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

, who once enjoyed the reputation of a philosopher, the eldest son of sir Everard Digby, was born at Gothurst in Buckinghamshire, June 11, 1603. At the time of his father’s death, he was with his mother at Gothurst, being then in the third year of his age: but he seems to have been taken early out of her hands, since it is certain that he renounced the errors of popery very young, and was carefully bred up in the protestant religion, under the direction, as it is supposed, of archbishop Laud, then dean of Gloucester. Some have said, that king James restored his estate to him in his infancy; but this is an error; for it was decided by law that the king had no right to it. About 1618 he was admitted a gentleman-commoner of Gloucester-hall, now Worcester college, in Oxford; where he soon discovered such strength of natural abilities, and such a spirit of penetration, that his tutor, who was a man of parts and learning, used to compare him, probably for the universality of his genius, to the celebrated Picus de Mirandula. After having continued at Oxford between two and three years, and having raised the highest expectations of future eminence, he made the tour of France, Spain, and Italy, and returned to England in 1623; in which year he was knighted by the king, to whom he was presented at the lord Montague’s house at Hinchinbroke, October 23. Soon after, he rendered himself remarkable by the application of a secret he met with in his travels, which afterwards made so much noise in the world under the title of the “Sympathetic Powder,” by which wounds were to be cured, although the patient was out of sight, a piece of quackery scarcely credible, yet it was practised by sir Kenelm, and his patient Howell, the letter-writer, and believed by many at that time. The virtues of this powder, as himself assures us, were thoroughly inquired into by king James, his son the prince of Wales, the duke of Buckingham, with other persons of the highest distinction, and all registered among the observations of the great chancellor Bacon, to be added by way of appendix to his lordship’s Natural History; but this is not strictly true; for lord Bacon never published that Appendix, although he does give a story nearly as absurd.

, earl of Bristol, and father of lord George Digby, was by no means an inconsiderable man, though checked by the circumstances of his times from making so great a figure as his son. He was descended from an ancient family at Coleshill, in Warwickshire, and born in 1580. He was entered a commoner of Magdalen-­college, Oxford, in 1595; and the year following distinguished himself as a poet by a copy of verses made upon the death of sir Henry Union of Wadley, in Berks. Afterwards he travelled into France and Italy, and returned from thence perfectly accomplished; so that soon falling under the notice of king James, he was admitted gentleman of the privy-chamber, and one of his majesty’s carvers, in 1605. February following he received the honour of knighthood; and in April 1611, was sent ambassador into Spain, as he was afterwards again in 1614. April 1616 he was admitted one of the king’s privy-council, and vicechamberlain of his majesty’s household; and in 1618 was advanced to the dignity of a baron, by the title of the lord Digby of Sherbourne, in Dorsetshire. In 1620 he was sent ambassador to the archduke Albert, and the year following to Ferdinand the emperor; as also to the duke of Bavaria. In 1622 he was sent ambassador extraordinary to Spain, concerning the marriage between prince Charles and Maria daughter of Philip III. and the same year was created earl of Bristol. Being censured by the duke of Buckingham, on his return from the Spanish court in 1624, he was for a short time sent to the Tower but after an examination by a committee of lords, we do not find that any thing important resulted from this inquiry. After the accession of Charles I. the tide of resentment ran strong against the earl, who observing that the king was entirely governed by Buckingham, resolved no longer to keep any measures with the court. In consequence of this, the king, by a stretch of prerogative, gave orders that the customary writ for his parliamentary attendance should not; be sent to him, and on May 1, 1626, he was charged with high treason and other offences. Lord Bristol recriminated, by preparing articles of impeachment against the duke; but the king, resolving to protect Buckingham, dissolved the parliament. The earl now sided with the leaders of opposition in the long parliament. But the violences of that assembly soon disgusting him, he left them, and became a zealous adherent to the king and his cause; for which at length he suffered exile, and the loss of his estate. He died at Paris, Jan. 21, 1653.

, an able mathematician, was descended from an ancient family, and born at Digges-court, in the parish of Barham, in Kent, in the early part of the sixteenth century. He was sent, as Wood conjectures, (for he is doubtful as to the place), to University-college, Oxford, where he laid a good foundation of learning; and retiring from thence without a degree, prosecuted his studies, and composed the following works: 1. “Tectonicum; briefly shewing the exact measuring, and speedy reckoning of all manner of lands, squares, timber, stones, steeples,” &c. 1556, 4to; repubiished, with additions, by his son Thomas Digges, 1592, 4to; and again in 1647, 4to. 2. “A geometrical practical treatise, named Pantometria, in three books,” left imperfect in ms. at his death; but his son supplying such parts of it as were obscure and imperfect, published it in 1591, folio; subjoining, “A discourse geometrical of the five regular and Platonical bodies, containing sundry theoretical and practical propositions, arising by mutual conference of these solids, inscription, circumscription, and transformation.” 3. “Prognostication everlasting of right good effect; or, choice rules to judge the weather by the sun, moon, and stars,” &c. 1555, 1556, and 1564, 4to, corrected and augmented by his son; with general tables, and many compendious rules, 1592, 4to. He died not later than 1573.

His son Dudley, who was his third son, was born about 1612, and educated at Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1632; and the year after was elected a fellow of All-souls’ college. He took a master’s degree in 1635; and became a good poet and linguist, and a general scholar. He died October 1, 1643; having distinguished himself only by the two following productions: 1. “An answer to a printed book entitled * Observations upon some of his majesty’s late answers and expresses, 1” Oxon. 1642. 2. “The unlawfulness of subjects taking up arms against their sovereign in what case soever; with answers to all objections,” Lond. 1643, 4to.

Having fully satisfied himself about the new method of treating persons under inoculation for the small-pox, he published his treatise on the subject in 1766, which was soon circulated over the continent, and translated into all languages. His particular opinion may be learned from the conclusion, in which he says that, “although the whole process may have some share in the success, it consists chiefly in the method of inoculating with recent fluid matter, and the management of the patients at the time of eruption.” This proof of his professional knowledge occasioned his being invited to inoculate the empress Catherine of Russia, and her son, in 1768, of which he gives a very particular and interesting account in his “Tracts on Inoculation,” printed in 1781. Never, perhaps, did the empress display her courage and good sense to more advantage than in submitting to an operation, of which she could have no experience in her own country, and where at that time it was the subject of uncommon dread and alarm. Nor was her liberal conduct towards Dr. Dimsdale less praiseworthy. He was immediately appointed actual counsellor of state and physician to her imperial majesty, with an annuity of 500l. the rank of a baron of the Russian empire, to descend to his eldest son, and a black wing of the Russian eagle in a gold shield in the middle of his arms, with the customary helmet, adorned with the baron’s coronet, over the shield. He also received at the same time, the sum of 10,000l., and 2000l. for travelling charges, and miniature pictures of the empress and her son, &c. The baron now inoculated great numbers of people at Petersburgh and Moscow; but resisted the empress’s invitation to reside as her physician in Russia. He and his son. Dr. Nath. Dimsdale, were afterwards admitted to a private audience of Frederick III. king of Prussia, at Sans Souci, and thence returned to England, and for some time the baron resumed practice at Hertford. In 1776, he published “Thoughts on general and partial Inoculation,” 8vo; and two years after, “Observations on the Introduction to the plan of the Dispensary for general Inoculation,” 8vo. This involved him in a controversy with Dr. Lettsom, in which he opposed the above plan for inoculating the poor at their own houses; and opened an inoculation-house, under his own direction, for persons of all ranks in the neighbourhood of Hertford, which was resorted to with success. His controversy with Dr. Lettsom was carried on in the following pamphlets “Dr. Lettsom’s letter on General Inoculation” “Remarks on Ditto,” 8vo; “Review of Dr. Lettsom’s observations on the Baron’s Remarks” “Letter to Dr. Lettsom on his Remarks, &c.” “Answer to Baron Dimsdale’s Review,” and “Considerations on the plan, &c.” In 1781 he printed the “Tracts on Inoculation,” already mentioned, which were liberally distributed, but not sold.

, a very eminent divine, descended of a noble family of Lucca, was born June 6, 1576; but of his early years we have no information. When, however, he was only nineteen years of age, we find him appointed professor of Hebrew at Geneva. In 1619 the church of Geneva sent him to the synod of Dort, with his colleague Theodore Tronchin. Diodati gained so much reputation in this synod, that he was chosen, with five other divines, to prepare the Belgic confession of faith. He was esteemed an excellent divine, and a good preacher. His death happened at Geneva, Oct. 3, 1649, in his seventy-third year, and was considered as a public loss. He has rendered himself noticed by some works which he published, but particularly by his translation of the whole Bible into Italian, the first edition of which he published, with notes, in 1607, at Geneva, and reprinted in 16 n. The New Testament was printed separately at Geneva in 1608, and at Amsterdam and Haerlem in 1665. M. Simon observes, that his method is rather that of a divine and a preacher, than of a critic, by which he means only, that his work is more of a practical than a critical kind. He translated the Bible also into French, but not being so intimate with that language, he is not thought to have succeeded so well as in the Italian. This translation was printed in folio, at Geneva, in 1664. He was also the first who translated into French father Paul’s “History of the Council of Trent,” and many have esteemed this a more faithful translation than de la Houssaye’s, although less elegant in language. He also is said to have translated sir Edwin Sandys’ book on the “State of Religion in the West.” But the work by which he is best known in this country is his Annotations on the Bible, translated into English, of which the third and best edition was published in 1651, fol. He is said to have begun writing these annotations in 1606, at which time it was expected that Venice would have shaken off the popish yoke, a measure to which he was favourable; and he went on improving them in his editions of the Italian and French translations. This work was at one time time very popular in England, and many of the notes of the Bible, called the “Assembly of Divines’ Annotations,” were taken from Diodati literally. Diodati was at onetime in England, as we learn from the life of bishop Bedell, whom he was desirous to become acquainted with, and introduced him to Dr. Morton, bishop of Durham. From Morrice’s “State Letters of the right hon. the earl of Orrery,” we learn that when invited to preach at Venice, he was obliged to equip himself in a trooper’s habit, a scarlet cloak with a sword, and in that garb he mounted the pulpit; but was obliged to escape again to Geneva, from the wrath of a Venetian nobleman, whose mistress, affected by one of Diqdati'a sermons, had refused to continue her connection with her keeper. The celebrated Milton, also, contracted a friendship for Diodati, when on his travels; and some of his Latin elegies are addressed to Charles Diodati, the nepheiv of the divine. This diaries was one of Milton’s most intimate friends, and was the son of Theodore Diodati, who, although originally of Lucca, as well as his brother, married an English lady, and his son in every respect became an Englishman. He was also an excellent scholar, and being educated to his father’s profession, practised physic in Cheshire. He was at St. Paul’s school, with Milton, and afterwards, in 1621, entered of Trinity-college, Oxford. He died in 1638.

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

Mr. Ditton was buried in the cloisters of Christ’s-hospital, on the north side of the quadrangle, and near the passage at its east end. A large blue grave-stone, with a Latin inscription cut in it, was laid over the grave. The stone yet remains; but the inscription is entirely effaced. From a private diary of Mr. Ditton’s, he appears to have been a man of warm piety and simplicity of heart. His son, the rev. John Ditton, was many years lecturer of St. Mary’s, Islington, where he died March 16, 1776.

, an English painter, was born in London, in 1610. His father was master of the Alienation office; but “spending his estate upon women, necessity forced his son to be the most excellent painter that England hath yet bred.” He was put out early an apprentice to one Mr. Peake, a stationer and trader in pictures, with whom he served his time. Nature inclined him very powerfully to the practice of painting after the life, in which he had some instructions from Francis Cleyne; and, by his master’s procurement, he had the advantage of copying many excellent pictures, especially some of Titian and Van Dyck. How much he was beholden to the latter, may easily be seen in all his works; no painter having ever so happily imitated that excellent master, who was so much pleased with his performances, that he presented him to Charles I. This monarch took him into his immediate protection, kept him in Oxford all the while his majesty continued in that city, sat several times to him for his picture, and obliged the prince of Wales, prince Rupert, and most of the lords of his court, to do the like. Dobson \\as a fair, middle-sized man, of a ready wit and pleasing conversation; but somewhat loose and irregular in his way of living; and, notwithstanding the opportunities he had of making his fortune, died poor at his house in St. Martin’s-lane, in 1647. Although it was his misfortune to want suitable helps in beginning to apply himself to painting, and he was much disturbed by the commotions of the unhappy times tie nourished in, yet he shone out through all disadvantages; and it is universally agreed, that, had his education and encouragement been answerable to his genius, England might justly have been as proud of her Dobson, as Venice of her Titian, or Flanders of her Van Dyck. He was both a history and portrait painter; and there are in the collections of the dukes of Marlborough, Devonshire, Northumberland, and the earl of Pembroke, several of his pictures of both kinds.

His son, Claude- John- Baptiste Dodart, following in the steps of his father, was made M. D. in 1688, and in 1718 was appointed first physician to Louis XV. The only work in which he was concerned, was an edition of “Pomet’s History of Drugs,” with some useful notes. He died at Paris, in 1730.

He designed his eldest son, Peter Dollond, for the same business with himself; and for several years they carried on their manufactures together in Spital -fields; but the employment neither suited the expectations nor disposition of the son, who, having received much information upon mathematical and philosophical subjects from the instruction of his father, and observing the great value which was set upon his father’s knowledge in the theory of optics by professional men, determined to apply that knowledge to the benefit of himself and his family; and, accordingly, under the directions of his father, commenced optician. Success, though under the most unfavourable circumstances, attended every effort; and in 1752, John Dollond, embracing the opportunity of pursuing a profession congenial with his mind, and without neglecting the rules of prudence towards his family, joined his son, and in consequence of his theoretical knowledge, soon became a proficient in the practical parts of optics.

, an artist and author, was born at Edinburgh in 1737; his father was a glover in rather low circumstances, but of a speculative turn of mind, and much addicted to metaphysical reveries, of which his son unfortunately inherited a double portion, and without his father’s prudence, who never suffered his abstractions to interfere with his business. While a child, young Donaldson was constantly occupied in copying every object before him with chalk on his father’s cutting-board, which, was often covered with his infant delineations. This natural determination of the mind was encouraged by the father, and at the age of twelve or thirteen, his son had acquired some reputation as a drawer of miniature portraits in Indian ink, and was by these efforts enabled to contribute to the support of his parents. At the same time he was much admired for his skilfil imitations of the ancient engravers, which he executed with a pen so correctly, as sometimes to deceive the eye of a connoisseur. After passing several years in Edinburgh, he came to London, and for some time painted portraits in miniature with much success; but unfortunately he now began to fancy that the taste, policy, morals, and religion of mankind were all wrong, and that he was born to set them right. From this time his profession became a secondary object, and whether from jealousy or insanity, he used repeatedly to declare that sir Joshua Reynolds must be a very dull fellow to devote his life to the study of lines and tints. The consequence of all this was that contemptuous neglect of business which soon left him no business to mind. In the mean time he employed his pen in various lucubrations, and published a volume of poems, and an “Essay on the Elements of Beauty,” in both which merit was discoverable. Before he took a disgust at his profession, he made an historical drawing, the “Tent of Darius,” which was honoured with the prize given by the Society of Arts and also painted two subjects in enamel, the “Death of Dido,” and “Hero and Leander,” both which obtained prizes from the same society, yet no encouragement could induce him to prosecute his art. Among his various pursuits he cultivated chemistry, and discovered a method of preserving not only vegetables of every kind, but the lean of meat, so as to remain uncorrupted during the longest voyages. For this discovery he obtained a patent; but want of money, and perhaps his native indolence, and a total ignorance of the affairs of life, prevented him from deriving any advantage from it. The last twenty years of his life were years of suffering. His eyes and business failing, he was not seldom in want of the most common necessaries. His last illness was occasioned by sleeping in a room which had been lately painted. He was seized with a total debility; and being removed by the care of some friends to a lodging at Islington, where he received every attention that his case required, he expired Oct. 11, 1801, regretted by all who knew him as a man of singular and various endowments, addicted to no vice, and of the utmost moderation, approaching to abstemiousness; but unhappy in a turn of mind too irregular for the business of life, and above the considerations of prudence. Mr. Edwards attributes to him an anonymous pamphlet entitled “Critical Observations and Remarks upon the public buildings of London.”

, or Donato, one of the principal revivers of sculpture in Italy, of an obscure family at Florence, was born in 1383. He learned design under Lorenzo de Bicci, and abandoning the old dry manner, he was the first who gave his works the grace and freedom of the productions of ancient Greece and Rome; and Cosmo de Medicis employed him on a tomb for pope John XXIII. and in other works, both public and private. Cosmo also availed himself of his taste and judgment in forming those grand collections, which gave celebrity to Florence as the parent of modern art. Amongst his performances in that city are his Judith and Holofernes in bronze, his Annunciation, his St. George and St. Mark, and his Zuccone, in one of the niches of the Campanile at Florence; all of which are as perfect as the narrow principles upon which the art was then conducted would allow. To these we may add another excellent performance, his equestrian statue of bronze at Padua, to the honour of their general Gallamalata. Conscious of the value of his performances, he exclaimed to a Genoese merchant, who had bespoke a head, and estimated it by the number of days which it had employed the artist, “this man better knows how to bargain for beans than for statues he shall not have my head” and then dashed it to pieces yet no man less regarded money than Donatello. Cosmo at his death having recommended him to his son, the latter gave him an estate; but in a little while Donatello, who began to be plagued with his farmers and agents, begged his benefactor to take it again, as he did not like the trouble of it. The gift was resumed, and a weekly pension of the same value assigned to the artist. He had no notion of hoarding; but it is said that he deposited what he received in a basket, suspended from a ceiling, from which his friends and workpeople might supply themselves at their pleasure. He died in 1466, at the age of 83, and was buried in the church of St. Lorenzo, near his friend Cosmo, that, as he expressed himself, “his soul having been with him when living, their bodies might be near each other when dead.” He left a son, named “Simon,” who adopted his manner, and acquired reputation.

, a famous physician of Padua, surnamed Aggregator, on account of the great quantity of remedies he had made, was not less versed in mathematics than in medicine. He invented a clock of a new construction, which shewed not only the hours of the day and night, the days of the month, and the festivals of the year, but also the annual course of the sun, and that of the moon. The success of this invention got him the appellation of Horologius, a name ever afterwards retained hy the family. It was likewise Dondus who first found out the secret of making salt from the waters of Albano, in the Pacluan, which is described in a posthumous treatise, “De fluxu et refluxu Maris,” 1571. He died in 1350, leaving several works in physics and medicine. We have by him: “Promptuarium medicinae,” Venice, 1481, folio; and in company with John de Dondis, his son, “De fontibus calidis Patavini agri,” in a treatise “De Balneis,” Venice, 1553, folio.

Ttieir imprisonment appears to have been an act of arbitrary power, for we hear of no trial being instituted, or punishment inflicted on the parties. Mr. Donne was first released*, and soon procured the enlargement of his companions; and, probably at no great distance of time, sir George Moor began to relent. The excellent character of his son-in-law was so often represented to him that he could no longer resist the intended consequences of such applications. He condescended, therefore, to permit the young couple to live together, and solicited the lord chancellor to restore Mr. Donne to his former situation. This, however, the chancellor refused, and in such a manner as to show the opinion he entertained of sir George’s conduct. His lordship owned that “he was unfeignedly sorry for what he had done, yet it was inconsistent with his plac^ and credit to discharge and re-admit servants at the request of passionate petitioners.” Lady Ellesmere also probably felt the severity of this remark, as her unwearied solicitations had induced the chancellor to adopt a measure which he supposed the world would regard as capricious, and inconsistent with his character.

Whatever allowance is to be made for the privileges of a parent, the conduct of sir George Moor, on this occasion, seems entitled to no indulgence. He neither felt as a father, nor acted as a wise man. His object in requesting his son-in-law to be restored to the chancellor’s service, was obviously that he might be released from the expence of maintaining him and his wife; for, when disappointed in this, he refused them any assistance. This harshness reduced Mr. Donne to a situation the most distressing. His estate, the three thousand pounds before mentioned, had been nearly expended on his education

Donne and his family remained with sir Francis Woolev until the death of this excellent friend, whose last act of kindness was to effect some degree of reconciliation between sir George Moor and his son and daughter. Sir George agreed by a bond to pay Mr. Donne eight hundred pounds on a certain day, as a portion with his wife, or twenty pounds quarterly for their maintenance, until the principal sum should be discharged. With this sum, so inferior to what he once possessed, and to what he might have expected, he took a house at Mitcham for his wife and family, and lodgings for himself in London, which heoften visited, and enjoyed the society and esteem of many persons distinguished for rank and talents. It appears, however, by his letters, that his income was far from adequate to the wants of an increasing family, of whom he frequently writes in a style of melancholy and despondence which appear to have affected his health. He still had no offer of employment, and no fixed plan of study. During his residence with sir Francis Wooley, he had read much on the civil and canon law, and probably might have excelled in any of the literary professions which offered encouragement, but he confesses that he was diverted from them by a general desire of learning, or what he calls in one of his poems “the sacred hunger of science.”

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

One of his prose writings requires more particular notice. Every admirer of his character will wish it expunged from the collection. It is entitled “Biathanatos, a Declaration of that Paradox, or Thesis, that Self-Homicide is not so naturally Sin, that it may never be otherwise.” If it be asked what could induce a man of Dr. Donne’s piety to write such a treatise, we may answer in his own words that “it is a book written by Jack Donne, and not by Dr. Donne.” It was written in his youth, as a trial of skill on a singular topic, in which he thought proper to exercise his talent against the generally-received opinion. But if it be asked why, instead of sending one or two copies to friends with an injunction not to print it, he did not put this out of their power by destroying the manuscript, the answer is not so easy. He is even so inconsistent as to desire one of his correspondents neither to burn it, nor publish it. It was at length published by his son in 1644, who certainly did not consult the reputation of his father, and if the reports of his character be just, was not a man likely to give himself much uneasiness about that or any other consequence.

Dr. Donne’s reputation as a poet, was higher in his own time than it has been since. Dryden fixed his character with his usual judgment; as “the greatest wit, though not the best poet of our nation.” He says afterwards , that “he affects the metaphysics, not only in his satires, but in his amorous verses, where Nature only should reign, and perplexes the minds of the fair sex with nice speculations of philosophy, when he should engage their hearts, and entertain them with the softnesses of love.” Dryden has also pronounced that if his satires were to be translated into numbers, they would yet be wanting in dignity of expression. From comparing the originals and translations in Pope’s works, the reader will probably think that Pope has made them so much his own, as to throw very little lighten Donne’s powers. He every where elevates the expression, and in very few instances retains a whole line. Pope, in his classification of poets, places Donne at the head of a school, that school from which Dr. Johnson has given so many remarkable specimens of absurdity, in his life of Covyley, and which, following Dryden, he terms the metaphysical school. Gray, in the sketch which he sent to Mr. Warton, considers it as a third Italian school, full of conceit, begun in queen Elizabeth’s reign, continued under James and Charles I. by Donne, Crashaw, Cleiveland, carried to its height by CowJey, and ending perhaps in Sprat. Donne’s numbers, if they may be so called, are certainly the most rugged and uncouth of any of our poets. He appears either to have had no ear, or to have been utterly regardless of harmony. Yet Spenser preceded him, and Drummond, the first polished versifier, was his contemporary; but it must be allowed that before Drummond appeared, Donne had relinquished his pursuit of the Muses, nor would it be just to include the whole of his poetry under the general censure which has been usually passed. Dr. Warton seems to think that if he had taken pains, he might not have proved so inferior to his contemporaries; but what inducement could he have to take pains, as he published nothing, and seems not desirous of public fame? He was certainly not ignorant or unskilled in the higher attributes of style, for he wrote elegantly in Latin, and displays considerable taste in some of his smaller pieces and epigrams. At what time he wrote his poems has not been ascertained; but of a few the dates may be recovered by the corresponding events of his life. Ben Jonson affirmed that he wrote all his best pieces before he was twenty-five years of age. His satires, in which there are some strokes levelled at the reformation, must have been written very early, as he was but a young man when he renounced the errors of popery. His poems were first published in 4to, 1633, and 12mo, 1635, 1651, 1669, and 1719. His son was the editor of the early editions.

, an eminent nonconformist, was born at Kidderminster in Worcestershire, in 1730. Having discovered an early inclination to learning, he was sent to Cambridge, and admitted of Pembroke-hall, where he studied with a view to the church, or rather to the meeting, as the church was then under the controul of the republican party. His first destination, however, was to the law, and he wont for some time to receive instructions in an attorney’s office; but his master having employed him to copy some writings on a Sunday, he relinquished the business. It appears to have been after this that he went to the university, and having taken his degrees in arts, became a preacher. His first settlement was at St. Alphage, London-wall. This living being then vacant, Mr. Doolittle appeared as a candidate, with several others, and the parishioners preferring him, he became their pastor in 1654, and remained a very popular preacher, until 1662, when he was ejected for nonconformity. From this he removed to Moorfields, and opened a kind of boarding-school, in which he was so successful as to be obliged to hire a larger house in Bunhillfields, where he continued until the great plague, and then he removed to Woodford. After the plague abated, he returned to London, and saw it laid in ashes by the great fire. On this occasion he and some other nonconformists resumed their preaching, and were for some time unmolested. Mr. Doolittle has the credit of projecting the first meeting-house, which was a hired place in Bunhillfields, but that proving toe small, when the city began to be rebuilt, he erected a more commodious place of worship in Mugwell, or Monkwell-street, Cripplegate, which remains until this day. Here, however, he was occasionally interrupted by the magistrates, who put the laws in execution; but in 1672 he obtained a licence from Charles II. which is still suspended in the vestry-room of the meeting, and for some time continued to preach, and likewise kept an academy at Islington for the education of young men intended for the ministry among the nonconformists. On the corporation-act being passed, when his licence became useless, he was again obliged to leave London, and resided partly at Wimbledon, and partly at Battersea, where, although his house was rifled, he escaped imprisonment. At the revolution he was enabled to resume his ministry in Monkwell-street, and here he closed the public labours of fifty-three years, on May 24, 1707^ the seventyseventh year of his age. Much of this time was spent in writing his various works, many of which attained a high degree of popularity; as, 1. “A Treatise concerning the Lord’s Supper,” 1665, 12mo, which has perhaps been oftener prii ted than almost any book on that subject. 2. “Directions how to live after a wasting plague” (that of London), 1666, 8vo. 3. “A Rebuke for Sin, by God’s burning anger” (alluding to the great Fire). 4. “The Young Man’s Instructor, and the Old Man’s Remembrancer,” 1673, 8vo. 5. “A Call to delaying Sinners,” 1683, 12mo, of which there have been many editions. 6. “A Complete Body of Practical Divinity,” fol. 1723, &c. &c. His son, Samuel, was settled as a dissenting minister at Reading, where-he died in 1717.

When a detachment of the army was ordered home to suppress the rebellion in Scotland, he returned to England in Sept. 1745, and having no longer any connexion with the guards, went back to Baliol college, where he was elected one of the exhibitioners on the more lucrative foundation of Mr. Snell. In 1747 he was ordained priest, and became curate of Tilehurst, near Reading; and afterwards of Dunstevv, in Oxfordshire, where he was residing, when, at the recommendation of Dr. Charles Stuart, and lady Allen, a particular friend of his mother, he was selected by lord Bath as a tutor to accompany his son, lord Pulteney, on his travels. Of the tour which he then made, there exists a manuscript in Mr. Douglas’s hand-writing. It relates principally, if not exclusively, to the governments and political relations of the several countries through which he passed. In October 1749, he returned to England, and took possession of the free chapel of Eaton Constantine, and the donative of Uppington, in Shropshire, on the presentation of lord Bath. Here he commenced his literary career, by his able defence of Milton. Early in 1747, William Lander, a Scotch schoolmaster, made a most flagitious attempt to subvert the reputation of Milton, by shewing that he was a mere copier or translator of the works of others, and that he was indebted to some modern Latin poets for the plan, arrangement, &c. of his Paradise Lost. Many persons of considerable literary talents gave credit to the tale of Lander, among whom was the celebrated Dr. Johnson. Mr. Douglas, however, examined the merits of the case, considered most accurately the evidence adduced by Lander, and soon found that the whole was a most gross fabrication. He published in 1750 a defence of Milton against Lander, entitled, “Milton vindicated from the Charge of Plagiarism,” &c. which appeared in the form of a letter addressed to the earl of Bath. Having justified the poet, he proceeded to charge the accuser with the most gross and manifest forgery, which he substantiated to the entire satisfaction of the public. The detection was indeed so clear and manifest, that the criminal acknowledged his guilt, in a letter dictated by Dr. Johnson, who abhorred the imposition he had practised.

In 1786 he was elected one of the vice-presidents of the Society of Antiquaries, and framed their address on the king’s recovery, 1789, both to his majesty and the queen. In March 1787 he was elected one of the trustees of the British Museum, and in September of the same year, was appointed bishop of Carlisle. In 1788 he succeeded to the deanery of Windsor, for which he vacated his residentiaryship of St. Paul’s. In 1789 he preached before the house of lords, and of course published, the sermon on the anniversary of king Charles’s martyrdom. In June 1791, he was translated to the see of Salisbury. In 1793 he preached, which is also published, the anniversary sermon before the society for propagating the Gospel. Having been often and very urgently requested, by many of his literary friends, to publish a new edition of the “Criterion,” which had been many years out of print, he undertook to revise that excellent work. He had a long time before collected materials for a new and enlarged edition; but unfortunately they had been either mislaid or lost; or, more probably, destroyed, by mistake, with some other manuscripts. This circumstance, and his very advanced ago, sufficiently accounts for his not having attempted to alter materially the original work. In this statement, all the avowed publications of the bishop are enumerated, but he was concerned in many others, in which he was never supposed to have had any part, and in some of no trifling celebrity, whose nominal and reputed authors he permitted to retain and enjoy exclusively all that credit of which he could have justly laid claim to no inconsiderable share. During a great part of his life, he was in correspondence with some of the most eminent literary and political characters of the age. Few could have read more, if indeed any one so much as, with such habits of incessant application as those in which he persevered, almost to the last hour of his long protracted life, he must necessarily have read. In the strictest sense of the expression, he never let one minute pass unimproved; for he never deemed any space of time too short to be employed in reading; nor was he ever seen by any of his family, when not in company with strangers, without having a book or a pen in his hand. He retained his faculties to the last, and without any specific complaint, died on Monday, May 18, 1807, without a struggle,in the arms of his son, to whom, the public are indebted for the principal part of the preceding memoir. Bishop Douglas was interred on Monday the 25th in a vault in St. George’s chapel, Windsor.

, a surgeon at York, and an eminent antiquary, was much esteemed by Dr. Mead, Mr. Folkes, the two Mr. Gales, and all the principal members of the Royal and Antiquarian Societies. He published, in 1736, “Eboracum or the History and Antiquities of the City of York,” a splendid folio. A copy of it with large manuscript additions was in the hands of his son, the late rev. William Drake, vicar of Isleworth, who died in 1801, and was himself an able antiquary, as appears by his articles in the Archseologia, and would have republisbed his father’s work, if the plates could have been recovered. Mr. Drake was elected F. S. A. in 1735, and F. R. S. in 1736. From this latter society, for whatever reason, he withdrew in 1769, and died the following year. Mr. Cole, who has a few memorandums concerning him, informs us that when the oaths to government were tendered to him in 1745, he refused to take them. He describes him as a middle-aged man (in 1749) tall and thin, a surgeon of good skill, but whose pursuits as an antiquary had made him negligent of his profession. Mr. Cole also says, that Mr. Drake and Csesar Ward, the printer at York, were the authors of the “Parliamentary or Constitutional History of England,” printed in twenty-four volumes, 1751, &c. 8vo. This work extends from the earliest times to the restoration.

