation was immediately revoked. The service he did his country, in this respect, procured him a mark of distinction from the council Pavia; who, in 1710, enrolled him in the list of and decurions of the town. He was now solely intent upon returning to Rome; but made his will first, as if he had foreseen what was shortly to happen to him. Upon his arrival there, he applied himself to a versification of six homilies of the Pope, which he caused to be magnificently printed, and would have presented it to the pontiff, who was then at Castel-Gandolfe. With this view he set out from Rome in June 17 12, and arrived at Frescati, where he was seized with an apoplectic fit, of which he died in a few hours, aged almost sixty-two. His body was carried back to Rome, and interred in the church of St. Onuphrius, near Tasso.

, a very celebrated artist, was born at Bologna in 1574, and early in life became the pupil of Denis Calvert, a Fleming; but he afterwards entered the school of the Carracci at Bologna, and is by many considered as their principal pupil, and none but Domenichino would have been entitled to dispute that praise with him, if his astonishing work of the communion of St. Jerome had been equally supported by his other labours, The Carracci, however, were too jealous to rejoice in the extraordinary progress of Guido, who threatened to rival at least, if not surpass, their own claims to public applause, and Ludovico disgracefully attempted to depreciate his pupil by opposing Guercino to him, while Annihal himself js said to have censured Albani for having conducted Guido. thither, alarmed at his aspiring talents, his graceful man-, ner, and ambitious desire to excel.

Great were the honours this painter received from Paul V. from all the cardinals and princes of Italy, from Lewis XIII. of France, Philip IV. of Spain, and from the king of Poland and Sweden, who, besides a noble reward, made him a compliment, in a letter under his own hand, for an Europa he had sent him. He was extremely handsome arul graceful in his person; and so very beautiful in his younger days, that his master Luclovico, in painting his angels, took him always for his model. Nor was he an angel only in his looks, if we may jDelieve what Gioseppino told the pope, when he asked his opinion of Guido’s performances in the Capella Quirinale, “Our pictures,” said he, “are the works of men’s hands, but these are made by hands divine.” In his behaviour he was modest, gentle, and very obliging; lived in great splendour both at Bologna and Rome; and was only unhappy in his immoderate love of gaming. To this in his latter days he abandoned himself so entirely, that all the money he could get by his pencil, or borrow upon interest, was too little to supply his losses: and he was at last reduced to so poor and mean a condition, that the consideration of his present circumstances, together with reflections on his former reputation and high manner of living, brought a languishing distemper on him, of which he died in 1642.

, an eminent oriental scholar in France, was born at Pointoise, Oct. 19, 1721. He studied the oriental languages under the celebrated Stephen Fourinont, and was appointed king’s interpreter in 1741, and a member of the academy of belles lettres in 1753. Having minutely investigated the Chinese characters, and compared them with those of other languages, he fancied he had discovered that they were only monograms formed of three Egyptian letters, and deduced from this that China had been originally peopled by an Egyptian colony. The same notion had been adopted before his time by Huet, Kircher, and Moiran; but other learned men, Deshauteraies, Paw, and the Chinese missionaries, have fully refuted it. De Guignes was for thirty-five years engaged in the “Journal des Sgavans,” which, as well as the Memoirs of the academy of belles lettres, he enriched with a great number of learned papers on the religion, history, and philosophy, of the Egyptians and Chinese Indians, &c. One very important service he rendered his country by discovering the punches and matrices of the oriental types which Savary de Breves, ambassador from Henry IV. at Constantinople, had brought into France, but which were now in such a state that Guignes was the only person who could put them in order, and give instructions for using them. From them he was enabled to cast fonts of the Arabic, Turkish, Persian, Syriac, Armenian, Hebrew, and Chinese, acquisitions of great consequence to his inquiries. With their aid he passed the greater part of his life among his books, without ambition for more than a competence suited to his literary wants. In his old age, however, the revolution deprived him even of this, but he still preserved his cheerful temper and independent spirit. Some help he derived from a legacy of 3000 livres, which Grosley, his fellow academician, and a distant relation, bequeathed to him. He died at Paris March 22, 1800, and was said at that time to be the only person in Europe perfectly acquainted with the Chinese language. His publications are, 1. “Abrege de la vie d'Etienne Fourmont,” Paris, 1747, 4to. 2. “Histoire generale des Huns, des Turcs, des Mogols, et des antres Tartares occidentaux,” 1756, 4 vols. 4to, taken from Chinese and oriental manuscripts, and without doubt, his greatest work, and that on which he had bestowed infinite labour, but in which there is a want of taste, and of style suited to the subjects, with frequent repetitions, which make it a book rather to be consulted than read. 3. The “Memoire,” already noticed, in which he attempts to prove that the Chinese were a colony from Egypt, 1759, 12mo. 4. “Chou-King,” 1770, 4to. Gaubil had published a translation of this sacred book among the Chinese, which de Guignes now reprinted with notes. 5. L'Art militaire de Chinois,“4to. 6.” Essai historiquf* sur la typographic orientate et Grecque,“1787, 4to. 7.” Principes de composition typographique," 1790, 4to, for the use of the compositors who were employed on the oriental types. He wrote also many notices of Arabian manuscripts for the catalogue preserved in the royal library.

, an eminent Scotch divine, the son of an opulent tradesman in Aberdeen, was born in that city in 1586, and received *a liberal education at Marischal college, then recently founded, with a view to the church. Before he took orders, however, he appeared as an autii:>r, by publishing, when only in his twentieth year, a treatise entitled “The New Sacrifice of Christian Incense,” London, 1608 and the same year, “The only way to Salvation,” printed also at London. Immediately after the publication of these, he appears to have taken orders, and was called to the pastoral charge of the parish of King EJward in the presbytery of Turriff and synod of Aberdeen. Here he passed some of the happiest years of his life, in high favour with Jiis parishioners and here in 1610 he married Katherine Rowen, daughter of Mr. Rowen or Rolland of Disblair, by whom he had no issue. In 1617, when king James I. visited Scotland, with a view to establish episcopacy, and brought bishop Andrews of Ely with him to assist in the management of that very delicate and ultimately unsuccessful attempt, Dr. Andrews, among other eminent men of the Scotch clergy whom he consulted, paid great regard to Mr. Guild; and the following year, when Andrews was promoted to the see of Winchester, Mr. Guild dedicated to him, one of his most useful works, entitled “Moses unveiled,” pointing out those fgures in the Old Testament which allude to the Messiah. Mr. Guild became, much about the same time, acquainted with Dr. Young, a countryman of his own, dean of Winchester, who introduced him to the king, by whom he was appointed one of the royal chaplains. This obligation he afterwards acknowledged in the dedication to his “Harmony of the Prophets,” a work which he published in the beginning of the reign of Charles I. It was afterwards printed with his “Moses unveiled,” in an edition now before us, dated Edinburgh, 1684.

As his attention to public affairs did not prevent him from applying diligently to his private studies, he continued, during his residence at King Edward, to exercise his talent for composition, and occasionally sent to the press some useful tracts. Most of his performances were of the popular kind, and all of them appear to have been adapted, as much as possible, to common use; but his literary merit was acknowledged by those who were more competent judges than the multitude. Men of learning knew him to be learned the academical honour of D. D. was conferred upon him, and he was ranked, while yet a young man, among the ablest divines in the church of Scotland. In 1625 and 1626 he published the “Ignis Fatuus” against the doctrine of purgatory, and “Popish glorying in antiquity turned to their shame,” both printed at London. His next publication, entitled “A compend of the Controversies of Religion,” was printed at Aberdeen.

When the commotions took place in consequence of king Charles’s endeavours to establish episcopacy in Scotland, the Perth articles, as they were called, were opposed by the Scotch covenant, which was subscribed by the majority of the clergy and people of Scotland, but not being so rigorously enforced as to prohibit all exercise of private judgment, Dr. Guild was permitted to subscribe it under such limitations as he was pleased to specify, which implied a loyal adherence to the king, but no condemnation of the articles of Perth, or of episcopal government. He was afterwards one of the commissioners in the general assembly of Scotland which met in 1638, and abolished the hierarchy of the church; and after his return from Glasgow, where this assembly met, officiated as formerly at Aberdeen in the pastoral function, and, with a view to beal the animosities then prevailing between the episcopal and presbyterian party, published “A friendly and faithful advice to the nobility, gentry, and others,” recommending that moderation which was then impossible, while the two great bodies who divided the sentiments of the two kingdoms, persisted in mutual encroachments. Yet notwithstanding an obvious leaning to the loyal side in Dr. Guild’s conduct, he was, on a vacancy, elected principal of King’s college, Aberdeen, in 1640, and preached his last sermon, as minister of Aberdeen, in June 1641. This was followed by a special mark of favour from his majesty, who bestowed upon Dr. Guild “a free gift of a house and garden, which had formerly been the residence of the bishop of Aberdeen.” He did'not, however, allow this to increase his private fortune, but wiih his usual liberality, devoted it to the service of the public, in benefactions to the college, the town, and the poor of the adjoining parish.

His attachment to the royal cause, however, soon involved him in the sentence passed on all who held such sentiments, and in 1651 he was deposed by five commissioners of general Monk’s army. From this time he appears to have resided in a private station at Aberdeen, improving his charitable foundation, and adding to it exhibitions for three scholars of Marischal college. He also during this retirement wrote “An Explication of the Song of Solomon,” London, 1658, 8vo “The Sealed Book opened,” or an explanation of the Revelation of St. John and “The Novelty of Popery discovered,” Aberdeen, 1656, 16mo.