He retained all his faculties till the last years of his life; even his memory, so early and so generally diminished by age, was but little impaired. He not only remembered the incidents of his childhood or youth, but the events of later years and so faithful was his memory to him, that his son has often said, that he never heard him tell the same story twice, but to different persons, and in different companies. His eye-sight failed him many years before his death, but his hearing was uniformly perfect and unimpaired. His appetite was good till within a few weeks before his death. He generally ate a hfarty breakfast of a pint of tea or coffee, as soon as he got out of his bed, with bread and butter in proportion. He ate likewise at eleven o'clock, and never failed to eat plentifully at dinner of the grossest solid food. He drank tea in the evening, but never ate any supper. He had lost all his teeth thirty years before his death (his son says, by drawing excessive hot smoke of tobacco into his mouth); but the want of suitable mastication of his food did not prevent its speedy digestion, nor impair his health. Whether the gums, hardened by age, supplied the place of his teeth in a certain degree, or whether the juices of the mouth and stomach became so much more acrid by time, as to perform the office of dissolving the food more speedily and more perfectly, may not be so easily ascertained; but it is observable, that old people are more subject to excessive eating than young ones, and that they suffer fewer inconveniences from it. He was inquisitive after news in the last years of his life; his education did not lead him to increase the stock of his ideas in any other way. But it is a fact well worth attending to, that old age, instead of diminishing, always increases the desire of knowledge. It must afford some consolation to those who expect to be old, to discover, that the infirmities to which the decays of nature expose the human body, are rendered more tolerable by the enjoyments that are to be derived from the appetite for sensual and intellectual food.

The subject of this article was remarkably sober and temperate. Neither hard labour, nor company, nor the usual afflictions of human life, nor the wastes of nature, ever led him to an improper or excessive use of strong drink. For the last twenty-five years of his life he drank twice every day a draught of toddy, made with two tablespoons-full of spirit, in half a pint of water. His son, a man of fifty-nine years of age, said he had never seen him intoxicated. The time and manner in which he used spirituous liquors, perhaps, contributed to lighten the weight of his years, and probably to prolong his life. He enjoyed an uncommon share of health, insomuch that in the course of his long life he was never confined more than three days to his bed. He often declared that he had no idea of that most distressing- pain called the head-ach. His sleep was interrupted a little in the last years of his life with a defluxion in his breast, which produced what is commonly called the old man’s cough.

In 1753 when a severe attack was made on the political character of his two intimate friends Mr. Stone and Mr. Murray, afterwards the great earl of Mansfield, the bishop vindicated his old school-fellows before a committee of the privy council, directed to inquire into the charge, with that persuasive energy of truth, which made the king exclaim on reading the examination, “That is indeed a man to make a friend of.” In May 1761 he was translated to the see of Salisbury, and when archbishop of York elect, in which dignity he was enthroned in the November following, he preached the coronation sermon of their present majesties, and soon after became lord high almoner, and a member of the privy council. In the former office he rectified many abuses, and rendered it more extensively beneficial, by preventing the royal bounty from being considered as a fund to which persons of high n;nk and opulence could transfer any just claims on their own private generosity. On one occasion, when applied to by a very rich peer in behalf of two of his cousins, he replied, “that he was sorry to say that the very reason which would induce himself to assist them, prevented his considering them as objects of his majesty’s charity their near relationship to his lordship.” His conduct in the metropolitan see of York is described with great spirit and truth by Mr. llastal, the topographer of Southwell, who styles him “peculiarly virtuous as a statesman, attentive to his duties as a churchman, magnificent as an archbishop, and amiable as a man.” This character appears to be confirmed by all who knew him. As a statesman he acted upon manly and independent principles, retiring from parliament in 1762, when new men and measures were promoted, averse, in his opinion, to that system of government under which the country had so long flourished. When, however, any question was introduced, in which the interference of a churchman was proper, he was sedulous in his attendance, and prompt in delivering his sentiments. His munificence in his see deserves to be recorded. When he was translated to York, he found the archiepiscopal palace, small, mean, and incommodious; and the parish church in a state of absolute decay. To the former he made many splendid additions, particularly in the private chapel. The latter he rebuilt from its foundation, with the assistance of a small contribution from the clergyman of the parish, and two or three neighbouring gentlemen. He died at his palace at Bishopsthorpe, Dec. 10, 1776, in the 66th year of his age, and was buried by his own desire, in a very private manner, under the altar of the church. Although his literary attainments were very considerable, he published only six occasional sermons, which were much admired, and of which his son, rev. George Hay Drummond, M. A. prebendary of York, published a correct edition in 1803: to this edition are prefixed “Memoirs of the Archbishop’s Life,” and it also contains “A Letter on Theological Study,” addressed to the son of an intimate friend, then a candidate for holy orders, which evinces an intimate acquaintance with many of the best writers on theological subjects. His own principles appear to have been rather more remote from those contained in the articles and homilies than could have been wished, because they are thereby not so consistent with some of the writers whom he recommends; and he speaks with unusual freedom of certain doctrines which have been held sacred by some of the wisest and best divines of the established church. Of the “Memoirs” prefixed to this new edition of his Sermons, we have availed ourselves in this brief record of a prelate whose memory certainly deserves to be rescued from oblivion. His Sermons are composed in an elegant and classical style, and contain many admirable passages, and much excellent advice on points of moral and religious practice.

a distinguished clergyman of the established church of Scotland, the third son of the rev. John Drysdale, minister of Kirkaldy, was born April 29, 1718, and educated there in classical learning. In 1732, he was sent to finish his studies at the university of Edinburgh; and in 1740, was licensed to preach by the presbytery of Kirkaldy, was several years assistant minister of the collegiate church in Edinburgh, and in 1748 was presented to the church of Kirkliston. After residing there for fifteen years, he was presented to lady Yester’s church, by the town-council of Edinburgh. This being the first instance in which the magistrates of that city had exercised their right of presentation, which was thought to reside in the parishioners, and Mr. Drysdale being suspected of favouring in his discourses the Arminian tenets, a very common objection to the modern church of Scotland, a formidable opposition was made to his institution; but the magistrates proving victorious, he obtained a settlement in lady Yester’s church. The sermons he preached there, says professor Dalzel, although his mode of delivery was by no means correct, always attracted a great concourse of hearers, whom he never failed to delight and instruct by an eloquence of the most nervous and interesting kind. His natural diffidence for some prevented his appearing as a speaker in the ecclesiastical judicatures; but he was at length induced to co-operate with Dr. Robertson, in defence of what was termed the moderate party in the church of Scotland. In 1765, the university of Aberdeen, unsolicited, conferred upon him the degree of D, D. by diploma, and on the death of Dr. Jardine, he was preferred to the church of Tron, and appointed a king’s chaplain, with the allowance of one-third the emoluments arising from the deanery of the chapel royal. In 1773, having obtained the character of an able and impartial divine, he was unanimously elected moderator of the general assembly of the Scottish kirk; “the greatest mark of respect,” observes his biographer, “which an ecclesiastical commonwealth can bestow.” In 1784 he was re-elected, by a great majority, to the same dignity. In May, 17s8, he appeared at the general assembly, and the first day acted as principal clerk, but was taken ill, and died on the 16th of June following, aged seventy years. His general character was that of betievolence and inflexible integrity. His candour obtained him many friends; and even such as were of different sentiments in church affairs, and held different religious tenets, esteemed the man, and with these he kept up a friendly intercourse. “Indeed,” adds the professor, “never any man more successfully illustrated what he taught by his own conduct and manners.” His reputation as a preacher was very great; and on an occasional visit he made to London, Mr. Strahan, the late printer, endeavoured to persuade him to publish a volume of sermons. On his return to Scotland he began a selection for the purpose, but his modesty hindered his proceeding, and induced him, finally, to relinquish the plan. After his death, his son-in-law, the late professor Dalzel, who h;,d the inspection of his manuscripts, made a selection of his sermons, and published them in two 8vo volumes, with biographical anecdotes of his life, which were published also in the " Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh.

1754, Mr. Duncombe drew up “Remarks on lord Bolingbroke’s Notion of a God,” with some occasional notes; to which he annexed a translation, from Cicero, “De Natura Deorum,” of the arguments of Q Lucilius Balbus, the stoic, in proof of the being, and of the wisdom, power, and goodness, of God. These were read and approved by the archbishop, and others of the author’s friends, but were not published till 1763, when he allowed the late Dr. Dodd to insert them in the “Christian’s Magazine.” They have since been collected in the Appendix to archbishop Herring’s letters. Horace having always been Mr. Duncombe’s favourite author, he had amused himself for more than thirty years, at different times, with translating several of his odes, but without any intention of publishing them, or of giving a version of the whole to the world, till his son offered his assistance for completing the work; and undertook some of the odes and satires, all the epodes, and the first book of epistles, and added several imitations from Sanadon, Dacier, &c. Mr. Duncombe compiled notes to the whole, and published one volume 8vo, in 1757, and the second in 1759. Another edition, in four volumes, 12mo, with several additional imitations, appeared in 1764. On the death of his excellent friend, archbishop Herring, our author, as a token of his gratitude and affection, collected, in one volume 8vo, the “Seven Sermons on public occasions,” which his grace had separately printed in his life-time, and prefixed to them some memoirs of his life. This was his last publication. With a constitution naturally weak and tender, by constant regularity, and an habitual sweetness and evenness of temper, his life was prolonged to the advanced age of seventy-nine; when, without any previous painful illness, he died February 13, 1769, esteemed, beloved, and regretted, by all who knew him. He was interred near the remains of his wife, in, the burying-place of his family, in Aldbury church, Hertfordshire, and left one son, the subject of the next article.

, was born 1730, and when a child, was of an amiable disposition, had an uncommon capacity for learning, and discovered, very early, a genius for poetry. After some years passed at a school at Romford, in Essex, under the care of his relation, the rev. Philip Fletcher, afterwards dean of Kildare, and younger brother to the bishop of that see, he was removed to a more eminent one at Felsted, in the same county. At this school he was stimulated by emulation to an exertion of his talents; and, by a close application, he became the first scholar, as well as captain of the school, and gained the highest reputation; and by the sweetness of his temper and manners, and by a disposition to friendship, he acquired and preserved the love of all his companions, and the esteem of his master and family. He has, on some particular occasions, been heard modestly to declare, that he was never punished, during hib whole residence at either school, for negligence in his lessons or exercise, or for any other misdemeanor. He was very early qualified for the university, and constantly improved himself, when at home, by his private studies, and the assistance or his father, happy in the companionship of such a son, who was always dutiful and affectionate to him; and the first literary characters of that time associated with a father and son, whose polished taste and amiable manners rendered them universally acceptable. He was entered, at the age of sixteen, at Bene‘t-college, Cambridge, where Mr. Castle, afterwards dean of Hereford, was then master: and he was recommended to that college by archbishop Herring, whom we have mentioned as his father’s particular friend. The archbishop baptised his son, and promised to patronize him, if educated for the church, and therefore sent him to the college where he had completed his own education. At the university he continued to rise in reputation as a scholar and a poet, and was always irreproachable in his moral character: he had the happiness of forming some connections there with men of genius an ’< virtue, which lasted through life; but the first and strongest attachment, in which he most delighted, end which reflected honour on his own merit, was the uninterrupted friendship, and constant correspondence, which com.uued to the last, with Mr. Greene, a very respectable clergyman of the diocese of Norwich, a man whose character for learning and abilities, goodness and virtue, justly gained him the esteem and love of all who had the happiness of his acquaintance, whose testimony is real praise, who acknowledged the worth of his valuable friend, “and loved his amiable and benevolent spirit.”

There were indeed other occasions, on which his feelings were most keenly awakened, and on which he gave vent to a becoming spirit of indignation. He treated with the greatest severity every instance, either of malversation in the officers of the law, or of chicanery in the inferior practitioners of the court. No calumnious or iniquitous prosecution, no attempt to pervert the forms of law to the purposes of oppression, ever eluded his penetration, or escaped his just resentment. Thus, perpetually watchful, and earnestly solicitous to maintain both the dignity and the rectitude of that sup'reme tribunal over which he presided, the influence of these endeavours extended itself to every inferior court of judicature as the motion of the heart is felt in the remotest artery. In reviewing the sentences ui inferior judges, he constantly expressed his desire of supporting the just authority of every rank and order of magistrates; but these were taught at the same time to walk with circumspection, to guard their conduct with the most scrupulous exactness, and to dread the slightest deviation from the narrow path of their duty. With these endowments of mind, and high sense of the duties of his office, it is not surprising, that amidst all the differences of sentiment which the jarring interests of individuals, or the more powerful influence of political faction, give rise to, thete should be but one opinion of the character of this eminent man, which is, that from the period of the institution of that court over which he presided, however conspicuous in particular departments might have been the merit of some of his predecessors, no man ever occupied the president’s chair, who combined in himself so many of the essential requisites for the discharge of that important office. But while we allow the merits of this great man in possessing, in their utmost extent, the most essential requisites for the station which he filled, it is but a small derogation from the confessed eminence of his character when we acknowledge a deficiency in some subordinate qualities. Of these, what was chiefly to be regretted, and was alone wanting to the perfection of his mental accomplishments, was, that he appeared to give too little weight or value to those studies which are properly termed literary. This was the more remarkable in him, that, in the early period of his life, he had prosecuted himself those studies with advantage and success. In his youth he had made great proficiency in classical learning; and his memory retaining faithfully whatever he had once acquired, it was not unusual with him, even in his speeches on the bench, to cite, and to apply with much propriety, the most striking passages of the ancient authors. But for these studies, though qualified to succeed in them, it does not appear that he ever possessed a strong bent or inclination. If he ever felt it, the weightier duties of active life, which he was early called to exercise, precluded the opportunity of frequently indulging it; and perhaps even a knowledge of the fascinating power of those pursuits, in alienating the mind from the severer but more necessary occupations, might have inclined him at last to disrelish from habit, what it had taught him at first to resist from principle. That this principle was erroneous, it is unnecessary to consume time in proving. It is sufficient to say, that as jurisprudence can never hope for any material advancement as a science, if separated from the spirit of philosophy, so that spirit cannot exist, independent of the cultivation of literature. That the studies of polite literature, and an acquaintance with the principles of general erudition, while they improve the science, add lustre and dignity to the profession of the law, cannot be denied. So thought all the greatest lawyers of antiquity. So thought, among the moderns, that able judge and most accomplished man, of whose character we have traced some imperfect features, lord Arniston, the father of the late lord president; of which his inaugural oration, as it stands upon the records of the faculty of advocates, bears ample testimony. His son, it is true, afforded a strong proof, that the force of natural talents alone may conduct to eminence and celebrity. He was rich in native genius, and therefore felt not the want of acquired endowments. But in this he left an example to be admired, not imitated. Few inherit from nature equal powers with his; and even of himself it must be allowed, that if he was a great man without the aids of general literature, or of cultivated taste, be must have been still a greater, had he availed himself of those lights which they furnish, and that improvement which they bestow. His useful and valuable life was terminated on the 13th of December 1787. His last illness, which, though of short continuance, was violent in its nature, he bore with the greatest magnanimity. He died in the seventy-fifth year of his age, in the perfect enjoyment of all his faculties; at a time when his long services might have justly entitled him to ease and repose, but which the strong sense of his duty would not permit him to seek while his power of usefulness continued; at that period, in short, when a wise man would wish to finish his course; too soon indeed for the public good, but not too late for his own reputation.

He preserved the dignity of a barrister very much in court, and frequently kept even the judges in check. When lord Mansfield, who had great quickness in discovering the jut of a cause, used to take up a newspaper by way of amusing himself, whilst Dunning was speaking, the latter would make a dead stop. This would rouse his lordship to say, “Pray go on, Mr. Dunning.” “No, my lord, not till your lordship has finished.” His reputation was as high with his fellow-barristers as with the public; he lived very much with the former, and had their affection and esteem. When lord Thurlow gave his first dinner as lord chancellor, he called Dunning to his right hand at table, in preference to all the great law otBcers; and when he hesitated to take the place, the other called out in his blunt way, “Why will you keep the dinner cooling in this manner?” He had that integrity in his practice, that on the opening of any cause, which he found by the evidence partook of any notorious fraud or chicanery, he would throw his brief over the bar with great contempt, and resort to his bag for a fresh paper. Whilst he was in the height of his practice, his father came to the treasurer’s office in the Middle Temple, to be one of the joint securities for a student performing his terms, <kc. Wh<-n he signed the bond, the clerk, seeing the name, asked him with some eagerness, whether he was any relation to the great Dunning? The old man felt the praise of his son with great sensibility, and modestly replied, “I am John Dunning’s father, Sir.” Few lawyers, without any considerable paternal estate at starting, and dying so young as lord Ashburton did, ever left such a fortune behind him; the whole amounting to no less than one hundred and eighty thousand pounds! Nor was this the hoard of a miser, for he always lived like a gentleman in the most liberal sense of the word, though, from his immense practice, he had no time to indulge in the arrangements of a regular establishment. During his illness, as a last resource he was advised to try his native air, and in going down to Devonshire accidentally met, at the same inn, his old colleague Wallace, lately attorneygeneral, coming to town on the same melancholy errand, to be near the best medical assistance. It was the lot of both to be either legal or political antagonists through the whole course of their lives, in which much keenness, and much dexterity of argument, were used on both sides: here, however, they met as friends, hastening to that goal, where the race of toil, contention, and ambition, was soon to have a final close. They supped together with as much conviviality as the nature of their conditions would admit, and in the morning parted wiih mutual promises of visiting each other early in the winter. These promises, however, were never performed: Dunning died in August, and Wallace in November.

was born of noble parents at Glastonbury, in Somersetshire, in the year 925. Under the patronage of his uncle Aldhelm, archbishop of Canterbury, he was instructed in the literature and accomplishments of those times, and in consequence of his recommendation invited by king Athelstan to court, who bestowed on him lands near Glastonbury, where he is said to have spent some years in retirement. Edmund, the successor of Athelstan, appointed him abbot of the celebrated monastery which he began to rebuild in that place in the year 042, and by the munificence of the king, who gave him a new charter in the year 944, he was enabled to restore it to its former lustre. Among other legendary stories reported of St. Dunstan we are told that he had been represented to the king as a man of licentious manners; and dreading the ruin of his fortune by suspicions of this nature, he determined to repair past indiscretions by exchanging the extreme of superstition for that of licentiousness. Accordingly he secluded himself altogether from the world; and he framed a cell so small that he could neither stand erect in it, nor stretch out his limbs during his repose; and here he employed himself perpetually in devotion or manual labour. In this retreat his mind was probably somewhat deranged; and he indulged chimeras which, believed by himself and announced to the credulous multitude, established a character of sanctity among the people. He is said to have fancied that the devil, among the frequent visits which he paid him, was one day more earnest than usual in his temptations; till Dunstan, provoked hy his importunity, seized him by the nose with a pair of red-hot pincers as he put his head into the cell, and he held him there till the malignant spirit made the whole neighbourhood resound with his bellowings. The people credited and extolled this notable exploit, and it ensured to Dunstan such a degree of reputation, that he appeared again in the world, and Edred, who had succeeded to the crown, made him not only the director of that prince’s conscience, but his counsellor in the most important affairs of government. He was also placed at the head of the treasury; and being possessed of power at court, and of credit with the populace, he was enabled to attempt with success the most arduous enterprizes. Taking advantage of the implicit confidence reposed in him by the king, Dunstan imported into England a new order of monks, the Benedictines, who, by changing the state of ecclesiastical affairs, excited, on their first establishment, the most violent commotions. Finding also that his advancement had been owing to the opinion of his austerity, he professed himself a parti zan of the rigid monastic rules; and after introducing that reformation into the convents of Glastonbury and Abingdon, he endeavoured to render it universal in the kingdom. This conduct, however, incurred the resentment of the secular clergy; and these exasperated the indignation of many courtiers, which had been already excited by the haughty and over-bearing demeanour which Dunstan assumed. Upon the death of Edred, who had supported his prime-minister and favourite in all his measures, and the subsequent succession of Edwy, Dunstan was accused of malversation in his office, and banished the kingdom. But, on the death of Edwy, and the succession of Edgar, Dunstan was recalled and promoted first to the see of Worcester, then to that of London and about the year 959, to the archiepiscopal see of Canterbury. For this last advancement it was requisite to obtain the sanction of the pope; and for this purpose Dunstan was sent to Rome, where he soon obtained the object of his wishes, and the appointment of legate in England, with very extensive authority. Upon his return to England, so absolute was his influence over the king, he was enabled to give to the Romish see an authority and jurisdiction, of which the English clergy had been before in a considerable degree independent. In order the more effectually and completely to accomplish this object, the secular clergy were excluded from their livings, and disgraced; and the monks were appointed to supply their places. The scandalous lives of the secular clergy furnished one plea for this measure, and it was not altogether groundless; but the principal motive was that of rendering the papal power absolute in the English church; for, at this period, the English clergy had not yielded implicit submission to the pretended successors of St. Peter, as they refused to comply with the decrees of the popes, which enjoined celibacy on the clergy. Dunstan was active and persevering, and supported by the authority of the crown, he conquered the struggles which the country had long maintained against papal dominion, and gave to the monks an influence, the baneful effects of which were experienced in England until the era of the reformation. Hence Dunstan has been highly extolled by the monks and partizans of the Romish church; and his character has been celebrated in a variety of ways, and particularly by the miracles which have been wrought either by himself or by others in his favour. During the whole reign of Edgar, Dunstan maintained his interest at court; and upon his death, in the year 975, his influence served to raise his son Edward to the throne, in opposition to Ethelred. Whilst Edward was in his minority, Dunstan ruled with absolute sway, both in the church and state, but on the murder of the king, in the year 979, and after the accession of Ethelred, his credit and influence declined; and the contempt with which his threatenings of divine vengeance were regarded by the king, are said to have mortified him to such a degree, that on his return to his archbishopric, he died of grief and vexation, May 19, 988. A volume of his works was published at Doway, in 1626. His ambition has given him a considerable place in ecclesiastical and civil history; and he appears to have been a man of extraordinary talents. Dr. Burney, in his history, notices his skill in music, and his biographers also inform us that he was a master of drawing, engraved and took impressions from gold, silver, brass, and iron, and that he even practised something like printing. Gervase’s words are, “literas formare,” which however, we think, means no more than that he cut letters on metal.

, born of a noble family at Beaug6-laville, in Brescia, then belonging to the duke of Savoy, in 1527, was among the most famous physicians of his time, and practised his art at Paris with great reputation, during the reigns of Charles IX. and Henry III. to whom he was physician in ordinary. He came to Paris very young, without money or friends, yet soon acquired distinction in his studies of the belles Jettres and medicine, and when he had taken his doctor’s degree in the latter faculty, acquired great practice; a very advantageous marriage served to introduce him at court, and to the appointment of professor of medicine. Henry Til who had a singular esteem and affection for him, granted him a pension of four hundred crowns of gold, with survivance to his five sons; and, as a mark of his condescension, was present at the marriage of his daughter, to whom he made presents to a considerable amount. Duret died Jan. 22, 1586, at the age of fifty-nine. He was firmly attached to the doctrine of Hippocrates, and treated medicine in the manner of the ancients. Of several books that he left, the most esteemed is a “Commentaire sur les Coaques d'Hippocrate,” Paris, 1621, Gr. and Lat. folio. He died before he had put the finishing hand to this work. John Duret, his son, revised it, and gave it to the public under this title, “Hippocratis magni Coacte praenotiones: opus admirabile, in tres libros distributum, interprete et enarratore L. Dureto.” John Duret followed his father’s profession with great success, and died in 1629., aged sixty-six.

Duval, occupied by his studies, and the inspection of the hermitage of St. Anne, had spent many years in perfect content, when an unexpected accident interrupted his felicity. Dnke Leopold died in 1738, and his son Francis exchanged the duchy of Lorraine for the grand duchy of Tuscany. King Stanislaus, the new possessor of Lorraine, used indeed the most urgent entreaties to prevail on Duval to continue in the office of professor in the academy of Luneville, but his attachment to his old patron would not permit him to listen to the proposal. He went to Florence, where he was placed at the head of the ducai library, which was transferred thither. Notwithstanding the charming climate of Italy, Lorraine, to which he had so many reasons to be attached, did not cease to be the object of his regret. His regret was considerably increased by his separation from the young duke Francis, who, on his marriage with the heiress of the house of Austria, was obliged of course to reside at Vienna. The science of medals, upon which Duval had already read lectures in Lorraine, became now his favourite amusement, and he was desirous of making a collection of ancient and modern coins. He was deeply engaged in this pursuit, when the emperor Francis, who had formed a similar design, sent for him, that he might have the care and management of the collection. In 1751 he was appointed sub-preceptor to the archduke Joseph, the late emperor; but he refused this office, and gave the reasons of his refusal in writing. He preserved, nevertheless, the friendship of their majesties, and continued to receive new proofs of it. He was, indeed, beloved by all the Imperial family; but, from his extreme modesty, he was scarcely acquainted with the personsof many individuals of it. The eldest archduchesses passing him one day without his appearing to know them, the king of the Romans, who was a little behind them, and who perceived his absence, asked him if he knew those ladies “No, sir,” said he ingenuously. “I do not at all wonder at it,” replied the prince; “it is because my sisters are not antiques.” His health being impaired by his close application to study, he was advised to take a journey to re-establish it. He returned into France, and arrived at Paris in 1752, where he found a number of persons who were desirous of shewing him civilities, and rendering his abode agreeable, particularly the abbé Lenglet du Fresnoy, M. du Fresne d'Aubigny, the abbe Barthelemi, M. de Bose, M. Duclos, and Madame de Graffigny. On his return he passed by Artonay, his native village, and purchased his paternal cottage, which one of his sisters had sold from indigence; and having caused, it to be pulled down, he built on the spot a solid and commodious house, which he made a present of to the community, for the abode of the schoolmaster of the village. His beneficence distinguished itself also in a hamlet situated near Artonay, where, finding that there were no wells, he had some dug at his own expence.

, one of the early reformers, was born at Kitzingen in Franconia, Nov. 8, 1511, and was first educated in the college at Anspach. In 1525 he went to Nuremberg, and in 1532 the senate of that city sent him to Wittemberg, where he took his master’s degree in 1536. 'As he wrote a fair hand, Melancthon employed him as his amanuensis, and finding in him talents of a superior order, consulted him on all his undertakings, which made him be called by some, “Philip’s Repertory.” In 1544 he was appointed to the professorship of philosophy, and in 1556 to that of Hebrew, and this last year he took orders. Some time after he was sent to the college of Worms, along with Melancthon; and in 1558 was appointed first pastor of Wittemberg, in the room of Bugenhagius. He took the degree of doctor in 1559, and in 1568 went to Anspach, with Paul Crellius, to allay some disputes that had arisen among the clergy of that place. In this attempt he gave so much satisfaction to prince George Frederick, that he rewarded him liberally, and settled a pension on his son. He died Dec. 20, 1589. After the death of Melancthon, he was regarded as the firat of his disciples who were usually called Crypto-Calvinists, from being somewhat tacit and moderate in their principles. He was a man of great learning, and an eloquent preacher. The only works mentioned by his biographers are: “Expositio Evangelior. Dominicalium;” “Calendarium Historicum,” Wittem. 1550, 8vo, reprinted at Basil the same year; “Historia populi Judaici a reditu Babylonico ad Hierosolymae excidium;” and “Hymni sacri vernacule editi,” for the use of his church, where they long continued to be sung.

, in Latin Clusius, an eminent botanist, was born at Arras, in French Flanders, on Feb. 19, 1526, and was educated at Ghent and Louvain, in the languages, jurisprudence, and medicine, in which last faculty he took a degree, but without any view to practice. At the age of twenty-three he began his travels, and pursued in them all the study of botany, to which he was extremely partial. He visited England three times, and in all his journeys cultivated the acquaintance of the learned in his favourite science. He also not only collected and described a number of uew plants, but made drawings of several with his own hand. In 1573 he was invited to Vienna, by the emperor Maximilian II. with whom, as well as with his son, afterwards the emperor Rodolphus II. he was in great favour, and was honoured by the former with the rank of nobility. In 1593, the sixty-eighth year of his age, he was chosen professor of botany at Leyden, where he resided in great reputation till his death, April 4, 1609. At his funeral, in St. Mary’s church, Leyden, a Latin oration in his praise was delivered by the rector of the university. With respect to hodily health, Ecluse was unfortunate beyond the usual lot of humanity. In his youth he was afflicted with dangerous fevers, and afterwards with a dropsy. He broke his right arm and leg by a fall from his horse in Spain, and dislocated, as well as fractured his left ankle at Vienna/ In his sixty-third year he dislocated his right thigh, which, being at first neglected, could never afterwards be reduced, and he became totally unable to walk. Calculous disorders, in consequence of his sedentary life, accompanied with colic and a hernia, close the catalogue of his afflictions. Yet his cheerful temper and ardour for science never forsook him, nor did any man ever enjoy more respect and esteem from those who knew him.

, an enterprising Danish missionary, was a native of Denmark, horn Jan. 31, 1686, and was for some time a preacher at Trundheim, in Norway. Having heard that lung before his time some families of Norway had established themselves in Greenland, where the Christian religion was propagated by them, and even churches and convents built, be felt himself interested in the welfare of this colony, and curious to know its actual state; and although he was told that the ice rendered that country intolerable, that the people were savages, and that no traces were now to be found of the religion which they had been taught, he still persisted in his design of reviving an establishment there, and for some years made many unsuccessful attempts to procure the necessary means. At length Frederic IV. king of Denmark seemed disposed to second his efforts, and called together the body of merchants of Bergen, to know what assignee and what privileges they would grant to a company disposed to make the experiment of establishing a colony in Greenland. But these merchants could not be made to comprehend the utility of the plan, and nothing was done by them as a body. Egede, however, was not wholly disheartened, but visited the merchants individually, and by dint of solicitation, obtained a subscription amounting to 10,000 crowns, to which he added 300, which wasthe whole of his own property. He then built vessels fit for the voyage, and provided all necessaries the king appointed him missionary, with a salary of 300 crowns, and in May 1721, Egede Bet sail with his wife and children, full of ardent hopes. After many dangers, he landed on the Baals river, in West Greenland, and built a house. He now endeavoured to gain the confidence of the natives by kind approaches; be learned their language, and took every method to soften their manners, and enlighten their understandings. He also, as a very necessary step towards civilization, endeavoured to form a commercial establishment with them, and, some time after, the king sent other vessels and two more ecclesiastics to assist Egede in his undertaking. The colony then began to prosper; above 150 children were baptised and taught the principles of the Christian religion, and every thing wore a promising appearance, when, on the accession of Christian VI. to the throne, an order came to discontinue their proceedings. On this the greater part of the colonists returned home; but Egede persisted in remaining on the spot, and having persuaded about a dozen seamen to share his lot, he renewed his endeavours with success, and the following year a vessel arrived from the mother-country with provisions and men, and an order to persevere in the objects of the mission. Every succeeding year a vessel arrived with similar assistance, and Egede received 2000 crowns by each, for the annual expences of the colony, in the promotion of which he continued to labour with great zeal, until old age and infirmities obliged him to desist, when his eldest son, Paul, was appointed his successor. After a residence of fifteen years, the good old man returned to Copenhagen, and employed the remainder of his days in teaching the Greenland language to young missionaries. He died in the island of Falster, Nov. 5, 1758. A short time before this event, he published his “Description and Natural History of Greenland,” of which there has been a French translation by Roches de Parthenay, printed at Geneva, 1763, 8vo, and the same year a German translation by Knrnitz. There is also a German translation of “The Journal of his Mission,” printed at Hamburgh, 1740, 4to. His son Paul, who died in 1789, wrote an “Account of his own Mission,” which appeared in 1789, 8vo.

, lord Ellesmere, an eminent English statesman and lawyer, the son of Richard Egerton, of Ridley, in Cheshire, was born in Cheshire, about the year 1540. In 1556 he was admitted a commoner of Brasencse college, in Oxford, where he continued about three years; and having laid a good foundation of classical and logical learning, he removed thence to Lincoln’s-inn, and applied himself with such success to the study of the law, that he soon became a noted counsellor. The superior abilities he displayed in the line of his profession, and his distinguished eminence at the bar, attracted the notice of queen Elizabeth, and on June 28, 1581, she appointed him her solicitor-general: the year after he was chosen Lent reader of the society of Lincoln’s-inn, and was made also one of the governors of that society, in which office he continued for twelve years successively. His conduct and proficiency in the law, promoted him on June 2, 1594, to the office of attorney-general, and he was knighted soon after. On the 10th of April, 1593, he was appointed master of the rolls, when he shewed his great friendship to Mr. Francis Bacon, afterwards lord Verulam, by assisting him with his own observations in regard to the office of solicitor-general, then likely to become vacant by the advancement of Mr. Edward Coke to that of attorneygeneral, which was acknowledged by sir Robert Cecil as a favour done personally to himself. Upon the death of sir John Puckering, he had the great eal of England delivered to him at Greenwich on the 6th of May, 1596, with the title of lord keeper, by the special choice and favour of the queen, without any mediator or competitor, and even against the interest of the prime minister and his son; and at the same time he was sworn of her majesty’s privycouncil. He was permitted to hold the mastership of the rolls till May 15, 1603, when James I. conferred it on Edward Bruce, afterwards baron of Kmloss.