The life of Dr. Guild, suitably to its benevolent progress, terminated with acts of charity. By his last will, written in 1657, he bequeathed seven thousand marks to be secured on land, and the yearly profit applied to the maintenance of poor orphans. His library he left to the unU versity of St. Andrew’s, except one valuable manuscript, supposed to be the original of the memorable letter from the states of Bohemia and Moravia, to the council of Constance, 1415, relative to John Huss and Jerome of Prague. This Dr. Guild bequeathed to the university of Edinburgh, He died in August 1657. His widow so far followed his benevolent example, that by her munificence are still maintained, six students of philosophy, four scholars at the public school, two students of divinity, six poor widows, and six poor men’s children. Before her death she sent up to Dr. John Owen a manuscript of her husband’s, who had intended to have published it with a dedication to that celebrated nonconformist, although not personally known to him. Dr. Owen accordingly published it, under the title ft The Throne of David, or an exposition of the Second (Book) of Samuel," Oxford, 1659, 4to; with a recommendatory preface, which shews how little there was of difference in religious opinion between Dr. Guild and the party that thought him unworthy to continue his ministerial labours.

, a French historian, was born about 1625, at Thiers in Auvergne, and became the first historiographer of the academy of painting and sculpture to which office he was elected in 1682. H& died at Paris, April 6, 1705. He was author of many works of considerable reputation, as “Athene Ancienne et Nouvelle;” “Lacedemone Ancienne et Nouvelle,” both printed in 1675, 12mo, and known to be his own productions, though he pretended to have taken them from the papers of his younger brother, who had travelled in that country. He published also “A History of the grand viziers’ Caprogji,” c. “The Life of Mahomet II.;” “The History of Castrucio Castracani,” translated from the Italian of Machiavel; “Les Arts de l‘homme d’Epee, ou Dietionnaire du Genlilhomme,” 1670, in two volumes. His “Ancient and modern Athens” involved him in a serious dispute with Spon, in which he was said to have gained the victory, as far as style and mannerly writing were concerned.

, a heraldic writer, was son of John Guillim of Westburg in Gloucestershire, but born in Herefordshire about 1565. He was sent to a grammar school at Oxford, and apparently entered a student of Brazen* nose college in 1581. Having completed his pursuit of literature in the university, he returned to Minsterworth in Gloucestershire; and had been there only a short space, when he was called to London, and made a member of the society of the college of arms, by the name of Portsmouth; and hence promoted to the honours of rouge-croix pursuivant of arms in ordinary in 1617 in which post he continued till his death, which happened May 7, 1621. His claim to a place in this work arises from the concern he had in a work entitled “The display of Heraldry,” published by him in 1610, folio, which has gone through many editions. To the fifth, which came out in 1679, was added a treatise of honour, civil and military, by captain John Loggan. The last was published, with very large additions, in 1724, and is generally esteemed the best book extant upon the subject, but the entire merit of it does not belong to Guillim, %ut to Barkham (See Barkkam), chaplain to archbishop Bancroft, who gave the manuscript to Guillim, and allowed him to publish it in his own name.

, a French anatomist, was born 1487, at Andermach. He was physician to Francis I. and retired to Strasburg, to avoid the troubles which arose about religion, and became professor of Greek there, as he had been at Louvain; and also practised physic, but was afterwards obliged to resign his professorship. He died Oct. 4, 1574. Guintier translated several treatises from Galen and other authors, and published some tracts in Latin “On the Plague,” 8vo and “On Pregnant Women and Children,” 8vo. He is sard to have been the first who gave the name of pancreas to the glandular substance which is fixed to the peritonaeum; and made some other discoveries, for which Winslow praises him highly, but Vesalius speaks contemptuously of his anatomical skill.

, called Quintus Icilius, an able writer on military tactics, was born at Magdeburg, and studied at the universities of Halle, Marpurg, and Leyden, where he applied to the classics, theology, and the oriental languages. He first carried arm* in the service of the United Provinces, and while thus einployed found leisure to prepare materials for his “Memoirs Militaires sur les Grecs et les Remains,” which induced him to obtain permission to visit England, where he re^­mained a year. The work was at length published, in two volumes quarto, 1757, received with much approbation, and went through five editions in France and Holland. In the same year he entered as a volunteer in the allied army, acquired the esteem of Ferdinand of Brunswick, and was recommended to the notice of Frederic II. of Prussia, who kept him near his person, often conversed with him on the art of war, and on account of his great knowledge on this subject, gave him the name of Quintus Icilius, the com* mander of Caesar’s tenth legion, when he appointed him to the command of a regiment formed out of the refuse of all nations, during the heat of the war. At the general peace he was one of the few persons whom his majesty admitted into his convivial parties at Potsdam, and to whom he gave the freest access to his library and coins, which latter Guise-hard increased so much, that he valued both at the sum of a hundred thousand dollars. The king, however, in his latter days, treated him with much disrespect, and took every opportunity to mortify him in the presence of others. Giiiscliard died May 13, 1775. Frederic purchased his library of his heirs for the sum of 12,000 dollars. Besides the work already mentioned, he was author of a very useful work to military or classical students, entitled “Memoires Critiques et Historiques sur plusieurs Points d'Antiquites Militaires,” in 4 vols. Hvo. Gibbon, who read his “Military Memoirs” with great attention, bestows high encomiums on him, and considers him as very superior to Folard, whom however Guischard affected too much to undervalue.

, an English divine, was born at Ablond’s or Abbey-load’s court, near Gloucester, in 1653, and entered in 1669 a commoner of Oriel-college, Oxford, which he changed for All souls, where he was chosen fellow a little before he took his first degree in arts, April 4, 1674. He commenced M. A. in 1677, and entered into orders; but marrying in 1680, he resigned his fellowship. However, he still continued at Oxford, and took a house in St. Michael’s parish, resolving not to leave the university, on account of his studies, which he prosecuted with indefatigable industry, and soon became a great master of the oriental learning and languages. He translated into English, and illustrated with a commentary, Dr. Bernard’s work entitled “Misnae pars ordinis prim”! Zeraim Tituli septem,“1690, 4to, and a tract” De Victimis humanis,“8vo, and was preparing an edition of Abulfeda’s Geography, when he was seized with the small-pox, which carried him off' Sept. 3, 1684, aged only thirty-one. Thomas Smith gives him the title of” Vir longe eruditissimus,“and observes, that his death was a prodigious loss to the republic of letters; and the editors of the” Acta Eruditorum“style him a” person of great learning, and the immortal ornament of the university of Oxford." He was buried at St. Michael’s church in that city, where a monument was erected to his memory by his widow, with a Latin inscription. He left issue a son John, who, being bred to the army, raised himself to the highest posts there, and was well known in the military world, by the title of General Guise. He died in 1765, and bequeathed his large collection of paintings to Christ-church Oxford, where he was educated, and where they are now placed in the lower library.

, a German lawyer and historian, was born February 25, 1671, near Nuremberg, and was the son of a clergyman, who died 1689. He was successively professor of philosophy, rhetoric, and the law of nature and nations, at Halle; and frequently consulted on public affairs at Berlin, where his talents were so well known, that he obtained the title of privy-counsellor for his services on various occasions. Gundling was indefatigable, had an excellent memory, great wit, vivacity, and eloquence; but his warmest admirers wished that his numerous writings had contained less satire, and more moderation and politeness. He died rector of the university of Halle, December 16, 1729, leaving several valuable works on literature, history, law, and politics: the principal are, 1.“Historia Philosophic moralis,” 8vo. 2. “Otia,” or a collection of dissertations on various physical, moral, political, and historical subjects, 3 vols. 8vo. 3. “De jure oppignorati Territorii,” 4to. 4. “Status naturalis Hobbesii in corpore juris civilis defensus et defendendus,” 4to. 5. “De statu Reipublicae Germanicse sub Conrado I.” 4to. Ludwig has refuted this work in his “Germania Princeps.” 6. “Gundlingiana,” in German. 7. “Commentaria de Henrico Aucupe,” 4to. 8. “Via ad veritatem,” or a course of philosophy, 3 vols. 8vo. Gundling had a great share in the “Observationes Hallenses,” an excellent collection in 11 vols. 8vo.

, bishop of Ely, was the son of Peter Gunning, vicar of Hoo, in Kent, and born there in 1613. He had his first education at the king’s school in Canterbury, where he commenced an acquaintance with Somner the antiquary, his school -fellow. At fifteen he was removed to Clare-hall, in Cambridge, was promoted to a fellowship in 1633, and became an eminent tutor in the college. Soon after he commenced M. A. and had taken orders, he had the cure of Little St. Mary’s from the master and fellows of Peter-house. He acquired much fame as a preacher, and was licensed as such by the university in 1641, when he distinguished himself by his zeal for the church and king, particularly by protesting publicly against the faction, when most formidable, and urging the university to publish a formal protestation against the rebellious league, in a sermon at St. Mary’s. About the same time, paying a visit to his mother at Tunbridge, he exhorted the people, in two sermons, to make a charitable contribution for the relief of the king’s forces there; which conduct rendered him obnoxious to the powers then in being, who imprisoned him for a short time, and, on his refusing to take the covenant, deprived him of his fellowship. This obliged him to leave the university, but not before he had drawn up a treatise against the covenant, with the assistance of some of his friends, who took care to publish it.

Being thus ejected, he removed to Oxford, where he was incorporated M. A. July 10; 1644, and kindly received by Dr. Pink, warden of New-college, who appointed him one of the chaplains of that house. During his residence there, he officiated two years at the curacy of Cassington, under Dr. Jasper Mayne, near Oxford, and sometimes preached before the court, for which service he was complimented, among many other Cambridge men, with the degree of B. D. June 23, 1646, the day before the surrender of that place to the parliament. Being thus obliged to quit the university, he became tutor to the lord Hatton and sir Francis Comptoti, and then chaplain to sir Robert Shirley, who was so much pleased with his behaviour in some disputations with a Romish priest, as well as with hris great worth and learning in general, that he settled upon him an annuity of 100l. Upon the decease of sir Robert, he held a congregation at the chapel of Exeter-house, in the Strand, where he duly performed all the parts of his office according to the liturgy of the church of England; yet he met with no other molestation from the usurper Cromwell, than that of being now and then sent for and reproved by him. On the return of Charles II. he was restored to his fellowship, and created D. D. by the king’s mandate, Septembers, 1660, having been first presented to a prebend in the church of Canterbury; soon after which he was instituted to the rectories of Cotesmore in Rutland, and of St^ke-Bruern in Northamptonshire. But this was not all; for, before the expiration of the year, he was made master of Corpus-Christi college, in Cambridge, and also lady Margaret’s professor of divinity, which he quitted on succeeding to the regius professorship of divinity, and the headship of St. John’s college, upon the resignation of Dr. Tuckney, who had been obliged June 12, 1661, to give way for Gunning; he being looked upon as the properest person to settle the university on right principles again, after the many corruptions that had crept into that body.