His lordship’s illness increasing, the king, as a farther testimony of his affection and good- will, sent the earl of Buckingham and sir Francis Bacon on the 15th of March to signify his intention of honouring him with an earldom, accompanied with an annual pension. These honours he did not live to receive, but the king conferred the former upon his son, John Egerton, afterwards created earl of Bridgewater. The age in which he lived was a particular aera of the British annals, distinguished by many great and extraordinary public characters: but, whilst the misconduct or misfortune of a Devereux, a Raleigh, a Bacon, and a Coke, exposed them to public disgrace, or to an ignominious death; the prudence, discretion, and integrity of lord Ellesmere, secured him a safe and honourable retreat from this life; for, he died at York-house, in the Strand, on the 15th of March, 1617, in his seventy-seventh year, “in a good old age, and full of virtuous fame,” and in the words of Camden, “Forte quanto propius reipublicse mala viderat, ut integer honestum finem voluit.” To sum up his character, says bishop Hacket, the biographer of archbishop Williams, he was one “Qui nihil in vita nisi laudandum aut fecit, aut dixit, aut sensit.” He was buried at Doddleston, in Cheshire, on the 6th of April.

Sir Gilbert Eliott, of Stobbs, had nine sons, of whotn our general was the youngest; and two daughters. His eldest brother, sir John Eliott, left the title and estate to his son sir Francis Eliott, nephew to the general. The general was born about the year 1718, and received thefirst rudiments of his education under a private tutor retained at the family seat. At an early age he was sent to the university of Leydcn, where he made a rapid progress in classical learning, and spoke with elegance and fluency the German and French languages. Being designed for a military life, he was sent from thence to the celebrated military school at La Fere in Picardy. This school was rendered the most famous in Europe by the great Vauban, under whom it was conducted. It was afterwards committed to the management and care of the comte d'Houroville. Here it was that the foundation was laid of that knowledge of tactics in all its branches, and particularly in the arts of engineering and fortification, which afterwards so greatly distinguished this officer. He completed his military course on the continent by a tour for the purpose of seeing in practice what he had been studying in thetsry, Prussia was the model for discipline, and he continued for some time as a volunteer in this service. Such were the steps taken by the young men of fashion in that day to accomplish themselves for the service of their country. Many of his contemporaries were then similarly engaged, nobly abandoning the enjoyments of ease and luxury at home, for the opportunity of seeing actual service.

, an artist, was the son of an able physician, and was born at Gottemburg the I 8th of September 1633, according to Houbraken, and in 1632 by Weyermann’s account. Ottomar’s father centred all his views in making his son a scholar, and he therefore put him to study the languages under the most famous professors. It was soon perceived that he relaxed in his progress in every other of his lessons, in proportion as his taste for painting was unfolded: and that in the very classes and school-hours he was secretly practising with the crayon. Chastisements were even found ineffectual to his correction, notwithstanding the obstinacy of his mother in not altering her purpose. A lucky accident delivered our young man from this disagreeable situation. One day a poor person desired to speak in private with the physician: the beggar displayed to him his extreme distress in several languages. The wife of the physician, who was present at this conversation, said to her husband, “Since I see that there are men of learning in indigence as well as painters, I think it altogether indifferent to which profession my son applies; let him satisfy his own inclination.” Elliger was then placed at Antwerp in the school of Daniel Segers, the Jesuit; where he learnt to paint flowers and fruit, and at length equalled his master. He was called to the court of Berlin, where he was highly honoured for his talents, and the elector Frederic William appointed him his principal painter. This prince found great amusement in conversing with Elliger, and his smart replies on all occasions pleased him so much, that he made frequent visits to his lodgings. This agreeable life, in which he found much profit as well as pleasure, continued till his death, the year of which is not known. Elliger’s works, which are as much sought after as those of his master, are principally in Germany, where they are preserved with the utmost care.

, a miscellaneous writer of some reputation in the last age, and well known to the scholars of that period, was the son of Mr. James Ellis, and was born in the parish of St. Clement Danes, March 22, 1698. His father was a man of an eccentric character, roving, and unsettled. At one time he was clerk to his uncle and guardian, serjeant Denn, recorder of Canterbury, and kept his chambers in Gray’s-inn, on a starving allowance, as Mr. Ellis used to declare, for board-wages. Leaving his penurious relation, who spent what his father left him in a litigious process, he obtained a place in the post-office at Deal in Kent, from whence he was advanced, to be searcher of the customs in the Downs, with a boat; but being imposed upon, as he thought, in some way by his patron, he quitted his employment and came to London. He was represented by his son as particularly skilful in the use of the sword, to which qualification he was indebted, through the means of a nobleman, for one of his places. He was also much famed for his agility, and could at one time jump the wall of Greenwich park, with the assistance of a staff. At the trial of Dr. Sacheverel he was employed to take down the evidence for the doctor’s use. His wife, Susannah Philpot, our author’s mother, was so strict a dissenter, that when Dr. Sacheverel presented her husband with his print, framed and glazed, she dashed it on the ground, and broke it to pieces, calling him at the same time a priest of Baal; and at a late period of our author’s life, it was remembered by him, that she caused him to undergo the discipline of the school, for only presuming to look at a top on a Sunday which had been given to him the day preceding. The qualifications which Mr. Ellis’s father possessed, it will be perceived, were not those which lead to riches; and indeed so narrow were his circumstances, that he was unable to give his son the advantages of a liberal education. He was first sent to a wretched day-school in Dogwell-court, White Fryars, with a brother and two sisters; and afterwards was removed to another, not much superior, in Wine-office-court, Fleet-street, where he learned the rudiments of grammar, more by his own application than by any assistance of his master. He used, however, to acknowledge the courtesy of the usher, who behaved well to him. While at this school he translated “Mars ton Moore; sive, de obsidione praelioque Eboracensi carmen. Lib. 6. 1650, 4to. Written by Payne Fisher;” which, as it has not been found among his papers, we suppose was afterwards destroyed. At what period, or in what capacity he was originally placed with Mr. John Taverner, an eminent scrivener in Threadneedlestreet, we have not learned; but in whatever manner the connexion began, he in due time became clerk or apprentice to him; and during his residence had an opportunity of improving himself in the Latin tongue, which he availed himself of with the utmost diligence. The son of his master, then at Merchant Taylors’ school, was assisted by his father in his daily school-exercises; which being conducted in the presence of the clerk, it was soon found that the advantage derived from the instructions, though missed by the person for whom it was intended, was not wholly lost. Mr. Ellis eagerly attended, and young Taverner being of an indolent disposition, frequently asked his assistance privately; which at length being discovered by the elder Taverner, was probably the means of his first introduction to the world, though it cannot be said much to his advantage, as old Taverner had the address to retain him in the capacity of his clerk during his life-time, and at his death incumbered him with his son as a partner, by whose imprudence Mr. Ellis was a considerable sufferer both in his peace of mind and his purse, and became involved in difficulties which hung over him a considerable number of years. His literary acquisitions soon, as it might be expected, introduced him to the acquaintance of those who had similar pursuits. In 1721, the rev. Mr. Fayting, afterwards of Merchant Taylors’ school, rector of St. Martin Outwich, and prebendary of Lincoln, being then about to go to Cambridge, solicited and obtained his correspondence, part of which was carried on in verse. With this gentleman, who died 22d Feb. 1789, in his eighty-sixth year, Mr. Ellis lived on terms of the most unreserved friendship, and on his death received a legacy of 100l. bequeathed to him by his will. At a period rather later, he became also known to the late Dr. King of Oxford. Young Taverner, who probably was not at first intended for a scrivener, was elected from Merchant Taylors’ school to St. John’s college, Oxford, and by his means Mr. Ellis was made acquainted with the tory orator. By Dr. King he was introduced to his pupil lord Orrery; and Mr. Ellis atone time spent fourteen days in their company at college, so much to the satisfaction of all parties, that neither the nobleman nor his tutor ever afterwards came to London without visiting, and inviting Mr. Ellis to visit them. In, the years 1742 and 1713, Dr. King published “Templum Libertatis,” in two books, which Mr. Ellis translated into verse with the entire approbation of the original author. This translation still remains in ms. Of his poetical friends, however, the late Moses Mendez, esq. appears to have been the most intimate with him. Several marks of that gentleman’s friendship are to be found scattered through his printed works; and about 1749 he addressed a beautiful epistle to him from Ham, never yet published. In 1744 Mr. Mendez went to Ireland, and on July 5 sent a poetical account of his journey to Mr. Ellis. This epistle was afterwards printed in 1767, in -a collection of poems, and in the same miscellany Mr. Ellis’s answer appeared. Soon after Mr. Mendez addressed a poetical epistle to his friend, Mr. S. Tucker, at Dulwich, printed in the sam collection.

, or as sometimes improperly spelt Ellis (Sir Richard, Bart.), a gentleman of extensive learning, particularly in biblical criticism and antiquities, descended from an ancient family originally of Wales, but who afterwards obtained possessions in Lincolnshire, was the son of sir William Ellys of Wyham, in that county, by Isabella, grand-daughter of the celebrated Hampden. Of his early history we have little information. His father had been a member of Lincoln college, Oxford, where he proceeded M. A. and his son might probably have been sent to the same university, and left it without taking a degree. From, his extensive acquaintance with the literati of Holland, it is not improbable, as the practice was then common, that he studied at some of the Dutch universities. We are told that he served in two parliaments for Grantham, and in three for Boston in Lincolnshire; but, according to Beatson’s Register, he sat only for Boston in the fifth, sixth, and seventh parliament of Great Britain, namely, from 1715 to 1734; but his father sir William sat for three parliaments for Grantham. Although sir Richard communicated some particulars of his family to Collins, when, publishing his “Baronetage,” the latter has either omitted, or was not furnished with the dates that might have assisted us in ascertaining these facts with certainty. Sir Richard married, first, a daughter and coheiress of sir Thomas Hussey, bart. and, secondly, a daughter and coheiress of Thomas Gould, esq. who survived him, and afterwards married sir Francis Dashwood, bart. (who died lord le Despencer in 1781), and died Jan. 19, 1769. Sir Richard had no issue by either of his wives, and the title of course became extinct on his death, which happened February 21, 1741-2, when he was deeply lamented, not only as a man of great learning and piety, but on account of his many and extensive charities. He entailed his estates, after the death of lady Ellys, on the Hobarts and Trevors, and his seat at Nocton in Lincolnshire is now the chief seat of the earl of Buckinghamshire. Sir Richard had two sisters married to Edward Cheek and Richard Hampden, esqs.

, an eminent Scotch prelate, descended from a noble family in Germany, the counts of Helphinstein, was the son of John, or as some say, William Elphinston and Margaret Douglas, daughter of Douglas of Drumlanrig, and was horn at Glasgow in 1431, or, according to another account, in 1437. He was educated in the newly-erected university of Glasgow, and in the twentieth year of his age became M. A. He then applied himself to the study of divinity, and was made rector of Kirkmichael. After continuing four years in this situation, he went to Paris, where he acquired such reputation in the study of the civil and canon law, as to attract the attention of the university; and he was advanced to the professorship of civil and canon law, first at Park, and afterwards at Orleans, where his lectures were attended by a great concourse of students. The improvement of his own mind, however, being the particular object of his solicitude, he canvassed the most abstruse and difficult parts of his profession with the most eminent and learned doctors of the age. After nine years’ intense study in France, he returned home at the earnest solicitations of his friends, particularly bishop Muirhead, who made him parson of Glasgow, and official of his diocese; and as a mark of respect he was chosen rector of that university in which he had been educated. After the death of his friend and patron, Ivluirbead, he was made official of Lolhian, by archbishop Schevez, of St. Andrew’s; and at the same time was called to parliament, and to a seat in the privycouncil. As his talents were of the most acute and discerning kind, he embraced subjects remote from his religious studies, and became conspicuous as an able politician and skilful negociator. In this capacity he was employed by James III. on an embassy to France, in conjunction with Livingstone, bishop of Dunkeld, and the earl of fiuchan. It is said that he managed so dextrously, that the old league and amity were renewed, and all cause of discord between the two kingdoms removed. The French monarch was so charmed with his conduct and conversation, that he loaded him with valuable presents. When he returned home, he was made archdeacon of Argyle, in 1479, and soon after bishop of Ross; and in 1484, he was translated to the see of Aberdeen. His address in negociation induced the king to send him as one of the commissioners from Scotland to treat of a truce with England, and a marriage between his son and the lady Anne, the niece of Richard III.

He was the author of, 1. “The ancient method and manner of holding Parliaments in England,” 1663, reprinted often since; the best edition is that of 1768, by the learned and accurate Thomas Tyrwhitt, esq. who was some time clerk of the house of commons. Wood supposes that this work is mostly taken from a manuscript entitled “Modus tenendi Parliamentum apud Anglos, &c. Of the form and manner of holding a Parliament in England, and all things incident thereunto, digested and divided into several chapters and titles, anno 1626.” Written by our author’s father, who died while his son was upon his travels. 2. A tract concerning the proceedings in parliament: never published. The manuscript was some time in the possession of sir Matthew Hale, who bequeathed it by his will to Lincoln’s-inn library. 3. He left also behind him some tracts and memorials, which his executors thought sot perfect enough to be published. 4. Wood ascribes moreover to him, “A declaration or remonstrance of the state of the kingdom, agreed on by the lords and commons assembled in parliament, 19th May, 1642.” But this piece is not thought to have been his, on account of a degree of virulence running through it, which was not natural to him. The reader may find it in the fourth volume of Rushworth’s Collections, and in Husband’s collection of Remonstrances, &c. 1643, 4to.

, a very eminent mathematician, was born May 14, 1701, at Hurvvorth, a village about three miles south of Darlington, on the borders of the county of Durham, at least it is certain he resided here from his childhood. His father, Dutlly Emerson, taught a school, and was a tolerable proficient in the mathematics; and without his books and instructions perhaps his son’s genius might might never have been unfolded. Besides his father’s instructions, our author was assisted in the learned languages by a young clergyman, then curate of Hurworth, who was boarded at his father’s house. In the early part of his life, he attempted to teach a few scholars; but whether from his concise method (for he was not happy in expressing his ideas), or the warmth of his natural temper, he made no progress in his school; he therefore Sood left it oft', and satisfied with a small paternal estate of about 60l. or 70l. a year, devoted himself to study, which he closely pursued in his native place through the course of a long life, being mostly very healthy, till towards the latter part of his days, when he was much afflicted with the stone: towards the close of the year 1781, being sensible of his approaching dissolution, he disposed of the whole of his mathematical library to a bookseller at York, and on May the 26th, 1782, his lingering and painful disorder put an end to his life at his native village, in the eighty-first year of his age. In his person he was rather short, but strong and well-made, with an open countenance and ruddy complexion. He was never known to ask a favour, or seek the acquaintance of a rich man, unless he possessed some eminent qualities of the mind. He was a very good classical scholar, and a tolerable physician, so far as it could be combined with mathematical principles, according to the plan of Keil and Morton. The latter he esteemed above all others as a physician the former as the best anatomist. He was very singular in his behaviour, dress, and conversation. His manners and appearance were that of a rude and rather boorish countryman, he wasof very plain conversation, and indeed seemingly rude, commonly mixing oaths in his sentences. He had strong natural parts, and could discourse sensibly on any subject; but was always positive and impatient of any contradiction. He spent his whole life in close study and writing books; with the profits of which he redeemed his little patrimony from some original incumbrance. He had but one coat, which he always wore open before, except the lower button no waistcoat; his shirt quite the reverse of one in. common use, no opening before, but buttoned close at the collar behind; a kind of flaxen wig which had not a crooked hair in it; and probably had never been tortured with a comb from the time of its being made. This was his dress when he went into company. One hat he made to last him the best part of his lifetime, gradually lessening the flaps, bit by bit, as it lost its elasticity and hung down, till little or nothing but the crown remained. He never rode although he kept a horse, but was frequently seen to lead the horse, with a kind of wallet stuffed with the provisions he had bought at the market. He always walked up to London when he had any thing to publish, revising sheet by sheet himself; trusting no eyes but his own, which was always a favourite maxim with him. He never advanced any mathematical proposition that he had not first tried in practice, constantly making all the different parts himself on a small scale, so that his house was filled with all kinds of mechanical instruments together or disjointed. He would frequently stand up to his middle in water while fishing; a diversion he was remarkably fond of. He used to study incessantly for some time, and then for relaxation take a ramble to any pot ale-house where he could get any body to drink with and talk to. The duke of Manchester was highly pleased with his company, and used often to come to him in the fields and accompany him home, but could never persuade him to get into a carriage. When he wrote his sinall treatise on navigation, he and some of his scholars took a small vessel from Hurworth, and the whole crew soon gotswampt; when Emerson, smiling and alluding to his treatise, said “They must not do as I do, but as I say.” He was a married man; and his wife used to spin on an old-fashioned wheel, of which a very accurate drawing is given in his mechanics. He was deeply skilled in the science of music, the theory of sounds, and the various scales both ancient and modern, but was a very poor performer. He carried that singularity which marked all his actions even into this science. He had, if we may be allowed the expression, two first strings to his violin, which, he said, made the E more melodious when they were drawn up to a perfect unison. His virginal, which is a species of instrument like the modern spinnet, he had cut and twisted into various shapes in the keys, by adding some occasional half-tones in order to regulate the present scale, and to rectify some fraction of discord that will always remain in the tuning. He never could get this regulated to his fancy, and generally concluded by saying, 4< It was a bad instrument, and a foolish thing to be vexed with."

In less than nine months after Mrs. Emlyn’s decease, he began to be involved in prosecutions on account of his opinions in relation to the Trinity. The first occasion was given by Dr. Duncan Cummins, a noted physician in Ihibiin, and a leading member of the congregation in Wood-street. This gentleman had been brought up to the study of divinity, but afterwards chose the medical profession; he had done many kind offices to Mr. Emlyn, but, having observed that Mr. Emlyn avoided expressing the common opinion, and those arguments which are supposed to support it, he strongly suspected that his judgment was against the Supreme Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. This suspicion he communicated to Mr. Boyse, the consequence of which was, that, in June 1702, they jointly waited upon Mr. Emlyn, acquainting him with their jealousies, and earnestly desiring to know his real sentiments in the matter. Being tlius applied to, he thought himself bound to declare openly his faith in so great a point. Accordiugly he freely owned himself to be convinced, that the God and father of Jesus Christ is alone the Supreme Being, and superior in excellence and authority to his son, who derives all from him. At the same time, Mr. Emlyn told the gentlemen that he did not aim to make any strife among the people of the congregation, but was willing to leave them peaceably, that, if they pleased, they might choose another minister. This, however, was not to be permitted him. Mr. Boyse, not willing to take such a weighty matter upon himself, brought it before the Dublin ministers, namely, Mr. Weld, Mr. Travers, Mr. Sinclair, Mr. Iredel, and Mr. Tate. At an interview with them, he candidly explained his sentiments, the only resuli of which was, that, on that very day, they agreed to cast him off, and that he should not be permitted to preach any more: and this they did without consulting his congregation, who, as yet, were entire strangers to the affair. Mr. Emlyn, however, directed the deacons and chief managers of the church to be called together, when he informed them, that a difference of opinion relative to the Trinity had rendered him offensive to some who were present, and to the ministers of Dublin; upon which account, thankfully acknowledging the kindness and respect they had shewn him for so many years, he desired his dismission. At this declaration the gentlemen assembled were greatly surprised and grieved; and Dr. Cummins himself then wished he had not begun the business. It was proposed that Mr. Emlyn should lie by for some time without preaching; but to this he would not consent without a declaration of the cause, lest he should be suspected of having been guilty of some immorality. The next proposition, was, that he should retire for a while to England, provided it was approved of by the ministers. To this they agreed, accompanying their agreement with a curious message, sent by two of their number, charging him not to preach any where, to whatever place he went. Mr. Emlyn embarked for England the next day, with great inconvenience to himself and family; and, no sooner was he gone, than a loud clamour was raised against him and his opinions. When he came to London, he found some persons who were disposed to treat him with candour and charity. This, however, when they heard of it, was so offensive to the Dublin ministers, that they endeavoured, by their letters, to render him as odious as possible. While he was in London, he published a short account of his case.

Although Mr. Emlyn flattered himself that his doctrine gradually gained ground both in England and Ireland, he still continued to be so obnoxious, that none of the divines among the dissenters in London dared to ask him to preach for them, excepting the ministers of the baptist congregation at Barbican, Mr. Burroughs and Mr. (afterwards Dr.) James Foster, who invited him more than once to that office. About 1726, upon the decease of Mr. James Pierce, of Exeter, several of the people wished to invite Mr. Emlyn thither; but, as soon as he was acquainted with it, be requested them to desist, thanking them for their respectful attention to him, and excusing his acceptance of an invitation, on account of his declining years, and the feebleness of his limbs. Though our author lived in private retirement, he was honoured with the esteem and friendship of divers persons of distinguishe4 learning and in eminent stations. He was particularly intimate with Dr. Samuel Clarke, who, though at first he was upon the reserve with Mr. Emlyn, when he came to be farther acquainted with him, expressed a high value and regard for him, generally advised with him in matters of importance, and opened his mind to him with the utmost freedom. The doctor’s language to our author was, “I can say any thing to you.” Mr. Whiston also, in his account of his own life, has spoken of Emtyn several times in terms of great respect. In 1731 our author wrote “Observations on Dr. Waterland’s notions in relation to Polytheism, Ditheism, the Son’s consubstantiality with, and inferiority to, the Father;” and in the same year he drew up some “Memoirs of the Life and Sentiments of the reverend Dr. Samuel Clarke,” neither separately published, but inserted in his works. Mr. Einlyn, who was naturally of a very cheerful and lively temper, enjoyed, in all respects, a large share of health, the gout excepted; which, by degrees, impaired his health, and by its annual returns greatly disabled him in his limbs. For the last two or three years of his life he grew much feebler; and about a year before his death he received a violent shock, which it was feared would have carried him off. However, he so well recovered from it, that he weathered the next winter, though a severe one, without any farther breach upon his health. On Friday, July 17, 1743, he was suddenly taken ill in the night, but grew so far better as to be able, for some days, to converse with his friends, and to testify the great satisfaction he enjoyed in the consciousness of his integrity. His disorder returning, he departed this life on Tuesday, the 30th day of the month, in the seventy-ninth year of his age. On the 16th of August following, his funeral sermon was preached at Barbican, by Mr. Foster, who has given him an excellent character. His character is likewise displayed at large in the Memoirs of his life, in which we are told that he was one of the brightest examples of substantial unaffected piety, of serious rational devotion, of a steady unshaken integrity, and an undaunted Christian courage. He was buried in Bunhill-Fields, where there is an inscription to his memory. The Memoirs of his life were written by his son, Sollom Emlyn, esq. and separately published in 1746. In the same year they were prefixed to a collection of his works, in two volumes, octavo. An appendix is added, containing several short papers, drawn up by our author, on various subjects. Mr. Sollom Emlyn, who was bred to the law, and became an eminent counsellor, was employed to publish lord chief justice Hale’s “History of the Pleas of the Crown,” which he did in 1736, in two volumes, folio, together with a preface and large notes, many, of which were contributed by Mr. William Whiston, a son of the celebrated Whiston, who also examined many of the records for the purpose of accuracy. Mr. Sollom Emlyn died in 1756, and left one son, Thomas Emlyn, esq. barrister at law, a bencher of Lincoln’s Inn, and fellow of the royal society, who died in 1797.

All we know of this curious artist is, that she lived single to the age of about forty, and then married Mr. Bartholomew Kello, a North Briton; that she had a son who was educated at Oxford, and was minister of Speckshall. in Suffolk. His son was sword-bearer of Norwich, and died in 1709. Joseph Hall, bishop of Norwich, when dean of Worcester, 1617, is styled by her, “My very singulaf friend,” in a manuscript dedicated to him, now in the Bodleian library.

, or rather Bischop, under which name, perhaps, he should bave been classed, was a celebrated printer at Basil. He was born at Weissembourg in Alsace, about the end of the fifteenth century. His acquaintance with Greek and Latin gave him very superior advantages when he began the business of printing. The famous Frobenius bestowed his daughter on him in marriage, and on his death, in 1527, Bischop went into partnership with his son Jerome. Among other spirited undertakings of this firm was an edition of the Greek fathers, which they commenced with the works of St. Basil. All writers on the subject of printing bestow high praise on the talents of Bischop, who was also much respected b/ the learned of his time. The works which came from his press were in general remarkable for correctness, neatness of type, and beauty of paper, qualities seldom to be met with together. Erasmus had so much regard for him as to leave him and his partners executors of his will. Bischop died Sept. 27, 1563, leaving a son of the same name and profession, who died two years after, in the flower of youth. They were a protestant family, and had fled from France during the persecutions.

He left Italy soon after his pupil, without understanding the language of that country, which made his journey less advantageous as well as pleasant to him. It is said that when he was at Venice, he met Bernard Ocricularius of Florence, who had written Latin history in the manner of Sallust Erasmus desired a conversation with him, and addressed him in Latin: but the Florentine obstinately refused to speak any thingexcept Italian; which Erasmus not understanding, they separated without edification on either part. Why Erasmus should not understand Italian, it is. not difficult to conceive; but it is somewhat singular that he should be ignorant of French, which was in a great measure the case, though he had spent so much time in that country. In his way from Italy to England, he passed first to Curia, then to Constance, and so through the Martian forest by Brisgau to Strasburgh, and from thence by the Rhine to Holland; whence, after making some little stay at Antwerp and Louvain, he took shipping for England. Some of his friends and patrons, whom he visited as he came along, made him great offers, and wished him to settle among them; but his heart was at this time entirely fixed upon spending the remainder of his days in England, not only upon account of his former connections and friendships, which were very dear to him, bxit the great hopes that had lately been held out to him, of ample preferment, provided he would settle there. Henry VII. died in April 1509; and Henry VIII. his son and successor, was Erasmus’s professed friend and patron, and had for some time held a correspondence with him by letters. That prince was no sooner upon the throne, than Montjoy wrote to Erasmus to hasten him into England, promising him great things on the part of the king, and of Warham archbishop of Canterbury, though indeed he had no particular commission to that end from either the one or the other. More, and some other friends, wrote him also letters to the same purpose. But he had no sooner arrived in the beginning of 1510, than he perceived that liis expectations had been raised too high, and began secretly to wish that he had not quitted Rome. However, he took no notice of the disappointment, but pursued his studies with his usual assiduity. At his arrival in England he lodged with More; and while he was there, to divert himself and his friend, he wrote, within the compass of a week, “Encomium Moriæ,” or “The praise of Folly,” a copy of which was sent to France, and printed there, but with abundance of faults; yet it became so popular, that in a few months it went through seven editions. The general design of this ludicrous piece is to shew, that there are fools in all stations, and more particularly to expose the errors and follies of the court of Rome, not sparing the pope himself; so that he was never after regarded as a true son of that church. It was highly acceptable to persons of quality, but as highly offensive to dissolute monks, who disapproved especially of the Commentary which Lystrius wrote upon it, and which is printed with it, because it unveiled several things from whose obscurity they drew much profit. Soon after he came to England he published a translation of the Hecuba of Euripides into Latin verse; and, adding some poems to it, dedicated it to archbishop Warham. The prelate received the dedication courteously, yet made the poet only a small present. As he was returning from Lambeth, his friend Grocyn, who had accompanied him, asked, “what present he had received” Erasmus replied, laughing, “A very considerable sum” which Grocyn would not believe. Having told him what it was, Grocyn observed, that the prelate was rich and generous enough to have made him a much handsomer present; but certainly suspected that he had presented to him a book already dedicated elsewhere. Erasmus asked, “how such a suspicion could enter his head” “Because,” said Grocyn, “such hungry scholars as you, who stroll about the world, and dedicate books to noblemen, are apt to be guilty of such tricks.”

, president of the parliament of Bourdeaux, a man of learning in the seventeenth century, acquired considerable fame by publishing in 1623, a book entitled “Enchyridion physicse restitutae.” He did not put his name to this, but it is proved to be his by several of his acquaintance, as well as by the device at the beginning, “Spes mea est in agno,” and before the treatise of chemistry, “Pene nos unda Tagi,” which are both anagrams of his name. It was the first work that appeared in France, professing to contain a complete system of physics contrary to that of Aristotle. The author, however, while he says that he has only re-established the ancient philosophy, has added many things of his own invention. He confutes the opinion of materia prima, which was held to be extended every where without being any where perceived, and incessantly tending to the uuion of forms without having any, being the basis and support of contraries, viz. of the elements which are said to be produced out of it. He shows that this system of nature is imaginary, that there is no contrariety in the elements, and that which is observed in them proceeds from the excess of their qualities, and that when they are tempered there is no contrariety in them. Yet he believes that there is a materia prima from whence the elements result and become the second matter of things, which are earth and water; for he holds neither air nor fire for elements. The elements, according to his notion, are not transformed into each other: water only becomes vapour, and vapour water, by circulation. He places the real fire of the world in the sun, which he calls not only the eye of the universe, but the eye of the creator of the universe, by which he beholds in a sensible manner his creatures, and which is the first agent of the world. The rest of his book abounds in curious particulars concerning the origin of things, their subsistence and various alterations, relating to the design of this philosopher to treat of chemical matters. He therefore subjoins another treatise, entitled “Arcanum Hermeticae philosophic opus,” in which he discourses of the matter of the philosopher’s stone and its digestions, of the degrees of fire, of the figure of the vessels and furnace, of the composition of the elixir and its multiplication. This book was translated into French under the title of “La Philosophic des Anciens retablie en sa purete.” In 1616 he published an old manuscript, entitled “Le Rozier des Guerres;” and added to it a treatise of his own upon the institution of a young prince. This ms. was found at Nerac in the king’s closet. Mr. d'Espagnet thought his edition to be the first, but it had been printed in 1523, in folio, which edition is more complete than this of 1616. In the ms. of Nerac, was wanting all the second part, and the three last chapters of the first. For this account the reader is referred to Naude“'s” Addition a Phistoire de Louis XI.“p. 72; and to” Syntagma de studio militari,“p. 73. The prologue alone suunces to convince us that Louis XI. is not the author of that work, as the title pretends, though he speaks in it as giving instructions to the dauphin his son. See the” Bibliotheque Choisie“of M. Colomie’s. In the publication of the” Rozier des Guerres,“he punctually retains the old spelling and in his advertisement to the reader gives this reason for it” This little tract, du Rozier,“says he,” seemed to me so good that I would not embellish or disguise it, but have left in its native simplicity: and though the language of it is not in use in our times, yet it may be understood, being so full of good sense and meaning, that with all its jargon it may silence the affected diction of the court and bar. 1 have also carefully preserved the orthography; because in adding or diminishing a letter, a word is often changed, and of ancient made modern. By this means, in my judgment, the language of Philip de Commines, in his history, has been corrupted: the editors, thinking to mend the spelling, and polish the diction, have destroyed the marks of its antiquity, so that the style of his book is not the style of his times; as we may judge both by this little manuscript, and by many others of the same age, which are to be found in famous libraries, especially by the history of Charles VI. written by John Juvenal des Ursins, and lately published by the sieur de Godefroy. I imagine this error proceeds from the insufficiency of the correctors; who, pretending to correct the orthography, have adulterated it, and thereby rendered themselves plagiaries."