He had invented a small portable quadrant, for the more easy finding of the hour and azimuth, and other solar conclusions of more frequent use, in 1618; and in 1620, he published his Latin “Canon Triangulorum, or Table of artificial Sines and Tangents to the Radius 10,000,000 parts, to each Minute of the Quadrant.” This was a great improvement to astronomy, by facilitating the practical part of that science in the resolution of spherical triangles without the use of secants or versed sines, the same thing being done here (by addition and subtraction only) for performing which the former tables of right sines and tangents required multiplication and division. This admirable help to the studious in astronomy was gratefully commemorated, and highly commended, by several of the most eminent mathematicians who were his contemporaries, and who at the same time did justice to his claim to the improvement, beyond all contradiction.

The truth is, Gu-nter’s inclination was turned wholly the same way with his genius; and it cannot be denied that he reached the temple of fame by treading in that road. To excite a spirit of industry in prosecuting mathematical knowledge, by lessening the difficulties to the learner; to throw new light into some things, which before appeared so dark and abstruse as to discourage people of ordinary capacities from attempting them; and by that means to render things of wonderful utility in the ordinary employment of life so easy and practicable as to be managed by the common sort; is the peculiar praise of our author, who effected this by that admirable contrivance of his famous rule of proportion, now called the line of numbers, and the other lines laid down by it, and fitted in his scale, which, after the inventor, is called “Gunter’s scale;” the description and use of which he published in 1624, 4to, together with that of his sector and quadrant already mentioned. His fame having reached the ears of his sovereign, prince Charles gave directions, that he should draw the lines upon the dials in Whitehall garden, which were destroyed in Charles Il.'s time, and give a description and use of them; and king James ordered him to print the book the same year, 1624. There was, it seems, a square sj;one there before of the same si?e and form, having five dials upon the upper part, one upon each of the four corners, and one in the middle, which was the principal dial, being a large horizontal concave; besides these, there were others on the sides, east, west, north, and south; but the lines on our author’s dial, except those which shewed the hour of the day, were greatly different. And Dr. Wallis tells us, that one of these was a meridian, in fixing of which great care was taken, a large magnetic needle being placed upon it, shewing its variation irom that meridian from time to time. If the needle was placed there with that intention by our author, it is a proof that his experiment at Deptford had made so much impression upon him, that he thought it worth while to pursue the discovery of the change in the variation, of which the world would doubtless have reaped the fruits, had his life been continued long enough for it. Unfortunately, however, for science, he died December 10, 1G26, about his forty-fifth year, and in the prim of life, at Gresham college, and was buried in St. Peter the Poor, Broad-street, without any monument or inscription; hut his memory will always be preserved in the mathematical world as an inventor, and the parent of instrumental arithmetic. The 5th edition of his works was published by Mr. Leybourn in 1674, 4to.

, a learned protestant divine, was born at Basil, Dec. 8, 1654, where his father was a merchant. Until the fourteenth year of his age, he was instructed by private tutors, and profited so much as to be then fit for the university of Basil, where, after studying languages, philosophy, mathematics, and history, for three or four years, he was on July 2, 1672, admitted to the degrees of master of arts and doctor in philosophy. He tnen studied divinity, and had for one of his masters Peter Werenfels, father of the celebrated Samuel VVerenfels. In about two years, he was appointed to lecture on theology during the vacations, and acquitted himself with great credit. In March 1676, he was admitted a preacher, and the following year passed six months at Geneva, whence he went into France, and visited the university of Saumur, where he heard the lectures of Henry Philiponeau de Hautecour, who was afterwards his colleague in the university of Franeker. His reputation having by this time extended to Germany, he was invited to Heilborn to be professor of philosophy and rhetoric, and rector of the classes, of which office he took possession in 1685, with a public harangue, “de fato philosophico in ecclesia Christiana.” As divinity was still his favourite study, he continued improving his knowledge of it; and having visited Heidelberg during the third jubilee of that university, he received his degree of D. D. with every mark of distinction, even from the learned catholics who heard him maintain a thesis on this occasion, the subject of which was “Christ’s kingly office.” After he had remained about two years at Heilborn, he was requested to accept the theological chair at Hanau, with which he complied. In 1696 he was again removed to Bremen as professor in ordinary of divinity, moderator of the schools, and perpetual rector magrdficus. To this place he drew a great concourse of students; but the fatigues attending his occupations here made him willing to accept the less laborious professorship of divinity at Deventer in 1699. In 1705 the curators of the university of Franeker offered him their theological chair, which he at first refused, but accepted it, on a second and more pressing invitation, in 1707. His constitution was now, however, so much worn down by repeated attacks of the gout, that he did not enjoy this office above four years, dying Sept. 28, 1711. Gurtler was a man of genuine piety, modesty, and candour, and of extensive knowledge in every branch of science, but especially in those connected with his profession. His works, which have generally received the approbation of catholics as well as protestants, are, 1. A Latin, German, Greek, and French Dictionary, published in 1682. 2. “Historia Templariorum observationibus ecclesiasticis aucta,” Amst. 1691, 8vo, and 1702, with additions. 3. “Institutiones Theologies,” ibid. 1794, 4to. 4. “Voces Typico-propheticiT,” Bremen, 1698, 4to, and Utrecht, 1715, considerably enlarged. 5. “Dialogi Eucharistici,” Bremen, 1699, 4to. 6. “SystemaTheologise propbeticse,” Amst. 1702, 4to, considered as one of the best works of the kind. 7. “Origines mundi, et in eo regnorum,” &c. Amst. 1708, 4to. 8. “Dissertationes de Jesu Christo in gloriam evecto,” Franeker, 1711. 9. “Forma sanorum verborum,” a short abridgment of divinity, which he used as a text-book, 1709, 12mo. Gurtler wrote also a “History of the Churches of France,” in German.

, king of Sweden, commonly called the Great, a title which, if great valour united with great wisdom, great magnanimity with regard to himself, and great consideration of the wants and infirmities of others, have any claim, he seems well to have deserved. He was born at Stockholm in 1594. His name Gustavus he inherited from his grandfather Gustavus Vasa, and he was called Adolphus from his grandmother Adolpha. His education was calculated to form a hero, and seems, in all respects, to have resembled that bestowed on Henry the Fourth of France. He had a great genius, a prodigious memory, and a docility and desire of learning almost beyond example. He ascended the throne of Sweden in 1611, being then no more than fifteen; but the choice he made of ministers and counsellors proved him fully adequate to govern. His valour in the field was tried first against Denmark, Muscovy, and Poland. He made an honourable peace with the two first, and compelled the last to evacuate Livonia. He then formed an alliance with the protestants of Germany against the emperor, and what is commonly called the league. In two years and a half he overran all the countries from the Vistula as far as the Danube and the Rhine. Every thing submitted to his power, and all the towns opened to him their gates. In 1631 he conquered Tilly, the imperial general, before Leipsic; and a second time at the passage of the Lech. In the following year, he fought the famous battle in the plains of Lutzen, where he unfortunately fell at the immature age of thirty-eight, Nov. 16, 1632. Besides his other noble qualities he loved and cultivated the sciences. He enriched the university of Upsal; he founded a royal academy at Abo, and an university at Dorp in Livonia. Before his time there were no regular troops in Sweden; but he formed and executed the project of having 80,000 men constantly well armed, disciplined, and cloathed. This he accomplished without difficulty, on account of the love and confidence which his subjects without reserve reposed in their king. Some historians have delighted to draw a parallel between Gustavus and the great Scipio, and it is certain that they had many traits of character in common. Scipio attacked the Carthaginians in their own dominions; and Gustavus undertook to curb the pride of Austria by carrying the war into the heart of her country. Here indeed the advantage is with Gustavus; for, the Carthaginian power was already debilitated; but the emperor’s had before never received any check. He died literally, as it is said of him, with the sword in his hand, the word of command on his tongue, and victory in his imagination. His life has been well written by our countryman Harte; and he appears in all respects to have deserved the high and numerous encomiums which writers of all countries have heaped upon his memory. Some have suspected this exalted character to have lost his life from the intrigues of cardinal Richelieu; others from Lawemburgh, one of his generals, whom Ferdinand the emperor is said to have corrupted. He left an only daughter, whom he had by the princess Mary of Brandenburg, and who succeeded her father at the age of five. This princess was the celebrated Christina queen of Sweden.

, an eminent clergyman of the presbyterian church of Scotland, descended from the ancient family of Pitforthy in the shire of Angus, was horn on his father’s estate of Pitforthy in 1620, and educated at the university of St. Andrew’s under his cousin, professor James Guthrie, who was executed at the restoration for his opposition to episcopal government, although he had with equal zeal opposed the usurpation of Cromwell. Under this tutor our author became a very hard student, well versed in the classical languages; and after taking his degree of M. A. studied divinity under professor Samuel Rutherford. He became afterwards private tutor to the eldest son of the earl of London, chancellor of Scotland, and in November 1644 was presented to the church of Finwick, a newly erected parish, and consisting of inhabitants rude and unacquainted with religion. The pains he bestowed upon them, however, soon produced a favour able change in their manners, and his easy and affable address and example had a remarkable elfcct upon them. With this view, as he was fond of fishing, fowling, and other field sports, he took those opportunities to mix among his people, and recommend morals and piety. He was not less happy in curbing the insolence of Cromwell’s army when in Scotland, by addressing them with an eloquence and air of authority which they could not resist. In the mean time his great fame as a preacher procured him invitations from the more eligible churches of Renfrew, Linlithgow, Stirling, Glasgow, and Edinburgh, to all which he preferred his humble situation at Finwick, and continued among his parishioners until 1664, when he was ejected by Burnet, archbishop of Glasgow, notwithstanding the solicitations of the earl of Glencairn, then chancellor of Scotland, and other persons of rank, who represented Mr. Guthrie as an excellent man and well affected to government. He did not long survive this sentence, dying Oct. Jo, 1665. Some spurious publications were attributed to him; but the only genuine work extant is his “Christian’s Great Interest,” which has long been a standard book in Scotland, and has been translated into Dutch and French, and, as reported, into one of the Eastern languages, at the expence of the Hon. Robert Boyle.