, king of Kent, and the first Christian king among the Anglo-Saxons, succeeded to the throne about the year 560. He began his reign, in order to revive the reputation of his family, by making war upon the king of Wessex, by whom he was twice defeated, though he was afterwards triumphant, and acquired the complete ascendancy over Wessex and the other states, except Northumberland, and reduced them to the condition of his tributaries or dependants. In the reign of Ethelbert, Christianity was introduced into England. The king had married Bertha, daughter of the king of Paris, who, being a Christian, had stipulated for the free exercise of her religion, and had carried over in her train a French bishop. So exemplary in every respect were her life and conduct, that she inspired the king and his court with a high respect for her person, and for the religion by which she appeared to be influenced. The pope, taking advantage of this circumstance, sent a mission of forty monks, at the head of whom was Augustin, to preach the gospel in the island. They landed in Kent, in the year 597, and were well and hospitably received by Ethelbert, who assigned them habitations in the isle of Thanet. A conference was held, and the king took time to consider of the new doctrines propounded to him; and in the mean while gave them full liberty to preach to his subjects. Numbers were converted, and at length the king submitted to a public baptism. (See Augustine). Christianity proved the means of promoting knowledge and civilization in this -island; and the king, with the consent of his states, enacted a body of laws, which was the first written code promulgated by the northern conquerors. Ethelbert died in the year 616, and left his crown, after a reign of fifty years, to his son Edbald.

, a physician, was born at Leipsic, May 26, 1644, and studied there and at Wittemberg. He took his master’s degree at Leipsic in 1662, travelled for two years in Italy, France, England, and Holland; on his return was admitted M. D. at Leipsic in 1666, where he assiduously read and disputed, was appointed in 1676 assessor of the faculty, and afterwards, in 1681, ordinary professor of botany, and extraordinary professor of surgery and anatomy. He wrote, 1. “Synopsis collegii institutionum medicarum.” 2. “Institutiones medicae.” 3. “Collegium chymicum.” 4. “Collegium pharmaceutiCum.” 5. “De pracscribendis formulis.” 6. “Collegium practicum doctrinale.” 7. “Tract, de morborum curationibus.” 8. “Fundamenta medicinae vera.” 9. Chymia rationalis & experimentalis curiosa which last was published by John Ephraim Aussfeldt, Leyden, 1684, 4to. 10. “Dissertationes de corpulentia nimia,” and many other topics, which were published together in 1708, at Francfort on the Mayne, by his son Dr. Michael Ernest Ettmuller, and also in 1729 at Naples by professor Cyrillo, in 5 vols. folio, with annotations, and are highly esteemed not only in Germany but over all Europe. He fell ill, after an unsuccessful chemical operation, and died in the prime of life, March 9, 1683.

, a celebrated tragic poet, the contemporary and rival of Sophocles, was born of a creditable Athenian family; especially on his mother Clito’s side, whom Suidas reports to have been nobly descended, though Aristophanes in jest calls her a cabbage-seller, and Valerius Maximus has recorded it in earnest. He was born in the island Salamis, whither his father and mother had fled, with a great many other eminent families of Athens, upon the formidable invasion of Greece by Xerxes: and his birth is supposed to have happened in the first year of the 75th olympiad, 480 years before Christ. His name is supposed to have been formed from the Euripus, or narrow sea, in which the battle of Salamis was fought, and the Persians defeated. It is said, that while his mother was with child, her husband Mnesarchus consulted the oracle of Apollo, to know what he might hope for; and that he received in answer, that the child who should be born to him would reach the summit of glory, and gain the honour of the sacred garland. Mnesarchus merely interpreting this promise of the oracle, that his son should win the prize in the Olympic games, took care to educate him in the same manner with those whom the Greeks designed for athletae or wrestlers: but Euripides, though he made so good a progress in these feats of the body, as to gain the crown at the Athenian sports in honour of Ceres and Theseus, had always a more laudable ambition: and therefore, while his father was labouring to have him perfect in the paltcstra, became a constant auditor of Anaxagoras in philosophy, and Prodicus in rhetoric; and diverted his leisure hours by studying painting, which some will have to have been at first his profession. It is not probable, that Euripides learnt morality of Socrates, as Gellius reports: Socrates was ten or twelve years younger than Euripides, and therefore is more likely to have profited by him; but it is certain that fchey were friends, and Socrates is thought to have been consulted by him in the composition of his dramas. Socrates very rarely frequented the theatre, except when the pieces of Euripides were represented. In the character of Palamedes, Euripides is supposed to have delineated that of his friend, and some verses are quoted addressing the Greeks as having slain the best and wisest of thir nation, which the audience are said to have applied to the fate of Socrates, and to have burst into tears at the recollection of their crime. This, however, seems rather to savour of conjecture, and if the Athenians were ever thus affected, it must have been at some representation of the play subsequent to the death of Socrates, who survived Euripides some years, and therefore, in the character of Palamedes could have only alluded to his death, as the probable result of the jealousy and rashness of the Athenians.

, a bookseller of London, and deserving notice not only for spirit and integrity in business, but for considerable literary taste and talents, was born in. 1742, and served his apprenticeship with Mr. Charles Marsh, a bookseller of reputation in Round-court, Strand, and at Charing-cross. Mr. Evans soon after his apprenticeship had terminated, set up in business, and by his acquaintance with English literature, which he had assiduously cultivated, was enabled to strike out many of those schemes of publication which do credit to the discernment of the trade, and as far as his own fortune permitted to embark alone in many republications which shewed the correctness of his judgment and his regard for the literary character of his country. Among these we may enumerate new editions of, 1. “Shakspeare’s Poems,” 1774. 2. “Buckingham’s Works,” 1775. 3. “Nicolson’s Historical Library,” 1776. 4. “Four volumes of Old Ballads, with notes,” l?7l 1784. Of this his son has lately published an improved edition. 5. “Cardinal de Retz’s Memoirs.” 6. “Savage’s Works,” 1777. 7. “Goldsmith’s Works,” 1777. 8. “Prior’s Works,” 1779. 9. “Rabelais’s Works.” 10. “History of Wales.” 11. “Peck’s Desiderata Curiosa,” 1779, in an advertisement to which he announced an intention of re-printing the “Notitia Monastica” of bishop Tanner, which has since been accomplished by Dr. Nasmith. To all these works Mr. Evans prefixed Dedications written with neatness and elegance, addressed to his literary patrons, Garrick, sir Joshua Reynolds, Mr. Sheridan, &c. He died in the prime of life, April 30, 1784, leaving a widow and son, the latter now a bookseller in Pall-mall, and the well-known and successful vendor of the most curious and valuable library ever sold in this, or perhaps, in some respects, in any other country, that of the late duke of Roxburgh.

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

, president of the parliament of Grenoble, was born Dec. 22, 1561, at Voiron in Dauphiny. His father Claude Expilli had acquired great reputation in the army. This his son studied first at Turin, and in 1581 and 1582 went through a course of law studies at Padua, where he became acquainted with many of the most learned men of his time, particularly Speroni, Torniel, Decianus, I'ancirollus, Pinelli, Zabarella, Picolomini, &c. On his return to France, he took his doctor’s degree at Bourges, where the celebrated James Cujas bestowed high praise on. him. He then settled at Grenoble, and acquired such distinction among the advocates of the parliament, that the king Henry IV. considered him as fit for the highest offices in law. Expilli was accordingly promoted to that of king’s procurator in the chamber of finances, king’s advocate in parliament, and lastly that of president. The same monarch, as well as Louis XIII. employed him in many important affairs in thecomte Venaissin, Piedmont, and Savoy, where he was first president of the parliament of Chamberi, after that city was taken in 1C 30. Three years after, the king made use of his services at Piguerol; but on his return to Grenoble, he died July 22 or 23, 1636, in the seventy- fifth year of his age. James Philip Thomasini, bishop of Citta Nova, wrote his eloge, and his life was written by Antony Boniel de Catilhon, his nephew, and advocate general of the chamber of accounts in Dauphiny. It was printed at Grenoble in 1660, 4to. Cherier, in his History of that province, says of him, that his works are an incontestable proof of his learning, which was by no means confined. He. was an orator, lawyer, historian, and poet, a man of excellent private character, and a liberal patron of merit, which alone was a sure introduction to his favour. His works are both in prose and verse. His “Pleadings” were printed at Paris, 1612, 4to. His French poems, after the greater part of them had been printed separately, were collected in a large volume, 4to, printed at Grenoble in 1624; and among them are some prose essays on the fountains of Vals and Vivarez, and on the use of medicinal waters; a supplement to the history of the chevalier Bayard, &c. He wrote also a treatise on “French orthography,” Lyons, 1618, folio, in which, however, he has not shewn much judgment, having proposed to spell according to pronunciation; and upon the whole, it appears that, although a man of learning as well as probity, he was a better magistrate than a writer.

, an eminent lawyer, descended from an ancient and noble family in East Friesland, was bora at Norden, Nov. 20, 1629. He had the misfortune to lose his father, when he was in his sixth year, but by the care of his mother and relations, he was sent to college, where he made great progress in the earlier classical studies. He then went to Rintelin, and began a course of law. In 1651 he removed to Marpurg, about the time when the academy in that city was restored, and here he recounts among the most fortunate circumstances of his life that he had au opportunity of studying under Justus Siriold, or Schutz, and John Helvicus his son, the former of whom was chancellor of the academy, and the latter was counsellor to the landgrave of Hesse, and afterwards a member of the imperial aulic council. Under their instructions he acquired a perfect knowledge of the state of the empire, and took his doctor’s degree in 1655. Soon after he was appointed by George II. landgrave of Hesse, to be professor of law, and his lectures were attended by a great concourse of students from every part of Germany. In 1669 he was invited by the dukes of Brunswick and Lunenburgh to Helmstadt, where he filled the offices of counsellor and assessor with great reputation. He was also appointed by the circle of Lower Saxony a judge of the imperial chamber of Spire, and in 1678 was received among the number of its assessors. The emperor Leopold, hearing of his eminent character and talents, engaged him to come to his court in the rank of aulic counsellor, and to reward his services, restored the rank of nobility which had been in his family. Eyben died July 25, 1699. His works were collected into a folio volume, and printed at Strasburgh in 1708. They are all on subjects of law. His son, Christian William, who was born in 1663, and died in 1727, was also a lawyer and classical antiquary. He published at Strasburgh, in 1684, “Dissertatio de ordine equestri veterum Romanorum,” folio, which was afterwards inserted in Sallengre’s “Thesaurus.”

, is the name of two engravers whose works are held in some estimation among portrait-collectors. The elder was born in Holland, where he learned the art of mezzotinto-scraping, and also drew portraits from the life, on vellum, with a pen. What time he came into England does not appear, but he resided here a considerable time, in Fountain court in the Strand, London. He died at Bristol in May 1721. He drew many of the portraits which he engraved from nature, but they are not remarkable either for taste or execution. His most esteemed works were, a collection of the founders of the colleges of Oxford, half sheet prints, the heads of the philosophers from Rubens, and a portrait of Dr. Wallis the mathematician, from Kneller. The other John Faber, the younger, was his son, and lived in London, at the Golden Head in Bloomsbury-square, where Strutt thinks he died in 1756. Like his father, he confined himself to the engraving of portraits in mezzotinto; but he excelled him in every requisite of the art. The most esteemed works are the portraits of the Kit-Cat club, and the Beauties of Hampton Court. Some of his portraits are bold, free, and beautiful.

, was a celebrated Roman, who was five times consul, three times dictator, and triumphed twice or more, yet was always distinguished by his modesty and equanimity. The first public office in which we trace him, is that of curule aedile, which he bore in the year before Christ 330. In the year 324, he was named master of the horse by the dictator L. Papirius Cursor, in the war against the Samrates; and, having given battle to the enemy in the absence of the dictator, contrary to his express order, though completely victorious, was capitally condemned; and through the strictness of Roman discipline, and the inflexible severity of the dictator, would have been executed bad be not been first rescued by the army, and then strongly interceded for by the senate and people of Rome. His first consulship was three years after, in the year 321 B. C. It was not till the year 303 B. C. when he bore the office of censor, that he acquired the sirname of Maximus, which afterwards was continued in his family, and was given him in consequence of his replacing the low and turbulent mob of Rome in the four urban tribes, and thereby diminishing their authority, which, when they were scattered in the various tribes, had been considerable on account of their numbers. His last consulship was in the year 294 B. C. and it is not likely that he lived many years after that period. We find him, however, three years after, attending the triumph of his son the proconsul, a very old man, and celebrated by the historians for his modest demeanour, and respectful acknowledgment of his son’s public dignity.

Besides many funeral orations, poems, &c. in honour of Fabricius, Reimar, his scholar and colleague, and afterwards his son-in-law, published a “Commentarius de Vita et Scriptis,” which contains many curious particulars of Fabricius, and a complete list of his writings; extracts from the correspondence of his friends, &c. Of his separate publications, although a few have been incidentally mentioned, the following chronological account cannot be uninteresting, as a stupendous monument to his industry and erudition.

, a man eminent for wit and learning, and for the civil employments with which he was honoured, was born at Hamburgh in 1613. He was a good poet, an able physician, a great orator, and a learned civilian. He gained the esteem of all the learned in Holland while he studied at Leyden; and they liked his Latin poems so well, that they advised him to print them. He was for some time counsellor to the bishop of Lubec, and afterwards syndic of the city of Dantzic. This city also honoured him with the dignity of burgomaster^ and sent him thirteen times deputy in Poland. He died at Warsaw, during the diet of the kingdom, in 1667. The first edition of his poems, in 1632, was printed upon the encouragement of Daniel Heinsius, at whose house he lodged. He published a second in 1638, with corrections and additions: to which he added a satire in prose, entitled “Pransus Paratus,” which he dedicated to Salmasius; and in which he keenly ridiculed the poets who spend their time in making anagrams, or licentious verses, as also those who affect to despise poets. The most complete edition of his poems is that of Leipsic, 1685, published under the direction of his son. It contains also Orations of our author, made to the kings of Poland; an Oration spoken at Leyden in 1632, concerning the siege and deliverance of that city and the Medical Theses, which were the subject of his public disputations at Leyden in 1634, &c.

Mr. Fairfax’s poetical exertions did not end with his translation of Tasso. He wrote the history of Edward the black prince, and a number of eclogues. No part of the history of Edward the black prince has, we believe, ever been laid before the public; which is the rather to be regretted as it might hence have more distinctly been discerned what were our poet’s powers of original invention. The eclogues were composed in the first year of the reiga of king James, and, after their being finished, lay neglected ten years in the author’s study, until Lodowic, duke of Richmond and Lenox, desired a sight of them, which occasioned Mr. Fairfax to transcribe them for his grace’s use. That copy was seen and approved by many learned men; and Dr. Field, afterwards bishop of Hereford, wrote verses upon it. But the book itself, and Dr. Field’s encomium, perished in the fire, when the banqueiing-house at Whitehall was burnt, and with it part of the duke of Richmond’s lodgings. Mr. William Fairfax, however, our author’s son, recovered the eclogues out of his father’s loose papers. These eclogues were twelve in number, and were composed on important subjects, relating to the manners, characters, and incidents of the times. They were pointed with many fine strokes of satire; dignified with wholesome lessons of morality and policy to those of the highest ranks; and some modest hints were given even to majesty itself. With respect to poetry, they were entitled to high commendation; and the learning they contained was so various and extensive, that, according to the evidence of his son, who wrote large annotations on each, no man’s reading beside the author’s own was sufficient to explain his references effectually. The fourth eclogue was printed, by Mrs. Cooper, in “The Muses Library,” published in 1737. It is somewhat extraordinary that the whole of them should never have appeared in print. If they are still in being, it might not, perhaps, be an unacceptable service to give them to the public.

, a very active man in the parliaments service during the civil wars, and at length general of their armies, was the eldest son of Ferdinando, lord Fairfax, by Mary his wife, daughter of Edmund Sheffield earl of Mulgrave. He was born at Denton within the parish of Otley, in Yorkshire, in January, 1611. After a proper school education, he studied sometime in St. John’s college, in Cambridge, to. which, in his latter days, he became a benefactor. He appears to have been a lover of learning, though he did not excel in any branch, except it was in the history and antiquities of Britain, as will appear in the sequel. Being of a martial disposition even in his younger years, but finding no employment at home, he went and served in Holland as a volunteer under the command of Horatio lord Vere, in order to learn the art of war. After some stay there (but how long we cannot learn) he came back to England; and, retiring to his father’s house, married Anne, fourth daughter of lord Vere. Here he contracted a strong aversion for the court; either by the instigation of his wife, who was a zealous presbyterian, or eLe by the persuasions and example of his father, who, as Clarendon says, grew “actively and factiously disaffected to the king.” When the king first endeavoured to raise a guard at York for his own person, he was entrusted by his party to prefer a petition to the king, beseeching him to hearken to his parliament, and not to take that course of raising forces, and when his majesty seemed to shun receiving it, Fairfax followed him with it, on Heyworth-moor, in the presence of near 100,000 people, and presented it upon the pommel of his saddle. Shortly after, upon the actual breaking out of the civil wars, in 1642, his father having received a commission from the parliament to be general of the forces in the North, he had a commission under him to be general of the horse. His first exploit was at Bradford in Yorkshire, which he obliged a body of royalists to quit, and to retire to Leeds. A few days after, he and captain Hotham, with some horse and dragoons marching thither, the royalists* fled in haste to York. And the former having advanced to Tadcaster, resolved to keep the pass at Wetherby, for securing the West Riding of Yorkshire, whence their chief supplies came. Sir Thomas Glemham attempted to dislodge them thence; but, after a short and sharp encounter, retired. On this, Will, am Cavendish earl of Newcastle, and Henry Clifford earl of Cumberland, united their forces at York, amounting to 9000 men, and resolved to fall upon Tadcaster: which being judged untenable, the lord Fairfax, and his son sir Thomas, drew out to an advantageous piece of ground near the town: but, alter a six hours fight, were beaten, and withdrew in the night to Selby. Three days after, sir Thomas marched in the night by several towns Inch the royalists lay, and came to Bradford, where he entrenched himself. But having too many soldiers to lie idle, and too few to be upon constant duty, he resolved to attack his enemies in their garrisons. Accordingly, coming before Leeds, he carried that town (Jan. 23, 1642-3) after a hot dispute, and found a good store of ammunition, of which he stood in great want. He next defeated a party of 700 horse and foot at Gisborough, under the command of colonel Slingsby; and then Wakefield and Doncaster yielded themselves to the parliament. But, For these overt acts, William earl of Newcastle, the king’s general, proclaimed sir Thomas and his father traitors, and the parliament did the like for the earl. In the mean time, the lord Fairfax, being denied succour from Hull and the East Riding, was forced to forsake Selby, and retire to Leeds: of which the earl of Newcastle having intelligence, lay with his army on Clifford-moor, to intercept him in his way to Leeds. On this sir Thomas was ordered, by his father, to bring what men he could to join with him at Sherburne, on purpose to secure his retreat. To amuse the earl, sir Thomas made a diversion at Tadcaster, which 'the garrison immediately quitted, but lord Goring marching to its relief, with twenty troops of horse and dragoons, defeated sir Thomas upon Bramham-moor: who also received a second defeat upon Seacroft-moor, where some of his men were slain, and many taken prisoners, and himself made his retreat with much difficulty to Leeds, about an hour after his father was safely come thither. Leeds and Bradford being all the garrisons the parliament had in the North, sir Thomas thought it necessary to possess some other place: therefore with about 1100 horse and foot, he drove, on the 21st of May, the royalists out of Wakefield, which they had seized again; and took 1400 prisoners, 80 officers, and great store of ammunition. But, shortly after, the earl of Newcastle coming to besiege Bradford, and sir Thomas and his father having the boldness, with about 3000 men, to go and attack his whole army, which consisted of 10,000, on Adderton-moor; they were entirely routed by the earl r on the 30th of June, with a considerable loss. Upon that, Halifax and Beverly being abandoned by the parliamentarians, and the lord Fairfax having neither a place of strength to defend himself in, nor a garrison in Yorkshire to retire to, withdrew the same night to Leeds, to secure that town. By his order, sir Thomas stayed in Bradford with 800 foot, and 60 horse, but being surrounded, he was obliged to force his way through: in which desperate attempt, hjs lady, and many Bothers, were taken prisoners. At his coming to Leeds, he found things in great distraction; the council of war having resolved to quit the town, and retreat to Hull, which was sixty miles off; with many of the "king’s garrison in the way, but he got safely to Selby, where there was a ferry, and hard by one of the parliament’s garrisons at Cawood. Immediately after his coming to Selby, being attacked by a party of horse which pursued him, he received a shot in the wrist of his left arm, which made the bridle fall out of liis hand, and occasioned such an effusion of blood, that he was ready to fall from his horse. But, taking the reins in the other hand in which he had his sword, he withdrew himself out of the crowd; and after a very troublesome and dangerous passage, he came to Hull. Upon these repeated disasters, the Scots were hastily solicited to send 20,000 men to the assistance of the parliamentarians, who were thus likely to be overpowered. Lord Fairfax, after his coming to Hull, made it his first business to raise new forces, and, in a short time, had about 1500 foot, and 700 horse. The town being little, sir Thomas was sent to Beverly, with the horse and 600 foot: for, the marquis of Newcastle looking upon them as inconsiderable, and leaving only a few garrisons, was marched with his whole army into Lincolnshire; having orders to go into Essex, and t>lock up London on that side. But he was hastily recalled northward, upon lord Fairfax’s sending out a large party to make an attempt upon Stanford-bridge near York. The marquis, at his return into Yorkshire, first dislodged, from Beverly, sir Thomas, who retreated into Hull, to which the marquis laid siege, but could not carry the place. During the siege, the horse being useless, and many dying every day, sir Thomas was sent with them over into Lincolnshire, to join the earl of Manchester’s forces, then commanded by major-general Cromwell. At Horncastle, or Winsby, they routed a party of 5000 men, commanded by sir John Henderson: and, at the same time, the besieged in Hull making a sally upon the besiegers, obliged them to retire. These two defeats together, the one falling heavy upon the horse, the other upon the foot, kept the royalists all that winter from attempting any thing; and the parliamentarians, after the taking of Lincoln, settled themselves in winter quarters. But sir Thomas had not long the benefit of them; for, in the coldest season of the year, he was commanded by the parliament to go and raise the siege of Nantwich in Cheshire, which lord Byron, with an army from Ireland, had reduced to great extremity. He set forward from Lincolnshire, December 29, and, being joined by sir William Brereton, entirely routed, 911 the 21st of January, lord Byron, who was drawn out to meet them. After that, they took in several garrisons in Cheshire, particularly Crew-house, &c. Sir Thomas, having stayed in those parts till the middle of March, was ordered back by his father into Yorkshire, that by the conjunction of their forces he might be abler to take the field. They met about Ferry-bridge; and colonel Bellasis, governor of York, having advanced to Selby to hinder their junction, they found means, notwithstanding, to join, and entirely defeated him, on the llth of April, 1644. This good success rendered sir Thomas master of the field in Yorkshire, and nothing then hindered him from marching into Northumberland, as he had been ordered by the parliament, to join the Scots, which were kept from advancing southward by the superior forces of the marquis of Newcastle, quartered at Durham. But that stroke having thrown York into the utmost distraction, the inhabitants speedily sent to the marquis to haste back thither; by which means a way was left open for the Scots, who, with cold, and frequent alarms, were reduced to great extremity. They joined the lord Fairfax at Wetherby, on the 20th of April, and, marching on to York, laid siege to that city *, wherein the marquis of Newcastle had shut himself up, being closely pursued, on the way thither, by sir Thomas, and major-general Desley. And, when prince Rupert was advancing out of Lancashire to the relief of that place, they marched with 6000 horse and dragoons, and 5000 foot, to stop his progress: but he, eluding their vigilance, and bringing round his army, which consisted of above 20,000 men, got into York. Whereupon the parliamentarians raised the siege, and retired to Hessey-moor. The English were for fighting, and the Scots for retreating; which last opinion prevailing, they both marched away to Tadcaster, there being great differences and jealousies between the two nations. But the rash and haughty prince, instead of harassing and wearing them out by prudent delays, resolved, without consulting the marquis of New­* fa our account cf Dodsworth (vol. XII. p. 181), will be found some circumstances favourable to sir Thomas Fairfax’s character in the conduct of this. castle, or any of his officers, to engage them, on Marstonmoor, eight miles from York, on the 2d of July: where that bloody battle was fought which entirely ruined the king’s affairs in the north. In this battle, sir Thomas Fairfax commanded the right wing of the horse. The prince, after his defeat, retiring towards Lancashire, and the marquis, in discontent, sailing away to Hamburgh, the three parliament-generals came and sat down again before York, which surrendered the 15th of July: and the North was now wholly reduced by the parliament’s forces, except some garrisons. In September following, sir Thomas was sent to take Helmesley-castle, where he received a dangerous shot in one of his shoulders, and was brought back to York, all being doubtful of his recovery for some time. Some time after, he was more nearly killed by a cannonshot before Pomfret-castle.

Hitherto, the crafty and ambitious Cromwell had permitted him to enjoy in all respects the supreme command, at least to outward appearance. And, under his conduct, the army’s rapid success, after their new model, had much surpassed the expectation of the most sanguine of their masters, the parliament* The question now was, to disband the majority of them after their work was done, and to employ a part of the rest in the reduction of Ireland. But either of the two appeared to all of them intolerable. For, many having, from the dregs of the people, risen to the highest commands, and by plunderings and violence amassing daily great treasures, they could not bear the thoughts of losing such great advantages. To maintain themselves therefore in the possession of them, Cromwell, and his son-in-law Ireton, as good a contriver as himself, but a much better writer and speaker, devised how to raise a mutiny in the army against the parliament. To this end they spread a whisper among the soldiery, “that the parliament, now they had the king, intended to disband them; to cheat them of their arrears; and to send them, into Ireland, to be destroyed by the Irish.” The army, enraged at this, were taught by Ireton to erect a council among themselves, of two soldiers out of every troop and every company, to consult for the good of the army, and to assist at the council of war, and advise for the peace and safety of the kingdom. These, who were called adjutators, or agitators, were wholly under Cromwell’s influence and direction, the most active of them being his avowed creatures. Sir Thomas saw with uneasiness his power on the army usurped by these agitators, the forerunners of confusion and anarchy, whose design (as he observes) was to raise their own fortunes upon the public ruin; and that made him resolve to lay down his commission. But he was over-persuaded by the heads of the Independent faction to hold it till he had accomplished their desperate projects, of rendering themselves masters not only of the parliament, but of the whole kingdom; for, he joined in the several petitions and proceedings of the army that tended to destroy the parliament’s power. About the beginning of June, he advanced towards London, to awe the parliament, though both houses desired his army might not come within fifteen miles of the same; June 15, he was a party in the charge against eleven of the members of the house of commons; in August, he espoused the speakers of both houses, and the sixty -six members that had fled to the army, and betrayed the privileges of parliament: and, entering London, August 6, restored them in a kind of triumph; for which he received the thanks of both houses, and was appointed constable of the Tower. On the other hand it is said that he was no way concerned in, the violent removal of the king from Holmby, by cornet Joyce, on the 3d of June; and waited with great respect upon his majesty at sir John Cutts’s house near Cambridge. Being ordered, on the 15th of the same month, by the parliament, to deliver the person of the king to such persons as both houses should appoint; that he might be brought to Richmond, where propositions were to be presented to him for a safe and well-grounded peace; instead of complying (though he seemed to do so) he carried his majesty from place to place, according to the several motions of the army, outwardly expressing, upon most occasions, a due respect for him, but, not having the will or resolution to oppose what he had not power enough to prevent, he resigned himself entirely to Cromwell. It was this undoubtedly that made him concur, Jan. 9, 1647-8, in that infamous declaration of the army, of “No further addresses or application to the king; and resolved to stand by the parliament, in what should be further necessary for settling and securing the parliament and kingdom, without the king and against him.” His father dying at York, March 13, he became possessed of his title and estate and was appointed keeper of Pontefract-castle, custos rotulorum of Yorkshire, &c. in his room. But his father’s death made no alteration in his conduct, he remaining the same servile or deluded tool to Cromwell’s ambition. He not only sent extraordinary supplies, and took all pains imaginable for reducing colonel Poyer in Wales, but also quelled, with the utmost zeal and industry, an insurrection of apprentices and others in London, April 9, who had declared for God and king Charles. The 1st of the same month he removed his head-quarters to St. EdmundV bury; and, upon the royalists seizing Berwick and Carlisle, and the apprehension of the Scots entering England, he was desired, May 9, by the parliament, to advance in person into the North, to reduce those places, and to prevent any danger from the threatened invasion. Accordingly he began to march that way the 20th. But he was soon recalled to quell an insurrection in Kent, headed by George Goring, earl of Norwich, and sir William Waller. Advancing therefore against them from London in the latter end of May, he defeated a considerable party of them at Maidstone, June 2, with his usual valour. But the earl and about 500 of the royalists, getting over the Thames at Greenwich into Essex, June 3, they were joined by several parties brought by sir Charles Lucas, and Arthur lord Capel, which made up their numbers about 400; and went and shut themselves up in Colchester on the 12th of June. Lord Fairfax, informed of their motions, passed over with his forces at Gravesend with so much expedition, that he arrived before Colchester June 13. Immediately he summons the royalists to surrender; which they refusing, he attacks them the same afternoon with the utmost fury, but, being repulsed, he resolved, June 14, to block up the place in order to starve the royalists into a compliance. These endured a severe and tedious siege of eleven weeks, not surrendering till August 28, and feeding for about five weeks chiefly on horse-flesh; all their endeavours for obtaining peace on honourable terms being ineffectual. This affair is the most exceptionable part in lord Fairfax’s conduct, if it admits of degrees, for he granted worse terms to that poor town than to any other in the whole course of the war he endeavoured to destroy it as much as possible he laid an exorbitant fine, or ransom, of J2,000l. upon the inhabitants, to excuse them from being plundered; and he vented his revenge and fury upon sir Charles Lucas and sir George Lisle, who had behaved in the most inoffensive manner during the siege, sparing that buffoon the earl of Norwich, whose behaviour had been quite different: so that his name and memory there ought to be for ever detestable. After these mighty exploits against a poor and unfortified town, he made a kind of triumphant progress to Ipswich, Yarmouth, Norwich, St. Edmund’s-bui y, Harwich, Mersey, and Maldon. About the beginning of December he came to London, to awe thatcity and the parliament, and to forward the proceedings against the king quartering himself in the royal palace of Whitehall: and it was by especial order from him and the council of the army, that several members of the house of commons were secluded and imprisoned, the 6th and 7th of that month; he being, as Wood expresses it, lulled in a kind of stupidity. Yet, although his name stood foremost in the list of the king’s judges, he refused to act, probably by his lady’s persuasion. Feb. 14, 1648-9, he was voted to be one of the new council of state, but on the 19th he refused to subscribe the test, appointed by parliament, for approving all that was done concerning the king and kingship. March 31 he was voted general of all the forces in England and Ireland; and in May he inarched against the levellers, who were grown very numerous, and began to be troublesome and formidable in Oxfordshire, and utterly routed them atBurford. Thence, on the 22d of the same month, he repaired to Oxford with Oliver Cromwell, and other officers, where he was highly feasted, and created LL.D. Next, upon apprehension of the like risings in other places, he went and viewed the castles and fortifications in the Isle of Wight, and at Southampton, and Portsmouth; and near Guildford had a rendezvous of the army, which he exhorted to obedience. June 4, he was entertained, with other officers, &c. by the city of London, and presented with a large and weighty bason and ewer of beaten gold. In June 1650, upon the Scots declaring for king Charles II. the juncto of the council of state having taken a resolution to be beforehand, and not to stay to be invaded from Scotland, but to carry first the war into that kingdom; general Fairfax, being consulted, seemed to approve of the design: but afterwards, by the persuasions of his lady, and of the presbyterian ministers, he declared himself unsatisfied that there was a just ground for the parliament of England to send their army to invade Scotland and resolved to lay down his commission rather than engage in that affair and on the 26th that high trust was immediately committed to Oliver Cromwell, who was glad to see him removed, as being no longer necessary, but rather an obstacle to his farther ambitious designs. Being thus released from all public employment, he went and lived quietly at his own house in Nun-Appleton in Yorkshire; always earnestly wishing and praying (as we are assured) for the restitution of the royal family, and fully resolved to lay hold on the first opportunity to contribute his part towards it, which made him always looked upon with a jealous eye by the usurpers of that time. As soon as he was invited by general Monk to assist him against Lambert’s army, he cheerfully embraced the occasion, and appeared, on the 3d of December 1659, at the head of a body of gentlemen of Yorkshire and, upon the reputation and authority of his name, the Irish brigade of 1200 horse forsook Lambert’s army, and joined him. The consequence was, the immediate breaking of all Lambert’s forces, which gave general Monk an easy inarch into England. The 1st of January 1659-60, his lordship made himself master of York; and, on the 2d of the same month, was chosen by the rump parliament one of the council of state, as he was again on the 23d of February ensuing. March '29 he was elected one of the knights for the county of York, in the healing parliament; and was at the head of the committee appointed May 3, by the house of commons, to go and attend king Charles II. at the Hague, to desire him to make a speedy return to his parliament, and to the exercise of his kingly office. May 16 he waited upon his majesty with the rest, and endeavoured to atone in some measure for all past offences, by readily concurring and assisting in his restoration. After the dissolution of the short healing parliament, he retired again to his seat in the country, where he lived in a private manner till his death, which happened November 12, 1671, in the sixtieth year of his age. Several letters, remonstrances, and other papers, subscribed with his name, are preserved in Rushworth and other collections, being published during the time he was general; but he disowned most of them. After his decease, some “short memorials, written by himself,” were published in 1699, 8vo, by Brian Fairfax, esq. but do his lordship no great honour, either as to principle, style, or accuracy. Lord Fairfax, as to his person, was tall, but not above the just proportion, and of a gloomy and melancholy disposition. He stammered a little, and was a bad orator ou the most plausible occasions. As to the qualities of his mind, he was of a good natural disposition; a great lover of learning, having contributed to the edition of the Polygiott, and other large works; and a particular admirer of the History and Antiquities of Great Britain, as appears by the encouragement he gave to Mr. Dodsvrorth. In religion he professed Presbyterianismn, but where he first learned that, unless ia the army, does not appear. He was of a meek and humble carriage, and but of few words in discourse and council; yet, when his judgment and reason were satisfied, he was unalterable; and often ordered things expressly contrary to the judgment of all his council. His valour was unquestionable. He was daring, and regardless of self-interest, and, we are told, in the field he appeared so highly transported, that scarcely any durst speak a word to him, and he would seem like a man distracted and furious. Had not the more successful ambition and progress of Cromwell eclipsed lord Fairfax’s exploits, he would have been considered as the greatest of the parliamentary commanders; and one of the greatest heroes of the rebellion, had not the extreme narrowness of his genius, in every thing but war, obstructed his shining as a statesman. We have already noticed that he had some taste for literature, and that both at York and at Oxford he endeavoured to preserve the libraries from being pillaged. He also presented twenty-nine ancient Mss. to the Bodleian library, one of which is a beautiful ms. of -Cower' s “Confessio Amantis.” When at Oxford we do not find that he countenanced any of the outrages committed there, but on the contrary, exerted his utmost diligence in preserving the Bodleian from pillage; and, in fact, as Mr. Warton observes, that valuable repository suffered less than when the city was in' the possession of the royalists. Lord Orford has introduced lord Fairfax among his “Royal and Noble Authors,” “not only as an historian, but a poet. In Mr. Thoresby’s museum were preserved in manuscript the following pieces:” The Psalms of David;“”The Song of Solomon“” The Canticles;“and” Songs of Moses, Exod. 15. and Deut. 32.“and other parts of scripture versified.” Poem on Solitude.“Besides which, in the same collection were preserved” Notes of Sermons by his lordship, by his lady, and by their daughter Mary,“the wife of the second duke of Buckingham; and” A Treatise on the Shortness of Life.“But, of all lord Fairfax’s works, by far the most remarkable were some verses which he wrote on the horse on which Charles the Second rode to liis coronation, and which had been bred and presented to the king by his lordship. How must that merry monarch, not apt to keep his countenance on more serious occasions, have smiled at this awkward homage from the old victorious hero of republicanism and the covenant” Besides these, several of his Mss. are preserved in the library at Denton, of which Mr. Park has given a list in his new edition of the “Royal and Noble Authors.”

He now opened a shop opposite the Palsgrave -head tavern without Temple-bar, where he sold not only his own engravings, but those of other English artists, and imported a considerable number of prints from Holland, France, and Italy. He also worked for the booksellers, particularly Mr. Royston, the king’s bookseller, Mr. Martin, his brother-in-law, in St. Paul’s church-yard, and Mr. William Peake, a stationer and printseller on Snow-hill, the younger brother of his old master. About 1680, he retired from his shop, and resided in Printing-house-yard: but he still continued to work for the booksellers, and painted portraits from the life in crayons, which art he learned of Nanteuil, during his abode in France. He also painted in miniature; and his performances in both these styles were much esteemed. These portraits are what we now find with the inscription “W. Faithorne pinxit” He appears to have been well paid for his engravings, of which lord Orford has given a very full list. Mr. Ashmole gave him seven pounds for the engraving of his portrait, which, if not a large one, or very highly finished, could not at that time have been a mean price. Unfortunately, however, for him, his son William dissipated a considerable part of his property, and it is supposed that the vexation he suffered from this young man’s misconduct, tended to shorten his days. He died in May 1691, and was buried by the side of his wife in the church of St. Anne, Blackfriars. In 1662 he published “The Art of Engraving and Etching.”

Portraits constitute the greater part of Faithorne’s engravings. He worked almost entirely with the graver in a free clear style. In the early part of his life, he seems to have followed the Dutch and Flemish manner of engraving but at his return from France he had considerably improved it. Some of his best portraits are admirable prints, and finished in a free delicate style, with much force of colour; but he did not draw the human figure correctly, or with good taste, and his historical plates by no means convey a proper idea of his abilities. His son scraped portraits in mezzotinto, and probably might have acquired a comfortable subsistence, but he neglected his business before he had attained any great degree of excellence, and died about the age of thirty.

, surnamed Strabo, was consul at Rome in 161 B. C. with Valerius Messala. The law called Fannia was made during his consulate, for regulating the expences of feasts, and empowering the pretors to drive the rhetoricians and philosophers from Rome. This law prohibited more than ten asses to be spent at a common feast, and an hundred at the most solemn, such as those of the Saturnalia, or of the public games; which seems almost incredible, when it is considered that a sheep at that time cost ten asses, and an ox an hundred, according to the opinion of several learned men. Caius Fannius, his son, distinguished himself by his eloquence, and was consul 120 B. C. He opposed the enterprizes of Caius Gracchus, and made a speech against him, which is praised by Cicero. Caius Fannius, cousin-german of this latter, was questor 139 B. C. and pretor ten years after; served under Scipio Africanus the younger in Africa; and, in Spain, under Fabius Maximus Servilianus. He was the disciple of Panetius, a celebrated stoic philosopher; married the youngest daughter of Lelius, and wrote some annals, which are much praised by Cicero.

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

The first publication of Fantoni was entitled te Dissertationes Anatomicae XI. Taurini, 1701.“The second,” Anatomia corporis humani ad usum Theatri Medici accoiiimodata, ibid. 1711.“This edition, which is, in fact, a part of the preceding work, relates to the anatomy of the abdomen and chest only. 3.” Dissertationes dure de structura et usu dune matris et lymphaticorum vasorum, ad Antonium Pacchionum conscripts;, Romae, 1721.“4. a Dissertationes duae deThermis Valderianis, Aquis Gratianis, Maurianensibus, Genevas,” 1725, in 8vo, and 1738, in 4to. 5. “Opuscula Medica et Physiologica, Genevoe, 1738.” This contains likewise some observations of his father. 6. “Dissertationes Anatomicae septem priores renovatae, de Abdomine, Taurini, 1745.” 7. “Commentariolum de Aquis Vindoliensibus, Augustanis, et Ansionensibus, ibid. 1747.” His father, John Baptist Fantoni, though less distinguished than his son, was also a teacher of anatomy and of the theory of medicine at Turin, as well as librarian, and first physician to Victor Amadeus II. duke of Savoy. He died prematurely in 1692, (having only attained the age of forty), in the vicinity of Embrun, where the duke, his patron, was encamped, during the siege of Chorges. He left several unfinished manuscripts, which John Fantoni revised, and of which he published a collection of the best parts, under the title of “Observationes Anatomico medicos selectiores,” at Turin, in 1699, and at Venice in 1713. This work contains some useful observations relative to the diseases of the heart.

, was born in 1644, at the castle of Valgorge, in Vivarais. He was captain of the guards to the duke of Orleans, and his son, who was regent. His gaiety, and sprightly wit, made him the delight of the best companies. He left a few songs, and other poetical pieces, which have been printed with those of his friend the abb de Chaulieu, and separately, with his Memoirs, 2 vols. small 12mo. They are full of wit and delicacy; but we are told he had attained the age of sixty before he made any poetical etibrt, and that then his inspirer was rather Cupid or Bacchus than Apollo, He also wrote the words of an opera, called “Panthea.” His “Memoirs” are written with great freedom and openness, and show the dislike which their author, and all his party, had to the government. We do not find when they were first published, but an English edition bears date 1719. The Author died at Paris, 1712.

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

As sir John Falstoff’s valour made him a terror in war, his humanity made him a blessing in peace: all we can find in his retirement, being elegant, hospitable, and generous, either as to the places of his abode, or those persons and foundations on which he showered his bounty. At his death he possessed lands and estates in Norfolk, Suffolk, Yorkshire, and Wiltshire. He was a benefactor to both the universities; bequeathing a considerable legacy to Cambridge, for building the schools of philosophy and Jaw, for which the first order under their chancellor Laurence, bishop of Durham, is dated in June 1458; and, at Oxford, he was so bountiful to Magdalen college, through the affection he had for his friend William Wainfleet, the founder thereof two years before, that his name is commemorated in an anniversary speech; and though the particulars of his bounty are not now remembered, because he enfeoffed the said founder in his life-time, yet it is known, that the boar’s head in Southwark, now divided into tenements, yielding one hundred and fifty pounds yearly, together with Caldecot manor in Suffolk, were part of the lands he bestowed thereon; and Lovingland in that county is conceived also to have been another part of his donation. There had been an ancient free chapel of St. John the Baptist in the manor house at Castre, the ancient seat of his family, as early as the reign of Edward I. Sir John intended to have erected a college for seven monks or secular priests (one of whom to be head), and seven poo? men; and to endow it with 120 marks rent charge, out of several manors which he gave or sold to his cousin John Paston, senior, esq. charged with this charity. Mr. Paston laboured to establish this pious foundation till his death, 6 Ed. IV. as did his son sir John Paston, knight, but whether it was ever incorporated and fully settled, bishop Tanner doubts, as there is no farther mention of it in the rolls or the bishop of Norwich’s registry. Only in the valuation, 26 Hen. VIII. there is said to have been in Castrehall a chantry of the foundation of sir John Fastolff, knight, worth tl. 135. 4d. per annum. 6 Ed. IV. from receipts it appears that the priests had in money, besides their diet, 40l. per annum, and the poor men 40$. per annum each. The foundation was certainly not completed till after his decease; for William Worcester, in a letter to Margaret Paston in 1466, tells her he had communed with her son whether it should not be at Cambridge in case it shall not be at Castre, neither at St. Benet’s (in the Holme), and that the bishop of Winchester (Wainflete) was disposed to found a college in Oxford for his sayd mayster to be prayed for, yet with much less cost he might make some other memorial in Cambridge.

, in Latin Faber, was a profound lawyer and an author; in a few instances, a poet, for some quatrains by him remain among those of Pi brae, and there is a tragedy of his e.ytant, entitled “The Gortlians, or ambition.” He was born in 1557, was promoted as a lawyer in his native town of Bresse, afterwards became governor of Savoy, and was employed in confidential negotiations between that dukedom and France. He might have been further promoted in his own country, but refused. He died in H>24. His works, chiefly on jurisprudence and civil law, form ten volumes in folio, printed from 1658 to 1661. For his son Favre (Claude). See Vaugelas.

the eldest son of Fearne, esq. judge advocate of the admiralty in the latter end of the late king’s reign. He presided at the trial of admiral Byng; and on that trial, and in the general course of his profession, was distinguished as a very able and learned man. He gave his son Charles the first rudiments of education himself, and at a proper age sent him to Westminster school, where he soon began to distinguish himself in classical and mathematical learning. Being designed for the law, as soon as he had finished his education at this seminary, he was entered of the Inner Temple; but at that time with no fixed resolution to become a barrister. His life had hitherto passed in making excursions from one branch of learning to another, in each of which he made very considerable advances, and might perhaps have succeeded in any. During this state of irresolution, his father died; and his fortune, which (from his habits of living) was very inconsiderable, was equally partitioned between our author, and a brother and sister. Here it was that young Fearne exhibited that generosity and independence that distinguished him through the greater part of his life. His father had given him, on his entrance into the Inner Temple, a few huudred pounds, to purchase chambers and books; and, as he had likewise given him a superior education to his younger brother, be nobly resolved on accepting this as a full equivalent for his share in the remainder of his father’s fortune. His brother and sister had affection and delicacy enough to resist this conduct for a while; but Fearne was immoveable. “My father,” said he, “by taking such uncommon pains with my education, no doubt meant it should be my whole dependence; and if that won't bring me through, a fevV hundred pounds will be a matter of no consequence.” His brother and sister therefore shared the father’s fortune between them: the former settled in the Admiralty-office, and the latter afterwards married a gentleman of equal rank and condition with herself.

In 1711, Mr. Felton was presented by the second duke of Rutland to the rectory of Whitewell in Derbyshire; and July 4, 1712, he preceded to the degree of doctor in divinity. On the death of Dr. Pearson, in 1722, he was admitted, by the provost and fellows of Queen’s college, principal of Edmund hall. In 1725, he printed a sermon which he had preached before the university, and which went through three editions, and excited no common attention, entitled “The Resurrection of the same numerical body, and its re-union to the same soul; against Mr. Locke’s notion of personality and identity.” His next publication, in 1727, was a tra'ct, written with much ingenuity, entitled “The Common People taught to defend their Communion with the Church of England, against the attempts and insinuations of Popish emissaries. In a dialogue between a Popish priest, and a plain countryman.” In 1728 and 1729, Dr. Felton was employed in preaching eight sermons, at lady Moyer’s lecture, at St. Paul’s, which were published in 1732, under the title of “The Christian Faith asserted against Deists, Arians, and Sociirians.” The sermons, when printed, were greatly augmented, and a large preface was given concerning the light and the law of nature, and the expediency and necessity of revelation. This elaborate work was dedicated to Dr. Gibson, bishop of London. In the title he is by some mistake called late principal of Edmund hall, a situation which he never resigned. In 1736 the duke of Rutland, being chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, gave him the rectory of Berwick in Elmet, Yorkshire, which he did not long live to enjoy. In 1739 he was seized with a rheumatic disorder; from which, however, he was so far recovered, after a confinement of nearly three months, that he thought himself able to officiate, in his church at Berwick, on Christmas-day, where he preached his last sermon, and with his usual fervour and affection. But having caught cold, which was followed by a defluxion, attended with a violent fever, he died March 1, 1739-40. During the whole of his disorder, he behaved with a resignation and piety becoming a Christian. He was interred in the chancel of the church of Berwick. He left behind him, intended for the press, a set of sermons on the creation, fall, and redemption of man; the sacrifices of Cain and Abel, and the rejection and punishment of Cain, which were published by his son, the rev. William Felton, in 1748, with a preface containing a sketch of his father’s life and character. This work was the result of great attention. The sermons were first composed about 1730, and preached in the parish church of Whitwell in that and the following year. In 1733 he enlarged them, and delivered them again in the same church; and in 1736 when removed to Berwick, he transcribed and preached them at that place. But though he had applied much labour to the subject of the resurrection, he did not think that his discourses on that head, or any other of his university sermons, were fit for re-publication.

He was now induced to trust to his abilities for a subsistence, but whatever his difficulties or discouragements, he kept his name unsullied, and never descended to any mean or dishonourable shifts. Indeed, whoever mentioned him, mentioned him with honour, in every period of his life. His first employ he owed to a recommendation to Charles earl of Orrery, whom he accompanied to Flanders, in quality of secretary, and returned with his lordship to England in 1705. Being then out of employment, he became assistant in the school of Mr. Bonwicke, (see Bo?7­Wicki:), at Headley, near Leatherhead, in Surrey; after which he was invited to the mastership of the free grammar school at Sevenoaks, in Kent, and in a few years brought that seminary into much reputation, while he enjoyed the advantage of making easy and frequent excursions to visit his friends in London. In 1710 he was prevailed upon by Mr. St. John (lord Bolingbrokt ) to give up what was called the drudgery of a school, for the worse drudgery of dependence on a political patron, from whom, after all, he derived no advantage. When Steele resigned his place of commissioner in the stamp-office, Fenton applied to his patron, who told him that it was beneath his merit, and promised him a superior appointment; but this, the subsequent change of administration prevented him from fulfilling, and left Fenton disappointed, and in debt. Not long after, however, his old friend the earl of Orrery appointed him tutor to his son, lord Broghill, a boy of seven years old, whom he taught English and Latin until he was thirteen. About the time this engagement was about to expire, Craggs, secretary of state, feeling his own want of literature, desired Pope to procure him an instructor, by whose help he might supply the deficiencies of his education. Pope recommended Fenton, but Craggs’s sudden death disappointed the pleasing expectations formed from this connection.

, a very celebrated French mathematician, though by profession a lawyer, was considered by the writers of his own country as having rendered no less service to mathematical science than Descartes, and as having even prepared the way for the doctrine of infinites, afterwards discovered by Newton and Leibnitz. He was not only the restorer of the ancient geometry, but the introducer of the new. He was born at Toulouse in 1590, educated to the law, and advanced to the dignity of counsellor to the parliament of Toulouse. As a magistrate, his knowledge and integrity were highly esteemed. As a mani of science he was connected with Descartes, Huygens, Pascal, and many others. He is said also to have cultivated poetry. He died in 1664. His mathematical works were published at Toulouse in 1679, in two volumes, folio. The first volume contains the treatise of arithmetic of Diophantus, with a commentary, and several analytical inventions. The second comprises his mathematical discoveries, and his correspondence with the most celebrated geometricians of his age. His son, Samuel Fermat, was also eminent as a literary man, and wrote some learned dissertations.

a learned French civilian, was doctor of law in the university of Paris, in which city he was born 1639, and taught law at Paris, as fellow, till 1694, when he was appointed professor at Rheims, where he acquired great reputation, and died May 11, 1715, aged seven-seven, leaving a great number of works, which became very popular, and the booksellers of Paris, for whom he wrote, were enriched, but he was not. His talents were considerable; but a certain arrogance of manner, and bigotry to his own opinions, prevented him from being distinguished in his profession. The principal of his works are, 1.“Comtnentaires sur la Coutume de Paris,” 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “Traité des Fiefs,” 1680, 4to. 3. “Recueil des Commentateurs de la Coutume de Paris,” 1714, 4 vols. fol. 4. “La Jurisprudence du Code,” 1684, 2 vols. 4to. 5. “Du Digeste,” 1688, 2 vols. 4to. 6. “Des Novelles,” 1688, 2 vols. 4to. 7. “La Science des Notaires,” 1771, 2 vols. 4to. '8. “Le Droit du Patronage,” 1686, 4to. 9. *; Institution Coutumiere,“3 vols. 12mo. 10.” Introduction a la Pratique,“1758, 2 vols. 12mo.” Le Diet, de Droit," 1771, 2 vols. 4to, is by Claudius Joseph, his son, who was dean of the law faculty in the university of Paris.

, one of the bravest French officers in the seventeenth century, was the son of Francis de Pas, head chamberlain to Henry IV. descended from the ancient house of Pas in Artois, and of Magdeleine de la Fayette, and was born June I, 1590, at Saumur. He rose by his merit and birth to the highest military offices, commanded the king’s forces twice as chief, conducted the famous siege of Rochelle, where he was taken prisoner, and contributed greatly to the surrender of that important place, through the intrigues of Mad. de Noailles, his wife’s mother. Being afterwards sent into Germany as ambassador extraordinary, he did great service to the state, was made lieutenant-general of Metz, Toul, and Verdun at his return, and died at Thionville, March 14, 1640, of the wounds he had received the precceding year at the siege of that city, during which he was made prisoner. His “Negociations” were printed in Germany, 163:*, and 1634, Paris, 175:3, 3 vols. 12mo. Isaac de Pas, marquis de Keuqu.eres, his son, was also lieutenant-general of the king’s armies, counsellor of state in ordinary, governor of Verdun, and lieutenant-general of Toul. He was sent as ambassador to Germany, and Sweden, 1672, gave proofs of his courage and prudence during this latter embassy, and died ambassador extraordinary in Spain, May 6, 1688, after having been viceroy in America, 1660.

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

, a learned Italian, and the reviver of the Platonic philosophy in the West, was born at Florence in 1433, where his father was physician to Cosmo de Medici, and sent his son to pursue that study at the university of Bologna. Marsilius obeyed him with some reluctance, but having made a short trip from Bologna to Florence, his father took him with him on a visit to Cosmo de Medicis, which gave a new turn to his life and studies. Cosmo was so charmed by his appearance and his spirited answers, that from that moment, although Marsilius was at this time merely a youth, he destined him to be the principal of the Platonic school which he was about to form. With this view he brought him to reside with him, superintended his studies, and treated him with so much kindness, that Marsilius regarded him ever after as a second parent. He made such rapid progress in the study of philosophy, that he was only twenty-three years old, when he wrote his four books of the Institutions of Plato. Cosmo and the learned Landino, to whom he shewed the manuscript, highly applauded his labours, but advised him to learn Greek before he should publish them. This he accordingly studied with his usual ardour, and gave the first proof of the progress he had made by translating the hymns of Orpheus into Latin. Reading about the same time in Plato that heaven had bestowed music on man in order to calm his passions, he learned that science also, and amrised himself with chanting the hymns of Orpheus, accompanying himself with a lyre resembling that of the Greeks. H translated afterwards the book on the origin of the world attributed to Mercurius Trismegistus, and having presented these first-fruits of his Greek studies to his patron, Cosmo rewarded him with a grant of some land at Careggi, near Florence, and with a house in the city, and some very magnificent manuscripts of Plato and Plotinus.

Marsilius now undertook the entire translation of Plato, which he completed in five years, and was then in his thirty-fifth year. Cosmo was now dead, but his son Peter who succeeded him, had the same friendship and esteem for our author, and it was by his orders that he published his translation, and lectured on the works of Plato at Florence to an audience composed of the eminent scholars of Europe who were most conversant in ancient philosophy. Lorenzo also extended his patronage to Marsilius, who having taken priest’s orders in his forty-second year (1475), Lorenzo bestowed several henefices on him, which rendered him easy in his circumstances. More he never wished, and when, by Lorenzo’s bounty, he had attained this competency, he made over his patrimony to his relations. His time was now divided between his ecclesiastical duties and his philosophical studies. His life was exemplary, and his temper amiable. He loved retirement, especially at his country-seat, where he enjoyed the conversation of a fevf friends. Although his constitution was weak, and he was frequently a sufferer by disease, his ardour of study never abated. The pleasure he felt in his retirement, his contented disposition, and his respect for the Medici family, made him refuse some great otters made by pope Sixtus IV. and by Matthias Corvinus, king of Hungary. He died at the age of sixty-six in 1499.

About 1610 the king bestowed on him the deanery of Gloucester, where he never resided long, but in order to preach four or 6ve times a year to a full auditory who respected and loved him. The greatest part of his time he spent at his parsonage, and the winter at Windsor, where his house in the cloister was the resort of all who were eminent for learning, to enjoy his conversation, and profit by his sentiments on ecclesiastical affairs, and on the parties and sects which divided the Christian world. Dr. Barlow, dean of Wells, and Dr. Crakenthorp were among his correspondents. He rejoiced when any man noted for learning was made prebendary of Windsor; and often visited sir Henry Savile at Eton college, and other eminent persons in that neighbourhood. He often preached before the king, who, the first time he heard him, said, “Is his name Field This is a field for God to dwell in” and Fuller, in the same punning age, calls him “that learned divine,whose memory swelleth like a field which the Lord hath blessed.” In the king’s progress through Hampshire, in 1609, the bishop of Winchester appointed him among those who were to preach before him; and in 1611, the king having a mind to hear the prebendaries of Winchester in their order, the dean wrote to him first, and he preached oftener than any of them, and to crowded audiences. The king, who delighted to discourse with him on points of divinity, proposed to send him into Germany to compose the differences between the Lutherans and Calvinists, but, for whatever reason, this appointment did not take place; and not long before his death, the king would have made him bishop of Salisbury, and gave him a promise of the see of Oxford on a vacancy. Bishop Hall tells us, that about the same time he was to have been made dean of Worcester. On Oct. 27, 1614, he lost his wife, who left him six sons and a daughter. After continuing a widower about two years, he married the only daughter of Dr. John King, prebendary of Windsor and Westminster, widow of Dr. John Spenser, some time president of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, but with her he lived not much above a month. She however bred up his only daughter, and married her to her eldest son, of which match there were three sons and five daughters. Dr. Field had reached the beginning of his fifty-sixth year, when, on Nov. 15, 1616, he died of an apoplexy, or some imposthume breaking inwardly, which suddenly deprived him of all sense and motion. He was buried in the outer chapel of St. George at Windsor, below the choir. Over his grave was laid a black marble slab, with his figure in brass, and under it an inscription on a plate of the same metal, recording the deaths of him and his first wife. His whole life was spent in the instruction of others, both by precept and example. He was a good and faithful pastor, an affectionate husband and parent, a good master and neighbour; charitable to the poor, moderate in his pursuits, never aiming at greatness for himself or his posterity; he left to his eldest son very little more than what descended to him from his ancestors. He had such a memory that he used to retain the substance of every book he read; but his judgment was still greater. Although he was able to penetrate into the most subtle and intricate disputes, he was more intent on composing than increasing controversies. He did not like disputes about the high points of predestination and reprobation, yet appears rather to have inclined to the Calvinistic views of these matters. When he first set about writing his books “Of the Church,” his old acquaintance Dr. Kettle dissuaded him, telling him that when once he was engaged in controversy, he would never live quietly, but be continually troubled with answers and replies. To this he said, “I will so write that they shall have no great mind to answer me;” which proved to be nearly the case, as his main arguments were never refuted. This work was published at London in 1606, folio, in four books, to which he added a fifth in 1610, folio, with an appendix containing a defence of each passage of the former books that were excepted against, or wrested to the maintenance of Romish errors. All these were reprinted at Oxford in 1628, folio. This second edition is charged hy the Scots in their “Canterburian’s Self-conviction,” 1641, folio, with additions made by bishop Laud. The purport and merit of this work has reminded some of the judicious Hooker, between whom and Dr. Field there was a great friendship. Dr. Field published also a sermon on St. Jude, v. 3, 1604, 4to, preached before the king at Windsor; and, a little before his death, had composed great part of a work entitled “A view of the Controversies in Religion, which in these last times have caused the lamentable divisions in the Christian world” but it was never completed, though the preface was written by the author, and is printed at large in the Life of him by his Son, together with some propositions laid down by him on election and reprobation. This Life was published from the original by John Le Neve, author of the “Monumenta Anglicana,” in 1617, 8vo, and from a copy of it interleaved with ms notes by the author, and by bishop Kennet, Mr. Gough, in whose possession it was, drew up a life for the new edition of the Biographia Britannica, which, with a very few omissions, we have here copied. It only remains to be mentioned that Dr. Field was nominated one of the fellows of Chelsea college in 1610, by king James, who, when he heard of his death, expressed his regret, and added, “I should have done more for that man” His son, who wrote his life, was the Rev. Nathaniel Field, rector of Stourton in the county of Wilts. Another son, Giles, lies buried, under a monumental inscription, against the east wall of New college Ante-chapel. He died in 1629, aged twenty-one.

, a physician of eminence, was born at Antwerp, March 28, 1567. His father, who was a physician at Antwerp, and who died at Dort in 1585, was the author of a treatise entitled “Commentarius de flatibus humanum corpus infestantibus,” Antwerp, 1582. His son, Thomas, studied medicine at Leyden, and afterwards at Bologna, which he visited in 1590. On his return to his native country his talents were soon made known, and in 1593 he was invited to Louvaine, in order to fill one of the vacant professorships of medicine in that university, in which he took the degree of doctor about the end of that year. After seven years of residence, he was appointed physician to Maximilian, duke and afterwards elector of Bavaria; but this he resigned at the end of one year, and returned to Louvaine, where the archduke Albert immediately increased his salary to a thousand ducats, in order to secure his services, and here he remained until his death, March 15, 1631, at the college of Breughel, of which he had been for a long time president. Besides being an able Greek and mathematical scholar, he was regarded as an intelligent and able physician; and had fewequals among his contemporaries in natural history and surgery. His works, which contributed greatly to advance his reputation, were, 1. “De Cauteriis libri quinque,” Louvaine, 1598. 2. “Libri Chirurgici XII., de praecipuis Artis Chirurgicre controversiis,” Francfort, 1602, which passed through many editions. 3. “De viribus Imaginationis Tractatus,” Louvaine, 1608. 4. “De Cometa anni 1618,” Antwerp, 1619, against opinions of Copernicus respecting the motion of the earth. 5. “De vi formatrice foetus liber, in quo ostenditur animam rationalem infundi tertia die,” ibid. 1620. This work was attacked with considerable success, by Louis du Gardin, a professor of Douay, and Fienus replied in, 6. “De formatrice foetus adversus Ludovicum du Gardin, &c.” Louvaine, 1624. His opinion was also impugned by Santa Cruz, the physician of Philip IV. which produced, 7. “Pro sua de anijnatione fcetds tertia die opinione Apologia, adversus Antonium Ponce Santa Cruz, Regis Hispaniarmn Medicum Cubicularem, &c.” Louvaine, 1629. 8. “Semiotice, sive de signis medicis Tractatus,” Leyden, 1664.

, a celebrated Italian poet, was born December 30, 1642, of a noble family at Florence. He studied philosophy, law, and divinity five years at Pisa, and took a doctor of law’s degree there. He then returned to Florence, where, after several years spent in his closet, with no other employment than poetry and the belles-lettres, the grand duke appointed him senator. He died September 27, 1707, aged sixty-five. Filicaia was member or the academies della Crusca, and degli Arcadi. His poems are much admired for their delicacy and noble sentiments. They have been published together by Scipio Filicaia, his son, under the title of “Poesie Toscane di Vincenzo da Filicaia,” &c. 1707, fol. the same with the Latin prose, Venice, 1747, 3 vols. 12mo.

He performed the office of high steward at the trial of lord Stafford, who was found guilty of high treason by his peers, for being concerned in the popish plot. On May J2, 1681, he was created earl of Nottingham, and died, quite worn out, at his house in Queen-street, Lincoln’sinn-fields, Dec. Is, 1682, and was buried in the church of Ilaunston near Olney in Buckinghamshire, where his son erected a superb monument to hrs memory. Though he lived in very troublesome and difficult times, yet he conducted himself with such even steadiness, that he retained the good opinion of both prince and people. He was distinguished by his wisdom and eloquence; and was such an excellent orator, that some of his contemporaries have styled him the English Roscius, the English Cicero, &c. Burnet, in the preface to his “History of the Reformation,” telis us, that his great parts and greater virtues were so conspicuous, that it would be a high presumption in him to say any thing in his commendation being in nothing more eminent, than in his zeal for, and care of, the church of England. His character is described by Dryden, or rather Tate, in the second part of “Absalom and Achitophel,” under the name of Amri; but more reliance may be placed on the opinion of judge Blackstone. “He was a person,” says this learned commentator, “of the greatest abilities, and most incorrupted integrity; a thorough master and zealous defender of the laws and constitution of his country; and endued with a pervading genius that enabled him to discover and to pursue the true spirit of justice, notwithstanding the embarrassments raised by the narrow and technical notions which then prevailed in the courts of law, and the imperfect ideas of redress which had possessed the courts of equity. The reason and necessities of mankind, arising from the great change in property, by the extension of trade, and the abolition of military tenures, co-operated in establishing his plan, and enabled him, in the course of nine years, to build a system of jurisprudence and jurisdiction upon wide and rational foundations, which have also been extended and improved by many great men, who have since presided in chancery; and from that time to this, the power and business of the court have increased to an amazing degree.”