In 1707 he built and furnished three wards on the north side of the outer court of St. Thomas’s hospital in Southwark, and gave 100l. to it annually for eleven years preceding the erection of his own hospital. Some time before his death he erected the stately iron gate, with the large houses on each side, at the expence of about 3000l. was seventy-six years of age when he formed the design of building the hospital near St. Thomas’s which bears his name. The charge of erecting this vast pile amounted to 18,793l. besides 219,499l. which he left to endow it: and he just lived to see it roofed in. He erected an almshouse, with a library, at Tarn worth, in Staffordshire (the place of his mother’s nativity, and which he represented in parliament), for fourteen poor men and women; and for their pensions, as well as for the putting out of poor children apprentices, bequeathed 125l. a year. To Christ’s hospital he gave 400l. a year for ever; and the residue of his estate, amounting to about 80,000l. among those who could prove themselves in any degree related to him.

, an eminent critic, was born of a good family at Angers, in 1575. He lost his father and mother when a child; and the small estate they left him was wasted by the imprudence of his guardians. He applied himself, however, intensely to books; and, with a view to improve himself by the conversation of learned men, he took a journey to Paris in 1599. The acquaintance he formed with the sons of Claudius du Puy proved very advantageous to him; for, the most learned persons in Paris frequently visited these brothers, and many of them met every day in the house of Thuanus, where Mess, du Puy received company. After the death of that president, they held those conferences in the same place; and Guyet constantly made one. He went to Rome in 1608, and applied himself to the Italian tongue with such success as to be able to write Italian verses. He was much esteemed by cardinal du Perron and several great personages. He returned to Paris by the way of Germany, and was taken into the house of the duke d'Epernon, to teach the abbot de Granselve, who was made cardinal de la V alette in 1621. His noble pupil, who conceived so great an esteem for him as always to entrust him with his most important affairs, took him to Rome, and procured him a good benefice; but Guyet, after his return to Paris, chose to live a private life rather than in the house of the cardinal, and resided in Burgundy college. Here he spent the remainder of his life, employed in his studies; and wrote a dissertation, in which he pretended to shew that the Latin tongue was derived from the Greek, and that all the primitive words of the latter consisted only of one syllable; but of this they found, after his death, only a vast compilation of Greek and Latin words, without any order or coherence, and without any preface to explain his project. But the reading of the ancient authors was his favourite employment, and the margins of his classics were full of notes, many of which have been published. Those upon Hesiod were imparted to Graevius, who inserted them in his edition of that author, 1667. The most complete collection found among his papers was his notes upon Terence; and therefore they were sent to Boeclerus, and afterwards printed. He took great liberties as a critic: for he rejected as supposititious all such verses as seemed to him not to savour of the author’s genius. Thus he struck out many verses of Virgil discarded the first ode in Horace and would not admit the secret history of Procopius. Notwithstanding the boldness of his criticisms, and his free manner of speaking in conversation, he was afraid of the public; and dreaded Salmasius in particular, who threatened to write a book against him if he published hjs thoughts about some passages in ancient authors. He was generally accounted a man of great learning, and is said to have been a sincere and honest man. He was cut for the stone in 1636; excepting which, his long life was hardly attended with any illness. He died of a catarrh, after three days illness, in the arms of James du Puy, and Menage his countryman, April 12, 1655, aged eighty. His life is written in Latin, with great judgment and politeness, by Mr. Portner, a senator of Ratisbon, who took the supposititious name of Antonius Periander Rhaetus; and is prefixed to his notes upon Terence, printed with those of Boeclerus, at Strasburg, in 1657, an edition in no great estimation.

, a French lady of fashion, remarkable for simplicity of heart, and regularity of manners, but of an enthusiastic and unsettled temper, was descended of a noble family, and born atMontargis, April 13, 1648. At the age of seven she was sent to the convent of the Ursulines, where one of her sisters by half-blood took care of her. She had afforded proofs of an enthusiastic species of devotion from her earliest infancy, and bad made so great a progress in what her biographers call “the spiritual course” at eight years of age, as surprized the confessor of the queen mother of England, widow of Charles I. who presented her to that princess, by whom she would have been retained, had not her parents opposed it, and sent her back to the Ursulines. She wished then to take the habit; but they having promised her to a gentleman in the country, obliged her to marry him. At twenty-eight years of age she became a widow, being left with two infant sons and a daughter, of whom she was constituted guardian; and their education, with the management of her fortune, became her only employment. She had put her domestic affairs into such order, as shewed an uncommon capacity; when of a sudden she was struck with an impulse to abandon every worldly care, and give herself up to serious meditation, in which she thought the whole of religion was comprised.