Under his name are published, 1. Several speeches and discourses in the trial of the judges of Charles I. in the book entitled “An exact and most impartial account of the Indictment, Arraignment, Trial, and Judgment (according to law) of twenty-nine regicides, &c. 1660,” 4to, 1679, 8vo. 2. “Speeches to both Houses of Parliament, 7th Jan. 1673; 13th of April and 13th of Oct. 1675; 15th of Feb. 1676; 6th of March, 1678; and 30th of April, 1679.” These were spoken while he was lord keeper and chancellor. 3. “Speech at the Sentence of William Viscount Stafford, 7th Dec. 1680,” printed in one sheet, folio; and in the Trial of the said Viscount, p. 212. 4. “Answers by his Majesty’s command, upon several Addresses presented to his majesty at Hampton Court, the 19th of May, 1681,” in one sheet, in folio. 5. “His Arguments; upon which he made the Decree in the cause between the honourable Charles Howard, esq. plaintiff, Henry late duke of Norfolk, Henry lord Mowbray his son, Henry marquis of Dorchester, and Richard Marriott, esq. defendants; wherein the several ways and methods of limiting a trust of term for years are fully debated, 1615,” folio, 6, “An Argument on the claim of the Crown to pardon on Impeachment,” folio. He also left behind him, written with his own hand, “Chancery Reports,” ms. in folio, and notes on Coke’s Institute.

, an eminent Latin poet, whose family name was Zarrabini, was born at Serevalle in 1498. His father, John Anthony, who first changed the family name to Flaminio on entering a literary society at Venice, was himself a man of learning, and professor of belles-lettres in different academies in Italy, and has left some works both in prose and verse, particularly twelve books of letters, in which are many particulars of literary history. He bestowed great pains on the instruction of his son, and sent him, when at the age of sixteen, to Rome, with a poem addressed to Leo X. exhorting him to make war against the Turks, and a critical work entitled “Annotationum Sylvae.” Leo appears to have been so pleased with the appearance of young Flaminio, as to request that he might remain at Rome, promising to encourage his studies there; but although this did not take place, in his after-visits to Rome, the pope patronized him with great liberality, and Flaminio answered every expectation that had been formed of his talents. In 1515 he accompanied the count Castiglione to Urbino, where he resided some months, and was held in the highest esteem by that accomplished nobleman for his amiable qualities and great endowments, but particularly for his. early and astonishing talents for Latin poetry. In this year he published at Fano, the first specimen of his productions, with a few poems of Marullus, not before printed, in a very rare volume in 8vo. entitled, “Michaelis Tardaaniotas Marulli Neniae. Ejusdem epigrammata nunquarn alias impressa. M. Antonii Flaminii carminum libellus. Ejusdem Ecloga Thyrsis.” Of these poems some have been printed, often with variations, in the subsequent editions of his works; but several pieces appear there which are not to be found in the edition by Mancurti, published at Padua, by Comino, in 1727, which is considered as the most complete; whence it is probable this early publication of Flaminio was not known to his editors.

, a man of some celebrity and talents, was born at Little Bronghton, in the parish of Bridekirk, Cumberland, in 1714. His father, who was a tobacco-pipe maker, had a small paternal estate; on which, with his trade, he was barely enabled to live, and bring up his family, without their becoming burthensome to their parish. It is not certain, that his son Abraham ever went to any school, although there is a tradition, that, very early in life, before he was able to do any work, his parents once spared him for three weeks, to attend a school in the village, where y^uth were taught at the rate of a shilling for the quarter. If this report be well-founded, all the education he ever had that was paid for, cost three-pence. By some means or other however he learned to read: and, before he haJ. arrived at manhood, he had also learned to write. With these humble attainments to set out with, it does him great honour that, at length by dint of industry alone, he became a man of science and a man of learning. He was of a thinking, inquisitive mind; and, having taught himself arithmetic, in preference to any other science, only because he met with a book of arithmetic and no other, for the same reason he applied himself to mathematical investigations. Whatever he attempted, he attempted with all hio might, and pursued with unwearied diligence. In the day-time, he was employed in husbandry, or in making pipes: and, at night, eagerly betook himself to work the theorems (which word he long used to pronounce theorems) on which, during the day, he had been intensely ruminating. Often has he sat up all night, delineating diagrams; to the serious grief of his parents, who considered only the apparent unprofitableness of such pursuits, and the certain loss of the lump or two of cannel-coal, incurred by his lucubrations. Hardly ever, even in the subsequent more prosperous periods of his life, did he aspire to any thing beyond a rush light. The parents, contented in their ignorance, felt no ambition to have their son pass through life otherwise than they had done, in the midst of hard work and hard fare. And, as his midnight studies, and abstractedness of mind, seemed not to them likely to qualify him either to work more, or to eat less, they thought it their duty, and for his interest, to discountenance and discourage his passion for theorems his books and his slate were hid and he was double-tasked with labour. It was this poor man’s fate to begin and continue through life his pursuit after knowledge, under almost every possible disadvantage: yet difficulties and discouragements seemed but to increase his ardour. He used to relate, with vast self-complacence and satisfaction, a device he had formed, by which he flattered himself he should be permitted to stick to his studies without interruption, at his few intervals of leisure. He married early; and his wife, adopting the opinions and maxims of his parents, was no friend to studies, which appeared to her little likely to lead to any thing that might help to feed and clothe themselves, or their children. Over his house of one room, there was a kind of loft, or hoarded floor, (in Cumberland called a banks), which, however, had neither door, window, nor stairs. Hither, by means of a single rope, which he always drew up after him, he mounted with his book and his slate; and here he went through Euclid. This anecdote (says his biographer) is but simple, yet it is not insignificant.

, the Resolute, as he used to style himself, was born in London in the reign of Henry VIII. and descended from the Florii of Sienna, in Tuscany. A little before that time his father and mother, who were Waldenses, had fled from the Valtoline into England, from the persecutions of popery; but when Edward the Sixth died, and the protestant religion became oppressed under Mary, they left England, and went to some other country, where John Florio received his juvenile literature. Upon the re-establishment of protestantism by Elizabeth, they returned; and Florio for a time lived in Oxford. About 1576, Barnes bishop of Durham, sending his son to Magdalencollege, Florio was appointed to attend him as preceptor in French, and Italian; at which time he was admitted a member of that college, and became a teacher of those languages in the university. After James came to the cvown, he was appointed tutor to prince Henry in those languages; and at length made one of the privychamber, and clerk of the closet to queen Anne, to whom he was also tutor. He was a very useful man in his profession, zealous for the protestant religion, and much devoted to the English nation. Retiring to Fulham in Middlesex, to avoid the plague which was then in London, he was seized and carried off by it in 1625, aged about eighty.

, a celebrated physician, was bofti at Mentz, in 1528, and educated at Paris, where he acquired a taste for the works of the Greek physicians, under ins preceptors Houllier and Goupile, who facilitated his progress in that course of study, by procuring books and Mss. for his perusal and under whose direction he copied some very ancient manuscripts of Hippocrates from the library of Fontainbleau and the Vatican, but his narrow circumstances obliged him to return for practice to Mentz about 1556 or 7, where his reputation became so great, even in distant provinces, that several princes endeavoured by promises of great honour and emolument, to draw him from his native place; but his attachment to it was immoveable. During his practice, he found leisure to peruse the works of Hippocrates, in which he thought he discovered the most important observations relative to diseases, and the most correct delineation of their nature and progress. This produced his first work, printed at Basil in 1650, entitled “Hippocratis Coi Liber secundus de morbis vulgaribus, difficillimus et pulcherrimus: olim a Galeno Commentariis illustratus qui temporis injurid, interciderunt; nunc vero pene in integrum restitutus Commentariis sex, et Latinitate donatus,” 8vo. In the following year he published a “Pharmacopeia medicamentorum omnium, quie hodie ad publica medentium munia in officinis extant, tractationem et usum ex antiquorum Medicorum pnescripto continens,” Basilea), 1561, 8vo. His constant meditations on the works of Hippocrates again produced “GEconomia Hippocratis alphabet! serie distincta, in qua dictionum apud Hippocratem omnium, pra?­jsertim obscurionnn, usus explicatur, et velut ex amplissimo penu depromitur: ita ut Lexicon Hippocraticum merito dici possit,” Francofurti, 1588, folio; Geneva, 1662, folio. Afterwards, at the request of his learned contemporaries, he published a complete and correct edition of the whole works of Hippocrates, entitled “Magni Hippocratis, Medicorum omnium facile Principis, Opera omnia Cjiub extant, in octo sectiones ex Erotiani uiente distributa: nunc recens Latina interpretatione et aiinotationibus iliustrata,” folio, Francofurti, 1593, &c. Geneva;, 1657. Foesius did not long survive this laborious undertaking: he died in 1595, and his talents were inherited by his son and grandson, who successively filled his station as physician at Metz.

, a learned Portuguese ecclesiastic, was born at Lisbon in 1523, and entered among the Dominicans in February 1539. Having acquired a critical knowledge of the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, king John III. sent him to study theology in the university of Paris, where he became distinguished for his proficiency. On his return to Lisbon the king appointed him his preacher, and prince Louis at the same time entrusted to him the education of his son. Of all the divines sent by king Sebastian to the council of Trent in 1561, he held the first place in respect of talents. It is said that one day when he was about to ascend the pulpit, he asked the fathers of the council, who were his auditors, in what language they would wish to hear him preach, such facility he had in all the modern languages. In consideration of his uncommon merit these fathers appointed him a member of that celebrated council of Feb. 26, 1562. He was also appointed secretary to the committee for examining and condemning such publications as they thought unfit to be disseminated, and this office was ever after given to a monk of his order. The fathers of the council afterwards sent him on an important mission to pope Pius IV. who discovering his talents, and knowing his integrity, conferred upon him the place of confessor to his nephew, the cardinal St. Charles Borromeo. At Rome he was also employed to reform the Breviary and the Roman Missal, and to compose the Roman catechism. This detained him at Rome for some time; but having at length returned to Portugal, he was chosen prior of the Dominican convent at Lisbon in 1568. His other offices were those of confessor to king John III. and the princess Mary, daughter of king Emanuel, qualificator of the inquisition, and deputy of the tribunal of conscience, and of the military orders. From the profits of these places he built the convent of St. Paul in the village of Almada, opposite Lisbon, and there he died, Feb. 10, 1581. He published an oration at the council of Trent, and the catechism and breviary mentioned above; but his principal work was a commentary of Isaiah, “Isaiae prophetae vetus et nova ex Hebraico versio, cum commentario, &c.” Venice, 163, fol. This is a very rare edition; but the work was afterwards added to the London edition of the “Critici Sacri,”

, an eminent naturalist, was the son of a burgomaster at Dirschaw, in Polish Prussia, where he was born Oct. 22, 1729. We learn nothing of his education until his fifteenth year, when he was admitted into the gymnasium of Joachimsthal at Berlin, where his application to the study of ancient and modern languages was incessant and successful. From 1748, when he went to the university of Halle, he studied theology, and continued his application to the learned languages, among which he comprehended the Oriental, and after three years he removed to Dantzic, and distinguished himself as a preacher, imitating the French rather than the Dutch manner; and in 1753 he obtained a settlement at Nassenhuben. In the following year he married his cousin, Elizabeth Nikolai. During his residence in this place he employed his leisure hours in the study of philosophy, geography, and the mathematics, still improving his acquaintance with the ancient and modern languages. With a small income, and increasing family, the difficulties he experienced induced him to accept the proposal of removing to Russia, in order to superintend the new colonies at Saratow, but not succeeding in this or any other scheme of a settlement in that country, he removed to London in 1766, with strong recommendations, but with very little money. After his arrival, he received from the government of Russia a present of 100 guineas; and he also made an addition to his stock by the translation of Kalm’s Travels and Osbeck’s Voyage. At this time lord Baltimore proposed to him a settlement in America, as superintendant of his extensive property in that country; but he preferred the place of teacher of the French, German, and natural history in the dissenting academy at Warrington. For the first department he was by no means well qualified, his extraordinary knowledge of languages being unaccompanied by a particle of taste, and his use of them being barbarous, though fluent; and his knowledge of natural history was of little value in his academical department. This situation, however, for these or other reasons which we never heard assigned, he soon abandoned; and returning to London, he was engaged, in 1772, to accompany captain Cook, as a naturalist, in his second voyage round the world. At this time he was forty-three years of age, and his son George, who went with him, was seventeen. Upon his return to England in 1775, the university of Oxford conferred upon him the degree of LL. D. At this time he was projecting, with the assistance of his son, a botanical work in Latin, containing the characters of many new genera of plants, which they had discovered in the course of their voyage. An account of the voyage having been published by his son in English and German, the father was supposed to have had a considerable share in it; and as he had entered into an engagement not to publish any thing separately from the authorized narrative, he thus incurred the displeasure of government, and gave offence to his friends. Independently of the violation of his engagement, he was also chargeable with having introduced into his work several reflections on the government which appointed, and some falsehoods respecting the navigators who conducted the expedition. The father and son, finding that, in consequence of these circumstances, their situation in London was become unpleasant, determined to quit EnglaiYd. Before the execution of their purpose, their condition became embarrassed and distressing; but Mr. Forster was invited, in 1780, to be professor of natural history at Halle, and inspector of the botanical garden and in the following year he obtained the degree of M. D. His health, however, began to decline and the death of his son George so deeply impressed his mind as to aggravate his other complaints. Towards the commencement of 1798, his case became desperate; and before the close of this year, viz. on the 9th of December, he died. Mr. Forster’s disposition was most unamiable, and extremely irritable and litigious; and his want of prudence involved him in perpetual difficulties. Yet these seem to have all been virtues in the eyes of the celebrated Kurt Sprengel of Halle, who thus embellishes his character, which we should not copy if it did not mention some particulars of his studies and works: “To a knowledge of books in all branches of science, seldom to be met with, he joined an uncommon fund of practical observations, of which he well knew how to avail himself. In natural history, in geography, both physical and moral, and in universal history, he was acquainted with a vast number of facts, of which he who draws his information from works only has not even a distant idea. This assertion is proved in the most striking manner by his ‘ Observations made in a Voyage round the World.’ Of this book it may be said, that no traveller ever gathered so rich a treasure on his tour. What person of any education can read and study this work, which is unparalleled in its kind, without discovering in it that species of instructive and pleasing information which most interests man, as such The uncommon pains which Forster took in his literary compositions, and his conscientious accuracy in historical disquisitions, are best evinced by his * History of Voyages and Discoveries in the North, 7 and likewise by his excellent archaeological dissertation ‘ On the Byssus of the Ancients.’ Researches such as these were his favourite employment, in which he was greatly assisted by his intimate acquaintance with the classics. Forster had a predilection for the sublime in natural history, and aimed at general views ratUer than detail. His favourite author, therefore, was Buffon, whom he used to recommend as a pattern of style, especially in his ‘ Epoques de la Nature,’ his description of the horse, camel, &c. He had enjoyed the friendship of that distinguished naturalist; and he likewise kept up an uninterrupted epistolary intercourse with Linna3us, till the death of the latter. Without being a stickler for the forms and ceremonies of any particular persuasion, he adored the eternal Author of all which exists in the great temple of nature, and venerated his wisdom and goodness with an ardour and a heart-felt conviction, that, in my opinion, alone constitute the criterion of true religion. He held in utter contempt aM those who, to gratify their passions, or imitate the prevailing fashion, made a jest of the most sacred and respectable feelings of mankind. His moral feelings were equally animated: he was attracted with irresistible force by whatever was true, good, or excellent. Great characters inspired him with an esteem which he sometimes expressed with incredible ardour.”

, an English divine and scholar of eminence in the last ceatury, was born Feb. 3, 1717, at Stadscombe, in the parish of Plimstock, Devonshire, of which his father, Robert Forster, was then minister. His mother, Elizabeth, was daughter of the rev. John Tindal, vicar of Cornwood, in the same county, and sister of the rev. Nicolas Tindal, translator of Rapin’s History. His father, soon after the birth of this his eldest child, being chosen lecturer to St. Andrew’s church at Plymouth, went thitherto reside, and continued in the same place and office till his death. His son, the subject of this article, having received the rudiments of a grammatical education at home, in which he made an early progress, was put under the tuition of the rev. John Bedford, master of the grammar-school at Plymouth; and of this numerous seminary he had gained the first place before he was thirteen years old. In 1731-2 he was removed to Eton, and at the same time entered at Pembroke college, Oxford, in order to entitle him to an exhibition. After passing about sixteen months at Eton, while Dr. George was head-master, he went to college, and became a pupil of Dr. Radcliffe. On June 13, 1733, he was admitted scholar of Corpus Christi, where Dr. Burton was tutor. In 1729 he became fellow; and afterwards took the care of pupils himself as assistant to Mr. Paget, but was disappointed in his wishes of succeeding that gentleman as the college tutor, Mr. Patten being appointed by the president to that office. He was admitted to the degree of B. A. Oct. 13, 1735; to that f M. A. Feb. 10, 1738, and to that 'of B. D. April 9, 1746, as soon as his standing allowed, in order to preserve hie seniority in college. His degree of D. D. was deferred till 1750, the time of his leaving the university. In 1739 he received deacon’s orders from Dr. Wynne, bishop of Bath and Wells, and priest’s orders from Dr. Hoadly, bishop of Winchester.

, an eminent lawyer, was born at Marlborough in Wiltshire, Dec. 16, 1689. His father Michael, and his grandfather John, were attornies in that place. After attending the free-school there, Mr. Foster was matriculated at Oxford May 7, 1705, and studied about two years at Exeter college, but like many eminent men in the profession of the law, left it without taking a degree. On May 23, 1707, he was admitted into the society of the Middle Temple, and in due time was called to the bar, but not having much success as an advocate, he retired into the country, and settled in his native town. Here he contracted an intimacy with Algernon, earl of Hertford, afterwards duke of Somerset, which continued many years, and until the death of the noble duke, who by his will appointed his friend executor in trust with his son-in-law Hugh, earl (afterwards duke) of Northumberland. In 1725 he married Martha, the eldest daughter of James Lyde, esq. of Stantonwick in Somersetshire; and in a few years afterwards he removed to Bristol, where he exercised his profession with great reputation and considerable success; and in August 1735 he was chosen rer corder of the city, which office he retained many years. Soon after accepting this office in Easter term, 1736, he took on him the degree of serjeant at law. In 1720 he had published “A Letter of Advice to protestant Dissenters,” in which he is said to discover the most liberal and enlarged views; and in 1735 he published a pamphlet which engaged the public attention very much, entitled “An Examination of the scheme of Church power laid down in the Codex juris ecclesiastici Anglicani, &c.” In this he controverted the system of church power vested in the clergy, and which forms the ground-work of bishop Gibson’s “Codex.” Several answers, however, were published to Mr. Foster’s pamphlet, the principal one by Dr. Andrews, a civilian. Mr. Foster seems to have promised a continuation, in reply to him and others, but did not pursue the subject. In the postscript, however, to the third edition of his pamphlet, he adverts to “the personal severity,” with which Dr. Andrews had treated him; and adds, “It is not in my nature to make any return of that kind. I forgive him with all my heart. If, upon poor reflection, he can forgive himself, I pity him.”

, marechal de camp, grand cross of the order of St. Louis, director of the royal corps of engineers, member of the council at war and of the naval council, and free associate of the academy of sciences, was born at Paris Jan. 19, 1715. He was the son of Charles de Fourcroy, an eminent counsellor at law, and Elizabeth L'Heritier. Destined to the bar as an hereditary profession, his inclination impelled him into the paths of science, and accident led him into the corps of engineers. An officer of that corps was involved in an important law-suit, which he chose M. de Fourcroy to conduct. M. de Fourcroy directed his son to converse with the officer for the purpose of procuring every information necessary to the success of his cause; but the youth, whose thirst of science was already conspicuous, shewed less attention to the particulars of the lawsuit, than desire to be acquainted with what concerned the service of an engineer; and being informed of the preliminary studies requisite to an admission into that body, he was soon enabled to offer himself for examination.

, founder of the society of quakers, was born at Drayton, in Leicestershire, in 1624. His father was a weaver, who seems to have taken great pains in educating his son in the principles of piety and virtue. He was, at a proper age, apprenticed to a dealer in wool, and grazier, and being also employed in keeping sheep, he had many opportunities for contemplation and reflection. When he was about nineteen years of age he experienced much trouble and anxiety on observing the intemperance of some persons, professing to be religious, with whom he had gone to an inn for refreshment; and on the following night he was persuaded that a divine communication was made to him, urging him to forsake all, and devote his life to the duties of religion. He now quitted his relations, dressed himself in a leathern doublet, and wandered about from place to place. Being discovered in the metropolis, his friends persuaded him to return, and settle in some regular employment. But he did not remain with them many months; determining to embrace an itinerant mode of life. He fasted much and often, walked abroad in retired places, with no other companion but the bibje, and sometimes sat in the hollow of a tree for a day together, and walked in the fields by night, as if in a state of deep melancholy. He occasionally attended upon public teachers, but did not derive that benefit from them that he looked for: and hearing, as he supposed, a voice exclaiming, “There is one, even Christ Jesus, that canspeak to thy condition/' he forsook the usual outward means of religion; contending, that as God did not dwell in temples made with hands, so the people should receive the inward divine teaching of the Lord, and take that for their rule of life. About 1648 he felt himself called upon to propagate the opinions which he had embraced, and commenced public teacher in Manchester, and some of the neighbouring towns and villages, insisting on the certainty and efficacy of experiencing the coming of Christ in the heart, as a light to discover error, and the knowledge of one’s duty. He now made more extensive journeys, and travelled through the counties of Derby, Leicester, and Northampton, addressing the people in the market-places, and inveighing strongly against injustice, drunkenness, and the other prevalent vices of the age. About this time he apprehended that the Lord had forbidden him to take off his hat to any one; and required him to speak to the people in the language of thou and thee; that he must not bend his knee to earthly authorities; and that he must on no account take an oath. His peculiarities exposed him to much unjustifiable treatment, although it must be allowed that he sometimes provoked harsh usage by his intemperate zeal. At Derby the followers of Fox were first denominated” quakers,“as a term of reproach, either on account of the trembling accent used in the delivery of their speeches, or, because, when brought before the higher powers, they exhorted the magistrates and other persons present” to tremble at the name of the Lord." In 1655 Fox was sent prisoner to Cromwell, who contented himself with obtaining a written promise that he would not take up arms against him or the existing government; and having discussed various topics with mildness and candour, he ordered him to be set at liberty. Fox probably now felt himself bold in the cause, re-commenced his ministerial labours at London, and spent some time in vindicating his principles by means of the press, and in answering the books circulated against the society which he had founded, and which began to attract public notice in many parts of the kingdom. Notwithstanding the moderation of Cromwell towards Fox, he was perpetually subject to abuse and insult, and was frequently imprisoned and hardly used by magistrates in the country whither he felt himself bound to travel; and more than once he was obliged to solicit the interference of the Protector, to free him from the persecutions of subordinate officers. Once he wrote to Cromwell, soliciting his attention to the sufferings of his friends; and on hearing a rumour that he was about to assume the title of king, Fox solicited an audience, and remonstrated with him very freely upon the measure, as what must bring shame and ruin on himself and his posterity. He also addressed a paper to the heads and governors of the nation, on occasion of a fast appointed on. account of the persecutions of the protestants abroad, in which he embraced the opportunity that such appointment offered, of holding up, in proper colours, the impropriety and iniquity of persecution at home. The history of Fox, for several years previously to 1666, consists of details of his missions, and accounts of his repeated imprisonments. In this last-mentioned year he was liberated by order of the king, and he immediately set about forming the people who had embraced his doctrines into a compact and united body: monthly meetings were established, and other means adopted to provide for the various exigences to which they might be liable.

Mr. Fox, for some time after his going to the university, was attached to the popish religion, in which he had been brought up, but afterwards applied himself to divinity, with somewhat more fervency than circumspection; and discovered himself in favour of the reformation then going on, before he was known to those who maintained the cause, or those who were of ability to protect the maintainers of it. In order to judge of the controversies which then divided the church, his first care was to search diligently into the ancient and modern history of it; to learn its beginning, by what arts it flourished, and by what errors it began to decline; to consider the causes of those controversies and dissensions which had arisen in the churd), and to weigh attentively of what moment and consequence they were to religion. To this end he applied himself with such zeal and industry, that before he was thirty years of age, he had read over all the Greek and Latin fathers, the schoolmen, the councils, &c. and had also acquired a competent skill in the Hebrew language. But from this strict application by day and by night while at Oxford, from forsaking his friends for the most solitary retirement, which he enjoyed in Magdalen grove, from the great and visible distractions of his mind, and above all, from absenting himself from the public worship, arose suspicions of his alienation from the church; in which his enemies being soon confirmed, he was accused and condemned of heresy, expelled his college, and thought to have been favourably dealt with, that he escaped with his life. This was in 1545. Wood represents this affair somewhat differently he says in one place, that Fox resigned his fellowbliip to avoid expulsion, and in another that he was " in a manner obliged to resign his fellowship/ 1 The stigma, however, appears to have been the same, for his relations were greatly displeased at him, and afraid to countenance or protect one condemned for a capital offence; and his father-in-law basely took advantage of it to withhold his paternal estate from him, thinking probably that he, who stood in danger of the law himself, would with difficulty find relief from it. Being thus forsaken by his friends, he was reduced to great distress; when he was taken into the house of sir Thomas Lucy of Warwickshire, to be tutor to his children. Here he married a citizen’s daughter of Coventry, and continued in sir Thomas’s family, till his children were grown up; after which he spent some time with his wife’s father at Coventry. He removed to London a few years before king Henry’s death; where having neither employment nor preferment, he was again driven to great necessities and distress, but was reIjeved, according to his son’s account, in a very remarkable manner. He was sitting one day, he says, in St. Paul’s church, almost spent with long fasting, his countenance wan and pale, and his eyes hollow, when there came to him a person, whom he never remembered to have seen before, who, sitting down by him, accosted him very familiarly, and put into his hands an untold sum of money; bidding him to be of good cheer, to be careful of himself, and to use all means to prolong his life, for that in a few days new hopes were at band, and new means of subsistence. Fox tried all methods to find out the person by whom he was so seasonably relieved, but in vain; the prediction, however, was fulfilled, for within three days he was taken into the service of the duchess of Richmond, to be tutor to the children of her nephew, the celebrated earl of Surrey. Upon the commitment of this amiable nobleman and his father the duke of Norfolk to the Tower, these children were sent to be educated under the care and inspection of their unnatural aunt the duchess of Richmond.

After queen Mary’s death, which bishop Aylrner says Fox foretold at Basil the day before it happened, and Elizabeth was settled on the throne, and the protestant religion established, Fox returned to his native country, where he found a very faithful friend in his former pupil, now fourth duke of Norfolk; who maintained him at his house, and settled a pension on him, which was afterwards confirmed by his son. In 1572, when this unhappy duke of Norfolk was beheaded for his treasonable connection with Mary queen of Scotland, Mr. Fox and dean Nowell attended him upon the scaffold. Cecil also obtained for Fox, in 1563, of the queen a prebend in the church of Salisbury, though Fox himself would have declined accepting it; and though he had many powerful friends, as Walsingham, sir Francis Drake, sir Thomas Gresham, the bishops Grindal, Pilkington, Aylmer, &c. who would have raised him to considerable preferments, he declined them: being always unwilling to subscribe the canons, and disliking some ceremonies of the church. When archbishop Parker summoned the London clergy to Lambeth, and inquired of them whether they would yield conformity to the ecclesiastical habits, and testify the same by their subscriptions, the old man produced the New Testament in Greek, “To this’ (says he) will I subscribe.” And when a subscription to the canons was required of him, he refused it, saying, “I have nothing in the church save a prebend at Salisbury and much good may it do you, if you will take it away from me.” Such respect, however, did the bishops, most of them formerly his fellow exiles, bear to his age, parts, and labours, that he continued in it to his death. But though Fox was a non-conformist, he was a very moderate one, and highly disapproved of the intemperance of the rigid puritans. He expresses himself to the following effect in a Latin letter, written on the expulsion of his son by the puritans from 'Magdalen-college, on the groundless imputation of his having turned papist; in which are the following passages. “I confess it has always been my great care, if I could not be serviceable to many persons, yet not knowingly to injure any one, and least of all those of Magdalen college. I cannot therefore but the more wonder at the turbulent genius, which inspires those factious puritans, so that violating the laws of gratitude, despising my letters and prayers, disregarding the intercession of the president himself (Dr. Humphreys), without any previous admonition, or assigning any cause, they have exercised so great tyranny against me and my son; were I one, who like them would be violently outrageous against bishops and. archbishops, or join myself with them, that is, would become mad, as they are, I had not met with this severe treatment. Now because, quite different from them, I have chosen the side of modesty and public tranquillity; hence the hatred, they have a long time conceived against me, is at last grown to this degree of bitterness. As this is the case, 1 do not so much ask you what you will do on my account, as what is to be thought of for your sakes: you who are prelates of the church again and again consider. As to myself, though the taking away the fellowship from my son is a great affliction to me, yet because this is only a private concern, I bear it with more moderation: I am much more concerned upon account of the church, which is public. I perceive a certain race of men rising up, who, if they should increase and gather strength in this kingdom, I am sorry to say what disturbance I foresee must follow from it. Your prudence is not ignorant how much the Christian religion formerly suffered by the dissimulation and hypocrisy of the monks. At present in these men I know not what sort of new monks seems to revive; so much more pernicious than the former, as with more subtle artifices of deceiving, under pretence of perfection, like stage-players who only act a part, they conceal a more dangerous poison; who while they require every thing to be formed according to their own `strict discipline' and conscience, will not desist until they have brought all things into Jewish bondage.” Conformably to these sentiments, he expresses himself on many other occasions, in which he had no private interest, and the two succeeding reigns proved that he had not judged rashly of the violent tempers and designs of some of the puritans. Those, however, who detest their proceedings against the son of a man who had done so much for the reformation, will be pleased to hear that he was restored to his fellowship a second time, by the queen’s mandate.

This appears to be the last of his public acts. During the reign of Henry VII. he enjoyed the unlimited favour and confidence of his sovereign, and bore a conspicuous share, not only in the political measures, but even in the court amusements and ceremonies of that reign. Henry likewise appointed him one of his executors, and recommended him strongly to his son and successor. But although he‘ retained his seat in the privy-council, and continued to hold the privy-seal, his influence in the new reign’ gradually abated. Howard, earl of Surrey and lord treasurer, had been his rival in Henry the Seventh’s time, and learned now to accommodate himself to the extravagant passions of his new master, with whom he was for a considerable time a confidential favourite; and the celebrated Wolsey, who had been introduced to the king by Fox, in order to counteract the influence of Surrey, soon became more powerful than either. After remaining some time in office, under many mortifications, our prelate, together with archbishop Warham, retired from court in 1515. Such was the political life of bishop Fox, distinguished by high influence and talent, but embittered at length, by the common intrigues and vicissitudes to which statesmen are subject.

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

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

king of France, surnamed “the Great, and the restorer of learning,” succeeded his father-in-law Louis XII. who died without a son in 1515. Francis I. was the only son of Charles duke of Orleans, constable of AngoulSroe, and born at Cognac, September 12, 1494. Immediately after his coronation he took the title of cluke of Milan, and put himself at the head of a powerful army to assert his right to that duchy. The Swiss, who defended it, opposed his enterprize, and attacked him. near Marignana; but they were cut to pieces in a sanguinary contest, and about 15,000 left dead on the field. The famous Trivulce, who had been engaged in eighteen battles, called this “The battle of the Giants,” and the others “Children’s play.” It was on this occasion that the king desired to be knighted by the famous Bayard. That rank was originally the highest that could be aspired to: princes of the blood were not called monseigneur, nor their wives madaine, till they had been knighted; nor might any one claim that honour, unless he could trace his nobility at least three generations back, both on his father’s and mother’s side, and also bore an unblemished character, especially for military courage and valour. The creation of a knight was attended with few ceremonies, except at some festivals, inwhich case a great number were observed. This institution, which may be traced up to the first race, contributed not a little to polish the minds of the French, by restraining them within the bounds of a benevolent morality. They swore to spare neither life or fortune in defence of religion, in fighting against the infidels, and in protecting the widow, the orphan, and all who were defenceless. By this victory at Marignana, Francis I. became master of the Milanese, which was ceded to him by Maximilian Sforza, who then retired into France. Pope Leo X. alarmed by these conquests, held a conference with the king at Bologna, obtained from him the abolition of the Pragmatic Sanction, and settled the Concordate, which was confirmed the year following in the Latcran council. From that time the kings of France appointed to all consistorial benefices, and the pope received one year’s income upon every change. The treaty of N.oyon was concluded the same year between Charles V. and Francis I. one principal article or' which was the restoration of Navarre. Charles V. on the death of Maximilian I. being elected emperor, 1519, in opposition to Francis, the jealousy which subsisted between those two princes broke out immediately, and kindled a long war, which proved fatal to all Europe. The French, commanded by Andrew de Foix, conquered Navarre in 1520, and lost it again almost directly; they drove the English and Imperialists from Picardy; took Hesdin, Fontarabia, and several other places; but lost Milan and Tournay in 1521. The following year, Odet de Foix, viscount of Lautrec, was defeated at the bloody battle of Bicoque, which was followed by the loss of Cremona, Genoa, and a great part of Italy. Nor did their misfortunes end here. The constable of Bourbon, persecuted by the duchess of Angouleme, joined the emperor 1523, and, being appointed commander of his forces in 1524, defeated admiral Bonevet’s rear at the retreat of Rebec, and retook all the Milanese. He afterwards entered Provence with a powerful army, but was obliged to raise the siege of Marseilles, and retired with loss. Francis I. however, went into Italy, retook Milan, and was going to besiege Pavia; but, having imprudently detached part of his troops to send them to Nappies, he was defeated by the constable de Bpurbon in a bloody battle before Pavia, February 24, 1525, after, having two horses killed under him, and displaying prodigious valour. His greatness of mind never appeared more conspicuously than after this unfortunate engagement. In a letter to his mother he says, “Every thing is lost but honour.” He was conducted as a prisoner to Madrid, and returned the following year, after the treaty which was concluded in that city, January 14, 1526. This treaty, extorted by force, was not fulfilled; the emperor had insisted on the duchy of Burgundy being ceded to him but, when Lannoi went to demand it in his master’s name, he was introduced to anaudience given to the deputies of Burgundy, who declared to the king, that he had no power to give up any province of his kingdom. Upon this the war re-commenced immediately. Francis I. sent forces into Italy, under the command of Lautrec, who rescued Clement VII. and at first gained great adVantages, but perished afterwards, with his army, by sickness. The king, who had been some years a widower, concluded the treaty of Cambray in 1529, by which he engaged to marry Eleanor of Austria, the emperor’s sister; and his two sons, who had been given as hostages, were Ransomed at the king’s return for two millions in gold. The ambition of possessing Milan, caused peace again to be broken. Francis took Savoy in 1535, drove the emperor from Provence in 153G, entered into an alliance with 8olyman II. emperor of the Turks; took Hesdin, and seyeral other places, in 1537, and made a truce of ten years with Charles V. at Nice, 1538, which did not, however, Jast long. The emperor, going to punish the people of Ghent, who had rebelled, obtained a passage through France, by promising Francis the investiture of the duchy of Milan for which of his children he pleased; but. after being received in France with the highest honours in 1539, he was no sooner arrived in Flanders than he refused to keep his promise. This broke the truce; the war was renewed, and carried on with various success on both sides. The king’s troops entered Italy, Roussillorr, and Luxemburg. Francis of Bourbon, comte d‘Enguien, won the battle of Cerizoles in 154*, and took Montferrat. Francis I. gained over to his side Barbarossa, and Gustavus Vasa, Icing of Sweden; while, on the other hand, Henry VIII. of England espoused the interests of Charles V. and took Bologna, ’1544. A peace was at last concluded with he emperor at Cressy, September 18, 1544, and with Henry VIII. June 7, 154fi; but Francis did not long enjoy the tranquillity which this peace procured him; he died at the castle of Rambouillet the last day of March, 1547, aged fifty-three. This prince possessed the most shining qualities: he was witty, mild, magnanimous, generous, and benevolent. The revival of polite literature in Europe was chiefly owing to his care; he patronized the learned, founded the royal college at Paris, furnished a library at Fountainbleau at a great expence, and built several palaces, which he ornamented with pictures, statues, and costly furniture. When dying, he particularly requested his son to dimiuish the taxes which he had been obliged to levy for defraying the expences of the war; and put it in his power to do so, for he left 400,000 crowns of gold in his coffers, with a quarter of his revenues which was then due. It was this sovereign who ordered all public acts to "be written in French. Upon the whole he appears to have been one of the greatest ornaments of the French throne.

, an English clergyman, and the able translator of Horace and Demosthenes, was of Irish extraction, if not born in that kingdom, where his father was a dignified clergyman, and, among other preferments, held the rectory of St. Mary, Dublin, from which he was ejected by the court on account of his Tory principles. His son, our author, was also educated for the church, and obtained a doctor’s degree. His edition of “Horace” made his name known in England about 1743, and raised him a reputation as a classical editor and translator, which no subsequent attempts have greatly diminished. Dr. Johnson, many years after other rivals had started, gave him this praise: “The lyrical part of Horace never can be properly translated; so much of the excellence is in the numbers and the expression. Francis has done it the best: I'll take his, five out of six, against them all.”

Some time after the publication of Horace, he appears to have come over to England, where, in 1753, he published a translation of part of the “Orations of Demosthenes,” intending to comprise the whole in two quarto volumes. It was a matter of some importance at that time to risk a large work of this kind, and the author had the precaution therefore to secure a copious list of subscribers. Unfortunately, however, it had to contend with the acknowledged merit of Leland’s translation, and, allowing their respective merits to have been nearly equal, Leland’s had at least the priority in point of time, and upon comparison, was preferred by the critics, as being more free and eloquent, and less literally exact. This, however, did not arise from any defect in our author’s skill, but was merely an error, if an error at all, in judgment; for he conceived, that as few liberties as possible ought to be taken with the style of his author, and that there was an essential difference between a literal translation, which only he considered as faithful, and an imitation, in which we can never be certain that we have the author’s words or precise meaning. Jn 1755 he completed his purpose in a second volume, which was applauded as a difficult work well executed, and acceptable to every friend of genius and literature; but its success was by no means correspondent to the wishes of the author or of his friends. The year before the first volume of his “Demosthenes” appeared, he determined to attempt the drama, and his first essay was a tragedy entitled “Eugenia.” This is profesedly an adaptation of the French “Cenie” to English feelings and habits, hut it had not much success on the stage. Lord Chesterfield, in one of his letters to his Son, observes that he did not think it would have succeeded so well, considering how long our British audiences had been accustomed to murder, racks, and poison in every tragedy; yet it affected the heart so much, that it triumphed over habit and prejudice. In a subsequent letter, he says that the boxes were crowded till the sixth night, when the pit and gallery were totally deserted, and it was dropped. Distress without death, he repeats, was not sufficient to arlect a true British audience, so long accustomed to daggers, racks, and bowls of poison; contrary to Horace’s rule, they desire to see Medea murder her children on the stage. The sentiments were too delicate to move them; and their hearts were to be taken by storm, not by parley. In 1754, Mr. Francis brought out another tragedy at Cuvent-garden theatre, entitled “Constantino,” which was equilly unsuccessful, but appears to have suffered principally by the improper distribution of the parts among the actors. This he alludes to, in the dedication to lord Chesterfield, with whom he appears to have been acquainted, and intimates at the same time that these disappointments bad induced him to take leave of the stage.

Franck was a member of several learned societies, and was ennobled by the emperor Leopold in 1692, and in 1693 was created count palatine, by the title of “De Franckenau.” His principal works are, 1. “Institutionum Medicarum Synopsis,” Heidelberg, 1672. 2. “Lexicon Vegetabilium usualium,” Argentorati, T672. This was re-published several times. In the edition of Leipsic, 161)8, the title of “Flora Francica” was given to it. 3, ?' Bona nova Anatomica,“Heidelberg, 1680. 4.” Parva Bibliotheca Zootomica,“ibid. 1680. 5.” De caVumniis in Medicos et Medicinam,“ibid. 1686. 6. * De Medicis Philologis,” Wittebergse, 1691. 7. “De palingenesis, five resuscitatione artiBciali planlarum, hominum, et amuialiuiii, e sure cineribus, liber singularis,” Hala-, 1717, edited by Nehring. 8. “Satyra; Medictc XX.” Leipsic, 1722. These pieces, which had begun to appear in 1673, were published by his son, George Frederic Franck, whp was also a teacher of medicine at Wittemberg, and wrote several works qn botany and physip.

In 1755, general Braddock, with some regiments of regular troops and provincial levies, was sent to dispossess the French of the posts upon which they had seized in the back settlements. After the men were all ready, a- difficulty occurred, which had nearly prevented the expedition this was the want of waggons. Franklin now step-: ped forward, and, with the assistance of his son, in a little time procured 150. After the defeat of Braddock, Franklin introduced into the assembly a bill for organizing a militia, and had the dexterity to get it passed. In consequence of this act, a very respectable militia was formed; and Franklin was appointed colonel of a regiment in Philadelphia, which consisted of 1200 men; in which capacity he acquitted himself with much propriety, and was of singular service, though this militia was soon after disbanded by order of the English ministry.

, of the ancient family of Fregoso, was the son of Peter Fregoso, who was elected doge of Genoa in 1450, and arrived himself at that honour in Nov. 1473. His arbitrary conduct, however, assisted the ambitious designs of his uncle Paul, archbishop of Genoa, who procured him to be deposed in 1483, and himself to be elected in his stead. Baptist was then banished to Tregui. When he died is not known. He amused himself in his exile by writing various works, among which was a collection of “Memorable Actions and Sayings,” addressed to his son Peter, and containing some particulars of his own life. Vossius has improperly classed him among Latin historians, on account of this work, which was written in Italian, but he had probably seen only Ghilini’s translation, published under the title “Batistte Fulgosi de dictis factisque memorabilibus collectanea a Camillo Ghilino Latina facta, libri novem,” Milan, 1508, fol. and often reprinted at Paris, Basil, Antwerp, &c. in 8vo. The best editions are those of Paris, 1578, and 1585, 8vo, which have additions by Gaillard. Fregoso also wrote “La vita di Martino V.” pope, bnt it tioes not appear whether it was published; and *' De Foeminis quae doctrina excelluerunt,“which appears to have been taken from his” Dicta,“and inserted in a collection respecting learned ladies by Ravisius Textor, Paris, 1521, fol. The only remaining publication of his was a treatise against love, entitled” Anteros." This is one of the earliest printed books, bearing date Milan, 1496, according to Clement, but Niceron says 1469.

Dr. Freind, in his last will, dated March 12, 1727, directs all his pictures to be sold (except those of his wife, his son, the bishop of Rochester and his son, and his own brother). He gives 100l. a year to his brother William, and lOOOl. to Christ Church, Oxford, to found an anatomical lecture. The greater part of his fortune he bequeathed to his nephew William, son to his brother Robert. His widow died in Sept, 1737. The manor of Hitcham was purchased by the Freinds in 1700, and continued in that family until the death of Robert Freind, e*q. Jan. 26, 1780, soon after which it was purchased by the present lord Grenville, who has a house in that neighbourhood.

, eldest brother of the preceding, was born in 16'67, and admitted in 1680 at Westminster school, whence he was elected to Christ Church, Oxford, in. 1686. While a student there he wrote some good verses on the inauguration of king William and queen Mary, which were printed in the Oxford collection. In, the celebrated dispute between Bentley and Boyle, Mr. Freind was a warm partizan for the honour of his college, but was eventually more lucky with Bentley than his brother, Dr. John. A neice of our author’s was married to a son of Dr. Bentley, who, after that event, conceived a better opinion of the Christ Church men, and declared that “Freind had more good learning in him than ever he had imagined.” Mr. Freind proceeded M. A. June I, 1693, became second master of Westminster school in 1699, and accumulated the degrees of B. and D. D. July 7, 1709. In 1711 he published a sermon preached before the house of commons, Jan. 30, 1710-11, and in the same year he succeeded Duke, the poet, in the valuable living of Witney, in Oxfordshire; became head master of Westminster school, and is said either to have drawn up, or to have revised the preamble to the earl of Oxford’s patent of peerage. In March 1723, the day after his brother, Dr. John, was committed to the Tower, he caused much speculation in Westminster school and its vicinity, by giving for a theme, tf Frater, ne desere Fratrem.“In 1724 he published Cicero’s” Orator,“and in 1728 Mr. Bowyer, the celebrated printer, was indebted to him for the Westminster verses on the coronation of George II. In April 1729, Dr. Freind obtained a canonry of Windsor, which in 173l i he exchanged for a prebend of Westminster, and in 1733 he quitted Westminster school. In 1734 he was desirous of resigning Witney to his son (afterwards dean of Canterbury); but could not do it without the permission of bishop Hoadly, which he had little reason to expect. On application, however, to that prelate, through queen Caroline and lady Sundon, he received this laconic answer,” If Dr. Freind can ask it, I can grant it." Dr. Freind’s letters to lady Sundon are still existing, and prove that he had as little scruple in asking, as bishop Hoadly had in flattering a lady, who, by her influence with queen Caroline, became for a considerable time the sole arbitress of churchpreferments. In 1744 Dr. Freind resigned his stall at Westminster in favour of his son, and died August 9, 1751. By Jane his wife, one of the two daughters of Dr. Samuel Delangle, a prebendary of Westminster, he had two sons, Charles, who died in 1736, and William, his successor at Witney, and afterwards dean of Canterbury.

Dr. Freind wrote a good deal of poetry, Latin and English, the former thought preferable. His various pieces are inserted in Mr. Nichols’s collection. He was a man of unquestionable learning, but held in less estimation than his brother the physician, on the score of personal character. His son, Dr. William Freind, dean of Canterbury, some particulars of whom may be found in our authority, died in 1766.

, a learned physician, was born at Nieder Wesel, in the duchy of Cleves, Oct. 30, 1581 but his relations being compelled, by the troubles of the times, to retire to Osnaburg, he began his classical studies there. He was afterwards sent to Cologne, Wesel, and Helmstadt; but his disposition being early turned to medicine, as a profession, he studied at Rostock, afterwards returned to Helmstadt to attend the lectures of Duncan Liddell and of Francis Parcovius; he likewise derived much advantage from the lectures of the celebrated Meibomius, in whose house he resided in the capacity of tutor to his son, and was soon thought fit to give private lectures to the younger students on the practice of physic. He afterwards lectured in public as professor extraordinary; and in 1604, at the age of twenty-three, he obtained the ordinary professorship in the university, which office he filled during four years. He then took his degree of doctor, and went to the court of Philip Sigismund, duke of Brunswick Lunenburg, and bishop of Osnaburg, who had appointed him his principal physician. About 1622, Ernest, duke of Holstein and earl of Schawenburg, offered him the same office, with the addition of the chief medical professorship in the university which he had lately founded at Rinteln; but his patron would not permit him. to accept it. This prince-bishop dying in 1623, his nephew, duke Frederic Ulric, gave Freitag the option of being his chief physician, or of resuming his professorship at Helmstadt. He con*­tinued at Osnaburg, where the new bishop retained him as his physician, and also appointed him one of his chamberlains. He also served his successor in the same capacity, but was dismissed in 1631, on account of his refusal to become a catholic. He found protection and patronage, however, under Ernest Cassimir, count of Nassau, and. the counts of Bettheim, who procured for him the vacant professorship in the university of Groningen. He fulfilled this new appointment with great reputation, and continued to distinguish himself by the success of his practice till the decline of his life, which was accelerated by a complication of maladies. Dropsy, gout, gravel, aud fever, terminated his life Feb. 8, 1641.

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

, or probably Frazer, (Amadeus Francis), was born at Chamberri, 1682, descended from a distinguished family of the robe, originally of Scotland. He was intended for the office of magistrate, but his family, in compliance with his inclination, permitted him to go into the military service, from which he entered the corps of engineer! in 1707. He was sent by the court, in 1711, to examine the Spanish colonies at Peru and Chili; and employed his talents for fortifications at St. Malo, at St. Domingo 1719, and at Landau 1728, in which year he also received the cross of St. Louis, and married. Frezier was afterwards employed in Bretany, but rose no higher than the rank of lieutenant-colonel, the various commissions in which he had been engaged having prevented his being present at more than two sieges; and the number of sieges at which the officers of engineers have been present, are the steps by which they rise to superior stations. He died October 16, 1772, leaving two daughters married, and a grandson, his son’s child. This son died before Frezier, on board a king’s ship, in the storm of 1768, which sunk him with all his property. His works are, “Tr. des Feux d‘ Artifice/’ 1747, 8vo.” Voyage de la Mer du Sud,“1716, 4to.” Theorie et Pratique de la Coupe des Pierres et des Bois,“Strasburg, 1769, 3 vols. 4 to; an abridgment of this work, by the title of” Eleinens de Stereotomie," Paris, 1759, 2 vols. 8vo.

A great number of valuable authors were printed by Frobenius with great care and accuracy, among which were the works of Jerome, Augustin, and Erasmus. He had formed a design to print the Greek fathers, which had not yet been done; but death prevented him. That work, however, was carried on by his son Jerome Frobenius and his son-in-law Nicolas Episcopius, who, joining in partnership, carried on the business with the same reputation, and gave very correct editions of those fathers.

The time of the death of Froissart has not been decided by his biographers. He relates some events of the year 1400, and by some is thought to have lived considerably beyond that period, but nothing certain can be affirmed. He probably ended his days ii> his own chapter, and was interred in tlje chapel of St. Anne in the coHegiate church. Although he was the author of 30,000 verses, his poetical character is forgotten, and he is now celebrated, and most justly, as a historian. His Chronicle, which is divided into four books, comprehends the period between 1326 and 1400, and relates the events which took place not only hi France, btrt in Flanders, Scotland, and Ireland, with numerous details respecting the papal courts of Rome and Avignon, and collateral particulars of the transactions in the rest of Europe, in Turkey, and even in Africa. His reputation stands high as a faithful and diligent narrator of what he saw and heard. By the French he has been charged with gross partiality towards the English; they bring against him the crime of making Edward, and his son, the Black Prince, the heroes of his history. But it tfannot be denied that they were the heroes of the age in which they flourished, and therefore an impartial historian was obliged to represent them in their true colours, and to make them the teading characters of the day. Mr. Johnes-, to whom the public is indebted for an admirable edition of Froissart’s Chronicles, has successfully vindicated the character of the historian from the charge of partiaFrty: throughout the whole work, he says, there is an evident disposition to give praise to valour on whatever side it was employed. The historian mourns over the death of each valiant knight, exults in the success of every hardy enterprize, and seems carried away almost by his chivalrous feelings, independently of party considerations. Till the publication of Mr. Johnes’s translation, the best edition of the “Chronicles” was that of Lyons in four volumes folio, 1559; and Mr. Johnes has since gratified the public wish by an equally accurate and well illustrated edition of Froissart’s continuator, Monstrelet.

Some botanical remarks of Fuchs, relating principally to the Arabian writers, are found in the 2d volume of the “Herbarium” of Brunfelsius. But the work on which his reputation in this study chit-fly rests, is his “Historia Plantarum,” published at Basil in 1542, fol. with numerous wooden cuts. A German edition appeared the following year. In this work he chiefly copies Dioscorides, adding a few remarks of his own, and falling, as Haller observes, into the common error of the writers of his* time, who expected to find in their own cold countries the plants of those more genial climates where the ancients studied botany and medicine. The publication of Fuchs, though nearly on a par with those of other learned men of his time, would probably have been long since forgotten, were it not for the transcendant merit of its wooden cuts, inferior to those of Brunfelsius alone in execution, and far exceeding them in number. They chiefly indeed consist of pharmaceutical plants, which though mere outlines, are justly celebrated for their fidejity and elegance. These original editions are become very rare; but copies and translations of them, various in merit, are common throughout Europe. Amongst the poorest of these is a French duodecimo* printed at Lyons, under the title of Le Benefice Commun, in 1355, for which our author is certainly not responsible, and it is ralher hard in Linnæus to class him, on account of some such spurious editions, under the heads of monstrosi aud rudes in his “Bibliotheca Botanica,” though indeed he there properly stands amongst the usitatissimi with respect to h>s original edition. By some of his writings, especially his “Cornarus furens,” published in 1545, against Cornarus, who had attacked his “Historia Plantarum” in a work entitled “Vulpecula excoriata,” he appears to have been vehement in controversy, but in his general character and deportment he is said to have been dignified and amiable, with a fine manly person, and a clear sonorous voice. His piety y temperance, and indefatigable desire to be useful, were alike exemplary. As a lecturer he was peculiarly admired and followed, especially in his anatomical courses. The famous Vesalius was present at one of his lectures, in which he found himself criticized. He afterwards familiarly addressed the professor, saying, “why do you attack me who never injured you?” “Are you Vesalius” exclaimed Fuchs. “You see him before you,” replied the former. On which great mutual congratulations ensued, and a strict friendship wag formed between these learned men. Fuchs was so famous throughout Europe, that the great Cosmo duke of Tuscany invited him, with the offer of a salary of 600 crowns, to become professor of medicine at Pisa, which he declined. The emperor Charles V. also bore testimony to his merit, by sending him letters with the insignia of nobility, which honour also Fuchs for some time declined. He was indifferent to money, as well as to all other than literary fame. His great ambition was, whenever he undertook in his turn the rectorship of the university, to promote good order, industry, and improvement among the students, whom he governed with paternal assiduity and affection. Two colleges were always under his immediate care, one of them founded by duke Ulrie for students of divinity alone, and more amply endowed by his son and successor.

Fuessli’s talents and reputation procured him the friendship of the greatest artists of his time, and Mengs sent him his treatise “on the beautiful,” which he published with a preface. Winkelmann, especially, lived in great intimacy with him. His taste for poetry also procured him the ao quaintance and correspondence of Keist, Klopstock, Wieland, Bodmer, and Breitinguer, nor was he less respected by many persons of the first distinction in rank, and his house was frequented by all the literati of his time, whom he delighted by his conversation-talents. Nor was he inconsiderable as a patron of the arts. He gave lessons gratis to many young persons, and made collections to assist them in their studies and travels, employing his interest with the great only for the benefit of genius and talents. In 1740 and 1742 he had the misfortune to lose his two friends Kupezki and Rugendas, both whose lives he wrote, and this employment seems to have suggested to him “The Lives of the Artists of Switzerland,” which he wrote with great elegance and critical discrimination. He published also a “Catalogue raisonne” of the best Engravings.“His own collection was uncommonly rich in the finest specimens of that art. Of his paintings, his son appeals to the series of consular portraits, which he painted after his return to Zurich, engraved in mezzotinto by Preisler and others, as a fair test of his style and tasteHe died at Zurich, May 6, 1781. His lives of Rugendas and Kupezki were published at Zurich in 1758; his Swiss Artists in 5 vols. 1769 1779; and his Catalogue of Engravers and their works, in 1770. Besides these he published” Winkelmann’s Letters to his friends in Switzerland,“1778, and Mengs” On Beauty," in 1770.

, an ecclesiastical writer, was borti at Telepta, or Tellepte, about the year 468. He was of an illustrious family, the son of Claudius, and grandson of Gordianus, a senator of Carthage. Claudius dying early, left his son, then very young, to the care of his widow Mariana. He was properly educated in the knowledge of the Latin and Greek languages, and made such progress in his studies, that while yet a boy he could repeat all Homer, and spoke Greek with fluency and purity. As soon as he was capable of an employment he was made procurator or receiver of the revenues of his province. But this situation displeased him, because of the rigour he was forced to use in levying taxes; and therefore, notwithstanding the tears and dissuasions of his mother, he left the world, and took the monastic vows under Faustus, a bishop persecuted by the Arian faction, who had founded a monastery in that neighbourhood. The continued persecutions of the Arians soon separated him and Faustus; and not long after, the incursions of the Moors obliged him to retire into the country of Sicca, where he was whipped and imprisoned. Afterwards he resolved to go into Egypt; but in his voyage was dissuaded by Eulalius bishop of Syracuse, because the monks of the East had separated from the catholic church. He consulted also a bishop of Africa, who had retired into Sicily; and this bishop advised him to return to his own country, after he had made a journey to Rome. King Theodoric was in that city when he arrived there, which was in the year 500. After he had visited the sepulchres of the apostles he returned to his own country, where he built a monastery.

Africa was then under the dominion of Thrasitnond king of the Vandals, an Arian, and a cruel enemy to the catholics. He had forbidden to ordain catholic bishops in. the room of those who died: but the bishops of Africa were determined not to obey an order which threatened the extinction of orthodoxy. Fulgentius, under these circumstances, wished to avoid being a bishop; and when elected for the see of Vinta in the year 507, fled and concealed himself, but being soon discovered, was appointed bishop of Ruspae much against his will. On this elevation he did not change either his habit or manner of living, but uspd. the same austerities and abstinence as before. He still loved the monks, and delighted to retire into a monastery as often as the business of his episcopal function allowed him time. Afterwards he had the same fate with about two hundred and twenty catholic bishops of Africa, whom. Thrasimond banished into the island of Sardinia; and though he was not the oldest among them, yet they paid such respect to his learning, as to employ his pen in all the writings produced in the name of their body. So great was his reputation, that Thrasimond had a curiosity to see and hear him; and having sent for him to Carthage, he proposed to him many difficulties, which Fulgentius solved to his satisfaction: but because he confirmed the catholics, and converted many Arians, their bishop at Carthage prayed the king to send, him back to Sardinia. Thrasimond dying about the year 523, his son Hilderic recalled the catholic bishops, of whom Fulgentius was one. He returned, to the great joy of those who were concerned with him, led a most exemplary life, governed his clergy well, and performed all the offices of a good bishop. He died in the year 533, on the first day of the year, being then sixty- five.

It was sufficiently known how steady he was in the interests of the church of England, against the innovations of the presbyterians and independents; but his zeal against these was mixed with greater compassion than it was towards the papists: and this raised him up many adversaries, who charged him with puritanism. He used to call the controversies concerning episcopacy, and the newfangled arguments against the church of England, “insects of a day;” and carefully avoided polemical disputes, being altogether of sir Henry Wotton’s opinion, “disputandi pruritus, ecclesise scabies.” The fact was, that he loved pious and good men of all denominations, and it is this candour which has given a value to his works superior to those of his opponents. For the many errors which occur in his histories, it is surely easy to find an apology in this single circumstance, that the whole of them were compiled and published within about twenty years, during which he was obliged to remove from place to place in quest of literary leisure, and freedom from the cruel severities of the times. His “Church History* 1 is the most incorrect of all his works, and Strype has pointed out a great many errors in the transcription of historical documents, to which perhaps Fuller had not the easiest access. His” Worthies" was a posthumous publication, by his Son, and although less perfect than he could have made it, had his life been spared a few years longer, with the opportunities which the return of peace might have afforded, yet it contains many interesting memorials; and he was the second (see Samuel Clarke) who published what may be called English biography. This work has for many years been rising in price and- estimation, and the public has lately been gratified by a new edition, in 2 vols. 4to, edited by Mr. Nichols, with many improvements and additions, from the communications of his literary friends.

, an English physician, but perhaps better known for a very useful work on morals, was born June 24, 1654, and was educated at Queen’s college, Cambridge, where he took his degrees in medicine, that of M. B. in 1676, and that of M. D. in 1681. He does not appear to have been a member of the college of physicians of London, but settled at Sevenoak in Kent, where he was greatly esteemed. He was a great benefactor to the poor, and a zealous assertor of their rights, having, not long before his death, prosecuted the managers of a considerable charity given to the inhabitants of that town by sir William Senoke (a foundling of the place, and in 1418 lord mayor of London) and obliged them to produce their accounts in chancery, and to be subject for the future to an annual election. Here Dr. Fuller died, Sept. 17, 1734. The moral work which he published was entitled “Introductio ad prudentiam; or directions, counsels and cautions, tending to prudent management of affairs of common life,” 1727, 12mo, compiled for the use of his son. To this he added, what may be reckoned a second volume, with the title of “Introductio, &c.; or the art of right thinking, assisted and improved by such notions as men of sense and experience have left us in their writings, in order to eradicate error, and plant knowledge,” 1731-2, 12mo. His medical works were, 1. “Pharmacopreia extemporanea,” 1702 and 1714, 8vo. 2. “Pharmacopoeia Bateana,” 1718, 12mo. 3.“Pharmacopoeia Domestica,” 1723, 8vo, 4.“Of eruptive fevers, measles, and small-pox,” 1730, 4to. There is another work entitled “Medici na Gymnastica,” which has been sometimes attributed to him, but was written by a Francis Fuller, M. A. of St. John’s college, Cambridge, and published in 1704.

Furietti collected and published at Rome the works of the celebrated Caspar Barziza of Bergamo, and of his son Guiniforte, most of which were never before printed, in a handsome 4to vol. 1723, with a learned preface and life. He published, likewise, at Bergamo in 1752, a fine edition of the poems of Fontana; but what obtained him most reputation among scholars and antiquaries, was his treatise on the Mosaic art of painting, entitled “De Musivis, vel pictoriae Mosaicse artis origine, progressu, &c.” Home, 1752, 4to. In this he describes a rare specimen of Mosaic which he discovered in 1737 in the ruins of Adrian, and which, according to him, is mentioned by Pliny, as being the work of the celebrated artist Sosius. This exquisite specimen, with the centaurs belonging to Furietti, was purchased after his death by pope Clement XIII. for 14,000 Roman crowns, and deposited in the museum.

, surnamed Cceriolanus, was a native of Valentia in Spain, and flourished in the sixteenth century. He studied at Paris under Talaeus, Tiirnebus, and Ramus, and afterwards came to lx>uvain, where he published a treatise “On Rhetoric,” and another in which he asserted that the scriptures ought to be translated into the vulgar tongue. It was entitled “Bononia,” sive de libris sacris in vernaculam linguam convertendis, &c.“Basil, 1556, 8vo. It was written, however, upon too liberal principles for the council of Trent, and was accordingly inserted in their” Index Expurgatorius.“It otherwise would have brought him into trouble if he had not found a protector in the emperor Charles V. who was informed of his learning, piety, and candour. This monarch sent him. into the Netherlands, and placed him with his son Philip, who made him his historian. Furius remained with this prince during his life, and having accompanied him to the states of Arragon, died at Valladolid in 1592. He appears to have employed his utmost endeavours in order to pacify the troubles in the Netherlands. He wrote another work” Del Conseio y Gonseiero," which was much esteemed, and twice translated into Latin, 1618 and 1663, 8vo.

, an eminent royal architect of France, built the palace at Choisy, and undertook the royal bridge at Paris, but died in 1686, before he had completed this work, which was finished by his son James and Frere Romain. James was born at Paris 1667, became a pupil of the celebrated Mansart, and acquired so great a reputation as to be appointed overseer- general of buildings, gardens, arts and manufactures first architect and engineer of bridges and banks through the kingdom, and knight of St. Michael. He planned the common sewer, and many public buildings, among which are the hotel de Ville, and the presidial court of Paris, &c. He died in that city 1742, leaving a son, first architect to the king, who long supported the reputation of his ancestors, and died in 1782.

, a learned divine, and an eminent preacher among the baptists, was born May 26, 1680, at London. His father was a citizen of good repute; and observing the natural turn of his son to be from his infancy grave and composed, he resolved to breed him for the ministry. He spared no cost jn his education, and the boy’s diligence was such, that, both in school and out of school, heapplied attentively to his learning, and became not only master of the Latin and Greek, but of the Hebrew language, at the age of seventeen; when he was sent to Ley den, to finish what he had so happily begun. Soon after his arrival there he received the news of his mother’s death, and, being sensible that this would hasten his return home, he made it a spur to his industry; and so surprisingiwas.his progress in academical learning, that he was thought. -worthy of the degrees of master of arts and doctor of philosophy in his nineteenth year, and accordingly received those honours in 1699, having performed the usual exercises with universal applause . This extraordinary testimony of his son’s merit could not fail to be very acceptable to the father; and the rector of the university communicated it, in a strong letter of commendation. Upon this occasion our author published his “Thesis,” and dedicated it to his father and his two uncles, sir John and sir Joseph Wolf; and a aioble attestation of his merit was subjoined by Adrian Ileland in a Latin panegyric.

Having possessed this dignity little more than four years and a half, he died April 8, 1702, in his 67th year, in the deanery-house, and was interred with a suitable epitaph; in the middle of the choir of his cathedral. There is a fine portrait of him in the library of Trinity-college, Cambridge, the gift of his son and there- is another at Scruton.