In this disposition of mind she went first to Paris, where she became acquainted with M. d'Aranthon, bishop of Geneva, who persuaded her to go to his diocese, in order to perfect an establishment he had founded at Gex, for the reception of newly-converted catholics. She accordingly Went in 1681, and took her daughter with her. Some time afterwards, her parents desired her to resign the guardianship of her children to them, and all her fortune, which was 40,000 livres a-year. She readily complied with their request, reserving only a moderate pension for her own subsistence. On this the new community desired their bishop to request her to bestow this remainder upon their house, and become herself the superior; but she refused to comply with the proposal, not approving th^ir regulations; at which the bishop and his community took such offence, that he desired her to leave the house.

She then retired to the Ursulines at Thonon, and from thence to Turin, Grenoble, and at last to Verceil, by the invitation of that bishop, who had a great veneration for her piety. At length, after an absence of five years, her ill state of health made her return to Paris, in 1686, to have the best advice. During her perambulations abroad, she composed the “Moyen court et tres facile de faire Oraison;” and another piece, entitled “Le Cantique tie Cantiques tie Salomon interprete, selon le sens mystique,” which were printed at Lyons, with a licence of approbation; but as her irreproachable conduct and extraordinary virtues made many converts to her system, which was culled Quietism, she was confined, by an order from the king, in the convent des Filles de la Visitation, in 1688. Here she was strictly examined for the space of eight months, by order of M. Harlai, archbishop of Paris; but this served only to establish her innocence and virtue; and madame Miraniou, the superior of the convent, representing the injustice of her detention to madame Maintenon, the latter pleaded her cause so effectually to the king, that she obtained her discharge, and afterwards conceived a particular affection and esteem for her.

Not long after her deliverance, she was introduced to Fenelon, afterwards archbishop of Cambray, who became her disciple. She had besides acquaintance with the dukes de Chevreuse and Beauvilliers, and several other distinguished persons, who, however, could not protect her from the ecclesiastics, who made violent outcries on the danger of the church from her sect. In this exigence, she was persuaded to put her writings into the hands of the celebrated Bossuet, bishop of Meaux, and submit them to his judgment; who, after reading all her papers, both printed and Mss. including a life she had written of herself, had a conference with her, and was well satisfied with her principles; but her enemies among the churchmen bt-ing not equally satisfied, an order passed for the re-examination of her two books already mentioned. Bossuet was at the head of this examination, to whom the bishop of Chalons, afterwards cardinal de Noailles, was joined, at the request of madame Guyon; and to these two were added, M.Tronson, superior of the society of St. Sulpice, and Fenelon. During the examination, madame Guyon retired to a convent at Meaux, by the desire of Bossuet, who at the end of six months drew up thirty articles, sufficient as he thought to set the sound maxims of a spiritual and mystic life in a proper light, to which four more were added by way of qualification by M. Fenelon, and the whole were signed at Issy near Paris, by all the examiners, March 10, 1695. Madame Guyon having signed them by the advice of Bossuet, he prevailed with her likewise to subscribe a submission, in which, among other things, she said, “I declare nevertheless, without any prejudice to the present submission, that I never had any design to advance any thinw that is contrary to the mind of the catholic apostolic Iloman church, to which I have always been, and shall always continue, by the help of God, to be submissive even to the last breath of my life; which I do not say by way of excuse, but from a sense of my obligation to declare my sentiments in simplicity. I never held any of those errors which are mentioned in the pastoral letter of M. de Meaux; having always intended to write in a true catholic sense, and not then apprehending that any other sense could be put upon my words.” To this the bishop subjoined an attestation, dated July 16, 1695, signifying that “madam Guyon having lived in the house, by the order and permission of their bishop, for the space of six months, had never given the least trouble or pain, but great edification; that in her whole conduct, and all her words, there appeared strict regularity, simplicity, sincerity, humility, mortification, sweetness, and Christian patience, joined to a true devotion and esteem for all matters of faith, especially for the mystery of the incarnation, and the holy infancy of our Lord Jesus Christ; and that, if the said lady would choose to pass the rest of her life in their house, the community would esteem it a favour and happiness, &c.” In consequence of these submissions, and of this testimony, Bossuet declared himself satisfied with her conduct, and continued her in the participation of the holy sacrament, in which he found her; and added that he had not discovered her to be any wise involved in the abominations, as he was pleased to term them, of Molina (see Molina), or others elsewhere condemned; and that he never intended to comprehend her in what he had said of those abominations in his ordonnance of April 15th preceding.

She died June 2, 1717, having survived the archbishop of Cambray almost two years and a half, who had a singular veneration for her to the day of his death. Her poems were translated and somewhat modernized by Cowper, a little before his death, but have not been added to any edition of his works, except that in quarto.