The works of this laborious scholar, were, 1. “Opuscula Mythologica Ethica et Physica, Gr. & Lat.” Cantab. 1671, 8vo, reprinted at Amsterdam, 1688, 8vo, with great improvements. This collection consists of Palaephatus, Hefaclitus, & Anonymus de incredibilibus Phurnutus de natura deorum Sallustius de diis Ocellus Lucanus; Timæus Locrus de anima mundi Demophili, Democratis, & Secundi philosophorum sententiae Joan n is Pediasimi desiderium de tnuliere bona et mala Sexti Pythagorei sententice Theophrasti characteres Pythagoreorum frag-, menta; & Heliodori Darisseci capita opticorum. 2. “ Historiæ Poeticæ Scriptores antiqui, Greecè & Latinè. Aecessere breves notæ, & indices necessarii,” Paris, 1675, 8vo. These are, Apollodorus Atheniensis, Conon Grammaticus, Ptolonutus Hephxstion, Parthenius Nicuensis, & Antoninus Liberalis. 3. “Rhetores Selecti, Gr. & Lat. viz. Demetrius Phalereus de Elocutione; Tiberius Rhetor de schematibus Demosthenis; Anonymu* Sophista de Rhetorica; Severi Alexandrini Ethopceisc. Demetrium emendavit, reliquos e Mss. edidit & Latine vertit, omnes notis illustravit Tho. Gale,” Oxon. 1676, 8vo. 4. “Jamblicbus Chalcidensis de Mysteriis. Epistola Porphyrii de eodem argumento, Gr. & Lat. ex versione T. G.” Oxon. 1678, 8vo. 5. “Psalterium juxta exemplar Alexandrinum,” Oxon. 1678, 8?o. 6. “Herodoti Halicarnassensis Historiarnin libri X. ejusdem narratio de vita Homeri excerpta e Ctesia, & H. Stephani Apologia pro Herodoto accedunt chronologia, tabula geographica, variantes Jectiones, &c.” Lond. 1679, fol. a most excellent edition. 7. An edition of “Cicero’s Works” was revised by him, Lond. 1681, 1684, 2 vols. fol. 8. “Histories Anglicanoe Scriptores quinque, &c.” Oxon. 1687, fol. This volume contains Annales de Margan, from 1066 to 1232. Chronicon Thomae Wikes from 1066 to 1334. Annales Waverleienses from 106t3 to 1291. G. Vinisauf Itinerarium regis Ricardi in terram Hierosolymitanam. Chronica Walteri de Hemingford, from 1066 to 1273. He reserved the remainder of this last Chronicle for another volume, which he intended to publish, but did not live to execute. Concerning this, see Hearne’s Preface to his edition of Hemingford, p. xxiii. 9. “A Discourse concerning the Original of Human Literature with Philology and Philosophy,” Phil. Trans, vol. VI. p. 2231. 10. “Historiae Britannicse, Saxonicae, AngloDanicae, Scriptores quindccim, &c.” Oxon. 1691, folio. This volume contains “Gildas de excidio Britannia-, Eddji vita VVilfridi, Nennii historia, Asserii annales, Higdeni Polychronicon, G. Malmesburiensis de antiquitate Glastoniensis ecclesiae, & libri V. de pontificibus Angliae, Histona Ramesiensis, Historia Eliensis, Chronica Joh. Wallingford, Historia Rad. Diceto, Forduni Scotichronicon, Alcuinus de pontificibus Eboracensibus.” This is called by Gale the first volume; and that which contains the Quinque Scriptores (Ingulphus, Peter Blesensis, Chron. de Mailros, Annales Burtonenses, and the Historia Croylandensis) though published in 1684 (by Mr. William Fulrnan under the patronage of Bp. Fell) is called the second, as the authors are of a more modern date. 11. A collection of “Latin Prayers,” by dean Gale, in ms. was in the possession of Dr. Ducarel. He left in ms. “Origenis Philocalia, variis manuscriptis collata, emendata, & nova versione donata” “Jamblichus de vita Pythagoras” and “Antonini Itinerarium Britannia” the latter published afterwards by his son, as were his Sermons preached on public occasions in 1704.

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

All this while the faculty persecuted him continually, insomuch that he was apprehensive of some design against his life. Under this suspicion, he retired very often to a country-house, where Commodus the emperor’s son resided. That prince was then under the tuition of Pitholaus, to whom the emperor had given orders, if his son should be taken ill, to send for Galen. This order gave him an opportunity of attending the prince in a fever, which appeared very violent on the first access. He had the good fortune to remove the disease, and the following eulogium was made by Faustina the princess: “Galen,” says she, “shews his skill by the effects of it, while other physicians give us nothing but words.” He also cured Sextus, another son of Aurelius Marcus, and predicted the success, against the opinion of all his colleagues. Thus he raised his fame above the reach of envy; and he continued not only to preserve, but increase it. The emperor, after his return from the German expedition, was suddenly seized in the night with violent pains in the bowels, which, being followed by a great flux, threw him into a fever. Next day, he took a dose of hiera picra, and another of the theriacum ; after which, the physicians who bad attended his person in the army, ordered him to be kept quiet, giving him nothing but a little broth for the space of nine hours. Galen, being called in soon after, attended with the rest, and they, upon feeling the patient’s pulse, were of opinion that he was going into an ague. The emperor, observing that Galen stood still without approaching him, asked the reason: Galen replied, that his luNe being touched twice by his physicians, he depended upon them, not duubting but they were better judges of the pulse than he was. The emperor, little satisfied with this answer, immediately held out his arm. Galen having considered the pulse with great attention, “I pronounce (says he) that we have nothing to do here with the access of an ague; but the stomach is overcharged with something that remains undigested, which is the true cause of the fever.” These words were no sooner uttered, than the prince cried out aloud, “That is the very thing, you have hit the case exactly;” and repeating the words three times, asked what must be done for his relief. “If it was the case of any other person,” replied Galen, “I should order a little pepper infused in wine, which I have often tried with success in this case; but as it is the custom to administer to sovereign princes only mild remedies, it suffices to apply hot to the stomach a piece of flannel dipped in the oil of spike.” Marcus did not neglect to make use of both these remedies; and in the issue said to Pitholaus, his son’s governor, “We have but one physician . Galen is the only valuable man of the faculty.”

, or Galeotus Martius, was born at Narni, in the pupal territory, and was for some time an instructor of youth at Bologna, but removed and kept a private school in Hungary. Being there distinguished by Matthias Corvinus, king of Hungary, he was admitted into his family, made his private secretary, and, it is supposed, presided over the education of his son John Coryinus. He was also keeper of the library at Buda. In this situation his fame reached Louis the Xlth, king of France, who invited him into that kingdom. Galeoti went accordingly to meet the king at Lyons, but Louis happening to come out of the city, they met a litjtle without the gates, and Galeoti, attempting to descend hastily to pay due honours to the king, fell, and being very fat, was so much hurt, that he died very soon 'after. In 1478, Galeoti published a collection of the bon-mots of Matthias Corvinus, “De jocose dictis ac factis regis Matt. Corvini,” inserted in the folio collection of writers on the history of Hungary. There is also by him a treatise in 4to, entitled “De nomine interiore et de corpore ejus,” and others, “De incognitis vulgo,” never printed; “De doctrina promiscua,” Lyons, 1552, 8vo, which is a miscellany of physical, medical, and astronomical questions. For some of his sentiments the monks accused him of heresy, and he had contentions with them, but he was protected by pope Sixtus IV. who had been his pupil.

He lived ten years after it, seven of which were employed in making still further discoveries with his telescope; but, by continual application to that instrument, added to the damage he received in his sight from the nocturnal air, his eyes grew gradually weaker, till, in 1639, he became totally blind. He bore this great calamity with patience and resignation, worthy of a philosopher. The loss neither broke his spirit, nor hindered the course of his studies. He supplied the defect by constant meditations, by which he prepared a large collection of materials; and began to dictate his own conceptions, when, by a distemper of three months continuance, wasting away by degrees, be expired at Arcetri near Florence , Jan. 8, 1642, in the same year that Newton was born. In stature he was small, but in aspect venerable, and his constitution vigorous; in company he was affable, free, and full of pleasantry. He took great delight in architecture and painting, and designed extremely well. He played exquisitely, on the lute; and whenever he spent any time in the country, he took great pleasure in husbandry. His learning was very extensive; and he possessed in a high degree a clearness and acuteness of wit. From the time of Archimedes, nothing had been done in mechanical geometry till Galileo, who, being possessed of an excellent judgment, and great skill in the most abstruse points of geometry, first extended the boundaries of that science, and began to reduce the resistance of solid bodies to its laws. Besides applying geometry to the doctrine of motion, by which philosophy became established on a sure foundation, he made surprising discoveries in the heavens by means of his telescope. He made the evidence of the Copernican system more sensible, when he shewed from the phases of Venus, like to those of the moon, that Venus actually revolves about the sun. He proved the rotation of the sun on his axis from his spots; and thence the diurnal rotation of the earth became more credible. The satellites that attend Jupiter in his revolution about the sun, represented, in Jupiter’s smaller system, a just image of the great solar system; and rendered it more easy to conceive how the moon might attend the earth, as a satellite, in her annual revolution. By discovering hills and cavities in the moon, and spots in the sun constantly varying, he shewed that there was not so great a difference between the celestial bodies and the earth as had been vainly imagined. He rendered no less service to science by treating, in a clear and geometrical manner, the doctrine of motion, which has justly been called the key of nature. The rational part of mechanics had been so much neglected, that hardly any improvement was made in it for almost 2000 years. But Galileo has given us fully the theory of equable motions, and of such as are uniformly accelerated or retarded, and of these two compounded together. He was the first who demonstrated that the spaces described by heavy bodies, from the beginning of their descent, are as the squares of the times; and that a body, projected in any direction not perpendicular to the horizon, describes a parabola. These were the beginnings of the doctrine of the motion of heavy bodies, which has been since carried to so great a height by Newton. In geometry, he invented the cycloid, or trochoid; though the properties of it were afterwards chiefly demonstrated by his pupil Torricelli. He invented the simple pendulum, and made use of it in his astronomical experiments he li ul also thoughts of applying it to clocks; but did not execute that design the glory of that invention was reserved for his son Vicen210, who made the experiment at Venice in 1649; and Huygens afterward carried this invention to perfection. Of Galileo’s invention also, was the machine, with which the Venetians render their Laguna fluid and navigable. He also discovered the gravity of the air, and endeavoured to compare it with that of water, besides opening up several other inquiries in natural philosophy. In short, he was rtot esteemed and followed by philosophers only, but was honoured by persons of the greatest distinction of all nations. Galileo had scholars too that were worthy of so great a master, by whom the gravitation of the atmosphere was fully established, and its varying pressure accurately and conveniently measured, by the column of quicksilver of equal weight sustained by it in the barometrical tube. The elasticity of the air, by which it perpetually endeavours to expand itself, and, while it admits of condensation, resists in proportion to its density, was a phenomenon of a new kind (the common fluids having no such property), and was of the utmost importance to philosophy. These principles opened a vast field of new and useful knowledge, and explained a great variety of phaenomena, which had been accounted for before that time in a very absurd manner. ‘ It seemed as if the air, the fluid in which men lived from the beginning, had been then but first discovered. Philosophers were every where busy inquiring into its various properties and their effects; and valuable discoveries rewarded their industry. Of the great number who distinguished themselves on this occasion, may be mentioned Torricelli and Viviani in Italy, Pascal in France, Otto Guerick in Germany,’ and Boyle in England.

, an unrivalled actor, was grandson of Mr. Garrick, a merchant in France, who, being a protestant, fled to England as an asylum, upon the revocation of the edict of Nantes in 1685; and son of Peter Garrick, who obtained a captain’s commission in the army, and generally resided at Lichfield. Peter Garrick was on a recruiting party in Hereford, when his son David was born; and, as appears by the register of All-saints in that city, baptized Feb. 28, 17^16. His mother was Arabella, daughter of Mr. dough, one, of the vicars in Lichfield cathedral. At ten years of age, he was sent to the grammar-school at Lichfield; but, though remarkable for declining puerile diversions, did not apply himself with any assiduity to his books. He had conceived an early passion for theatrical representation; and, at little more than eleven years of age, procured “The Recruiting Officer” to be acted by young gentlemen and ladies, himself performing the part of serjeat Kite. From school he went on invitation to an uncle, a wine-merchant, at Lisbon; but returning shortly to Lichfield, he was sent once more to the grammar-school, where, however, he did not make any considerable progress in learning.

His Latin works, consisting of treatises on grammar and rhetoric, orations, letters, &c. do not form the only title he has to be considered among the revivers of learning and elegant Latinity. He merited this honour also, like Aurispa and Guarino, for his ability in explaining the ancient classics, and in decyphering the manuscript copies which at that time engaged the curious researches of the learned world. His “Epistles” form an epoch in the history of French printing. When two doctors of the Sorbonne, William Fichet, and John de la Pierre, had engaged from Germany three printers, Gering, Crantz, and Friburger, to come to Paris, in 1459, a printing-press was set up in the house of the Sorbonne, and Gasparino’s “Epistles” were the first typographical production in France. The title was “Gasp. Pergamensis (Bergomensis) Epistolre,” 4to, without date, but printed in 1470. All Gasparino’s works were collected and printed by cardinal Furietti at Rome, 1725, 4to, with those of his son Guiniforte. This son was born at Pavia in 1406. He had not the same reputation for eloquence and elegance as his father; but his works shew that he had studied the ancients with equal assiduity. He lectured at Novara on Cicero’s Offices, and Terence’s comedies, when a lucky circumstance introduced him to Alphonso king of Arragon. Being admitted to address him at Barcelona, in 1432, the king was so struck with his eloquence, as immediately to appoint him one of his council, and Guiniforte in consequence had the honour to accompany him in his expedition to the coast of Africa. Falling sick, however, in Sicily, he obtained leave to return to Milan, but without any loss of the king’s respect and friendship for him. Here the duke Philip of Milan gave him the title of his vicar-general. With this he held the office of professor of moral philosophy, the duties of which were frequently interrupted by his being employed in diplomatic affairs to the courts of Arragon and Rome. After the death of Philip, his successor appointed Guiniforte to be ducal secretary, and he passed the rest of his life in that office. It is thought he died about the end of 1459.

, a very eminent mathematician and philosopher, was born Jan. 22, N. S. 1592, at a village called Chantersier, about three miles from Digne in Provence, in France. His father, Antony Gassendi, a Roman catholic, educated him with great piety, and the first words he learned to pronounce were those of his prayers. This practice made such an impression upon his infant mind, that at four years of age he demonstrated the good effects of it in reproving or exhorting his playfellows, as occasion prompted. In these first years of his youth he likewise took particular delight in gazing at the moon and stars, in clear uncloudy weather, and was so intent on these observations in solitary places, that his parents had him often to seek, not without many anxious fears. At a proper age they put him to school at Digne, to Godfrey Wendeline, an excellent master, under whose care he made a quick and extraordinary progress in learning. In a very short time he learned not only the elements of the Latin language, but was so far advanced in rhetoric as to be superior to all the boys in that school; and some friends who had witnessed his proficiency, recommended to have him removed, in order to study philosophy under Fesay, a very learned Minorite friar, then at Aix. This proposal was not much relished by his father, whose design was to breed up his son in his own way to country business, or farming, as a more profitable employment than that of a scholar, nor would he consent but upon condition that the boy should return home in two years at farthest. Young Gassendi accordingly, at the end of his allotted time, repaired to Chantersier; but he did not stay there long, being invited to be a teacher of rhetoric at Digne, before he was full sixteen years of age; and he had been engaged in this not above three years, when his master Fesay dying, he was made professor of philosophy in his room at Aix.

His extensive learning was admired by the great men abroad, as Salmasius and others, with whom he held a correspondence. Axenius styles him a man of infinite reading and exact judgment; and Colomies tells us, that of all the critics of that age, who have written for the advancement of polite learning, there is none superior to him in the talent of explaining authors. Morhoff speaks of all his Latin works with high commendation: and Baillet has a chapter concerning his writings, in which he acknowledges his profound skill in the learned languages, his great accuracy and admirable sagacity; but adds, that he was too bold in his conjectures. Gataker left several Mss. some of which were published by his son. In the course of his long life he had four wives.

, an ingenious though unsuccessful artist, who was a goldsmith in Edinburgh, deserves to be recorded for his attempt to introduce an improvement in the art of printing. The invention, first practised by Ged in 1725, was simply this. From any types of Greek or Roman, or any other character, he formed a plate for every page, or sheet, of a book, from which he printed, instead of using a type for every letter, as is done in the common way. This was first practised on blocks of wood, by the Chinese and Japanese, and pursued in the first essays of Coster, the European inventor of the present art. “This improvement,” says James Ged, the inventor’s son, “is principally considerable in three most important articles, viz. expence, correctness, beauty, and uniformity.” In July 1729, William Ged entered into partnership with William Fenner, a London stationer, who was to have half the profits, in consideration of his vancing all the money requisite. To supply this, Mr. John James, then an architect at Greenwich (who built sir Gregory Page’s house, Bloomsbury church, &c.) was taken into the scheme, and afterwards his brother, Mr. Thomas James, a letter-founder, and James Ged, the inventor’s son. In 1730, these partners applied to the university of Cambridge for printing bibles and common-prayer books by block instead of single types, and, in consequence, a lease was sealed to them April 23, 1731. In their attempt they sunk a large sum of money, and finished only two prayer-books, so that it was forced to be relinquished, and the lease was given up in 1738. Ged imputed his disappointment to the villainy of the press-men, and the illtreatment of his partners (which he specifies at large), particularly Fenner, whom John James and he were advised to prosecute, but declined it. He returned to Scotland in 1733, and had no redress. He there, however, had friends who were anxious to see a specimen of his performance; which he gave them in 1744, by an edition of Sallust. Fenner died insolvent in or before 1735, and his widow married Mr. Waugh, an apothecary, whom she survived. Her effects were sold in 1768. James Ged, the son, wearied with disappointments, engaged in the rebellion of 1745, as a captain in Perth’s regiment; and being taken at Carlisle, was condemned, but on his father’s account (by Dr. Smith’s interest with the duke of Newcastle) was pardoned, and released in 1748. He afterwards worked for some time as a journeyman, with Mr. Bettenham, and then commenced master; but being unsuccessful, he went privately to Jamaica, where his younger brother William was settled as a reputable printer. His tools, &c. he left to be shipped by a false friend, who most ungenerously detained them to try his skill himself. James died the year after he left England; as did his brother in 1767. In the above pursuit Mr. Thomas James, who died in 1738, expended much of his fortune, and suffered in his proper business; “for the printers,” says Mr. Mores, “would not employ him, because the block-printing, had it succeeded, would have been prejudicial to theirs.” Mr. William Ged died, in very indifferent circumstances, October 19, 1749, after his utensils were sent for Leith to be shipped for London, to have joined with his son James as a printer there. Thus ended his life and project, which has lately been revived both in France and England, under the name of stereotype, although its application to the printing of books has hitherto been partial, and indeed chiefly confined to such as are supposed not to admit of changes or improvements, such as Bibles, and some school-books.

, or, as by some called, Gayler Keiserspergius, an eminent Swiss divine, was born in 1445, at Schaffhausen, where his father was a notary, but he dying about three years afterwards, his son was adopted by a relation who lived at Keysersberg, and educated there in his infancy. He afterwards pursued his more serious studies at Fribourg and Basil. When admitted into the church he was invited to preach at Wurzburgh, where he became so celebrated for pulpit oratory, that Augsbourg, Basil, and Strasburgh contended which should persuade him to settle among them. At length he gave the preference to Strasburgh, where he resided thirty-three years, edifying the people by his discourses and his example. Here he died March 10, 1510. He is said to have been the first who proposed that the sacrament should be administered to condemned persons. He was much admired by Wimpheliugius, Beatus Rhenanus, and many of the eminent men of his time. His works, the principal of which are enumerated by Clement, as books of rare occurrence, are in German and Latin, and consist principally of “Sermons,” often surcharged with metaphors and allegories, and sometimes with facetious remarks, but in general they are learned, and serve very much to illustrate the manners of the time, which he had the courage to censure, when erroneous, before persons of the highest rank or power, with intrepid boldness. Oberlin published in 1786, a curious life of Geiler, which we have not seen; the preceding account being taken from the authorities below.

, sometimes called Gemma Frisius, from his country, was a Dutch physician, a native of Dockum in Friseland, who practised physic at Louvain. He was born in 1508, and died in 1555. Besides his medical skill, he was esteemed one of the best astronomers of his age; and wrote several works on that science, and other branches of mathematics, among which the principal are, “Methodus Arithmetics” “Demonstrationes Geometries? de usu radii astronomici” “De Astrolobio catholico liber,” &c. His son, Cornelius Gemma, became royal professor of medicine in his native place in 1569, through the appointment of the duke of Alba, at which time he took the degree of doctor, but a few years afterwards died of the plague, which raged at Louvain, Oct. 12, 1577. His writings are not numerous, ad relate to mathematical and philosophical subjects as well as to medicine. There was a third, John Baptist Gemma, a native of Venice, and a physician of considerable repute about the end of the fifteenth century, who was physician to Sigismund III. king of Poland. He wrote a treatise, containing a history of pestilential epidemics, with a detail of the effects of contagion, &c. printed in 1584.

, an eminent civilian at Oxford, was the son of Matthew Gentilis, an Italian physician, the descendant of a noble family of the Marcbe of Ancona, who left his country about the end of the sixteenth century, on account of his having embraced the protestant religion. Taking with him his sons Albericus and Scipio, he went into the province of Carniola, where he received his doctor’s degree, and then into England, after his eldest son Albericus, who was born in 1550. He was educated chiefly in the university of Perugia, where, in 1572, he was made doctor of civil law. He came into England probably about 1580, as in that year he appears to have been kindly received by several persons here; and among others, by Robert Dudley, earl of Leicester, then chancellor of the university of Oxford, who gave him letters of recommendation to the university, stating that he had left his country for the sake of his religion, and that it was his desire to bestow some time in reading, and other exercises of his profession, at the university, &c. He accordingly went to Oxford, and by favour of Dr. Donne, principal of New inn Hall, had rooms allowed him there, and at first was maintained by contributions from several colleges, but afterwards had an allowance from the common funds of the university. In the latter end of the same year, 1580, he was incorporated LL. D. and for some years employed his time on his writings, most of which were published at London or Oxford. He resided also some time either in. Corpus or Christ Church, and, as Wood says, “became the flower of the university for his profession.” In 1587 queen Elizabeth gave him the professorship of civil law, on which he lectured for twenty-four years with great xeputation. Hre he died, in the latter end of March or the beginning of April 1611, although others say at London, June 19, 1608, and was buried near his father, who also died in England, but where is uncertain. Wood’s account seems most probable. He left a widow, who died at Rickmansworth in 1648, and two sons, one of which will be noticed in the next article. Wood enumerates twentyseven volumes or tracts written by him, all in Latin, and mostly on points of jurisprudence, on which, at that time, his opinion appears to have had great weight. Grotius praises and acknowledges his obligations to his three books “De Jure Belli” and his “Lectiones Virgilianae,” addressed to his son, prove that he had cultivated polite literature with success.

, a Protestant lawyer, and an able defender of the reformed religion against the Roman catholics and Socinians, was born at Vienne, in Dauphiny, in the sixteenth century; but we have no dates of his birth or death. Some of the works we are about to mention have been attributed to his son Vincent, although improperly, and he is with equal impropriety called Valentine in some biographical works. He was president of the chamber of the edict at Grenoble, established in 1576; and published an Apology for the Protestant Religion, in Latin; the best edition of which is that of Geneva, 1588, 8vo, and several other works; the principal of which are, “Le Bureau du Concile deTrente,” Geneva, 1586, 8vo, maintaining that this council was contrary to the ancient canons, and to the royal authority; “L'Anti Machiavel,” Leyden, 1547, 12mo; “Anti Socinus,” 1612, 4to. The learning and vigour of argument in these works procured him great reputation among the protestants. He was obliged to quit his country, and is said to have been syndic of the republic of Geneva; but this last, as well as some other particulars of his history, rests on doubtful authority.

, an eminent divine of the church of Scotland, eldest son of the rev. Gilbert Gerard, minister of Chapel-Garioch, in Aberdeenshire, was born there Feb. 22, 1728; he was educated partly at the parish school of Foveran, whence he was removed to the grammar-school at Aberdeen, after his father’s death. Here he made such rapid progress, that he was entered a student in Marischal-college when he was but twelve years of age. He devoted his first four years to the study of Greek, Latin, the mathematics, and philosophy, and was at the close of the course admitted to the degree of M. A. He now commenced his theological studies, whtch he prosecuted at the universities of Aberdeen and Edinburgh. Immediately on the completion of his twentieth year, in 1748, he was licensed to preach in the church of Scotland, and in 1750 was chosen assistant to Mr. David Fordyce, professor of philosophy in the Marischal college at Aberdeen, and in two years afterwards, upon the death of the professor, Gerard was appointed to succeed him. Here, after a short time, the department assigned to Mr. Gerard was confined to moral philosophy and logic, the duties of which he discharged with conscientious and unwearied diligence, and with equal success and reputation. He was a member of a literary society at Aberdeen, consisting of Drs. Blackwell, Gregory, Reid, Campbell, Beattie, &c. which met very regularly every fortnight during the winter, when the members communicated their sentiments with the utmost freedom, and received mutual improvement from their literary discussions; and hence originated those well-known works, Reid’s “Inquiry into the Human Mind” Gregory’s “Comparative View;” Gerard’s “Essay on Genius” Beattie’s “Essay on Truth” andCampbell’s “Philosophy of Rhetoric.” In 1759 Mr. Gerard was ordained a minister of the church of Scotland, and in the following year he was appointed professor of divinity in the Marischal college, and about the same period he took his degree of D. D. He continued to perform the several duties attached to his offices till 1771, when he resigned the professorship, together with the church living, and was preferred to the theological chair in the university of King’s-college, a situation which he held till his death, which happened on his birth-day, Feb. 22, 1795. Dr. Gerard’s attainments were solid rather than brilliant, the effect of close and almost incessant study, and a fine judgment. He had improved his memory to such a degree, that he could in little more than an hour get by heart a sermon of ordinary length. He was author of “An Essay on Taste,” which was published in 1759, and which obtained for him the prize of a gold medal, from the society of Edinburgh. This work was afterwards much enlarged, and reprinted in 17 So. His “Dissertations on the Genius and Evidences of Christianity,” published in 1766, are well known and highly appreciated; so also are his “Essay on Gesius,” and his sermons in 2 volumes. In 1799 his son and successor, Dr. Gilbert Gerard, gave the world a posthumous work of much merit, which had been left among the papers of his father, entitled “The Pastoral Care,” which made a part of his theological course of lectures. As a clergyman the conduct of Dr. Gerard was marked with prudence, exemplary manners, and the most punctual and diligent discharge of his ministerial duties; his sermons were simple and plain, adapted to the common class of hearers, but so accurate as to secure the approbation of the ablest judges. As a professor of divinity, his great aim was not to impose by his authority upon his pupils any favourite system of opinions; but to impress them with a sense of the importance of the ministerial office; to teach them the proper manner of discharging all its duties; and to enable them, by the knowledge of the scriptures, to form a just and impartial judgment on controverted subjects. Possessing large stores of theological knowledge, he was judicious in selecting his subjects, happy and successful in his manner of communicating instruction. He had the merit of introducing a new, and in many respects a better plan of theological education, than those on which it had formerly been conducted. Having a constant regard to whatever was practically useful, rather than to unedifying speculations, he enjoined no duty which he was unwilling to exemplify in his own conduct. In domestic life he was amiable and exemplary; in his friendships steady and disinterested, and in his intercourse with society, hospitable, benevolent, and unassuming; uniting to the decorum of the Christian pastor, the good breeding of a gentleman, and the cheerfulness, affability, and ease of an agreeable companion.

, an eminent scholar, philosopher, and naturalist, and called the Pliny of Germany, was the son of Vasa Gesner, and Barbara Friccius, and born at Zurich in Switzerland in 1516, where he received the first rudiments of the Latin and Greek languages. His proficiency was such as to give every hope of his becoming an accomplished scholar, but the poverty of his father, who was a worker in hides, and perhaps wanted his son’s assistance in his trade, threatened a total interruption to his studies, when John James Ammian, professor of rhetoric at Zurich, took him to his house, and offered to defray the expence of his education. Gesner accordingly continued three years with Ammian, and applied to his studies with the utmost diligence. In his fifteenth year his father was killed in the civil wars of Switzerland, and his mother was no longer able to maintain him; and, added to these misfortunes, he fell into a dropsical disorder. On his recovery, finding himself destitute of friends, he determined, young as he was, to travel, in hopes of being able to provide a subsistence by his talents in some foreign country. With this view he first went to Strasburgh, where he entered into the service of Wolfgang Fabricius Capito, the learned Lutheran reformer, with whom he resumed the study of the Hebrew language, of which he had acquired some knowledge when at Zurich. After some months’ stay here he returned to Switzerland, and the public tranquillity being restored, he procured a pension from the academy of Zurich, which enabled him to make the tour of France. He passed a year at Bourges, applying to Greek and Latin with great attention; and finding his pension too scanty to maintain him, improved his finances in some degree by teaching school. Next year, he went to Paris, but is said to have made very little progress in study while there, and returned to Strasburgh in hopes of procuring some employment from the friends he had made, but was very soon recalled by the university of Zurich, and placed at the head of a reputable school. Here he might have maintained himself in the comfortable pursuit of his studies, had he not married, a step which, although he had afterwards no reason to repent of his choice, in his present circumstances was highly injudicious, and involved him in many difficulties.

, a painter, of whom Vasari speaks as being of the first rank in his time, was properly called Corradi, and was born in 1449. He at first was employed by his father in his own profession of goldsmith, at Florence, who obtained the name of Ghirlandaio, by having been the first to make little metallic garlands (Ghirlandi) for children to wear. Domenico, after he had adopted painting as his profession, worked for the churches and convents in Florence, both in fresco and in oil, like other artists introducing into his pictures the portraits of his friends, but with more character than had hitherto been done there; and he was the first who left off gilding in pictures, and attempted to imitate its effects by colours. He was called to Rome by Sixtus IV. to assist other masters employed in painting his chapel. His works there were afterwards spoiled to make room for those of M. Angelo. He was highly honoured, and employed nobly; but his greatest glory is, having had the great hero of the art, M. Angelo, for a pupil. He died in 1493. His brothers, David and Benedetto, finished many of his works, and educated his son Riclolfo to the art, who afterwards made great progress, and obtained esteem from Raphael himself, who invited him, but not successfully, to work in the Vatican. In Ridolfo’s pictures, Mr. Fuseli says, “there is something analogous to the genius of Raphael; the composition, the vivacity of the face, the choice of colours, something ideal in the use of nature, betray similar maxims, with inferior powers.” He died in 1560, aged seventy-­five.

, an eminent English historian, was descended from an ancient family of that name in Kent. His grandfather, Edward Gibbon, a citizen of London, was appointed one of the commissioners of customs under the Tory administration of the last four years of queen Anne, and was praised by lord Bolingbroke for his knowledge of commerce and finance. He was elected one of the directors of the unfortunate South-sea company, in 1716, at which time he had acquired an independent fortune of 60,000l. the whole of which he lost when the company failed in 1720. The sum of 10,000l. however, was allowed for his maintenance, and on this foundation he reared another fortune, not much inferior to the first, an<,i secured a part of it in the purchase of landed property. He died in December 1736, at his house at Putney, and by his last will enriched two daughters, at the expence of his son Edward, who had married against his consent. This son was sent to Cambridge, where at Emanuel college, he “passed through a regular course of academical discipline,” but left it without a degree, and afterwards travelled. On his return to England he was chosen, in 1734, member of parliament for the borough of Petersfield, and in 1741 for Southampton. In parliament he joined the party which after a long contest, finally drove sir Robert Walpole and his friends from their places. Our author has not concealed that “in the pursuit of an unpopular minister, he gratified a private revenge against the oppressor of his family in the South-sea persecution.” "Walpole, however, was not that oppressor, for Mr. CoxC has clearly proved that he frequently endeavoured to stem the torrent of parliamentary vengeance, and to incline the sentiments* of the house to terms of moderation.

In 1758 he was permitted to return to England, after an absence of nearly five years. His father received him with more kindness than he expected, and rejoiced in the suecess of his plan of education. During his absence his father had married his second wife, miss Dorothea Patton, whom his son was prepared to dislike, but found an amiable and deserving woman. At home he was left at liberty to consult his taste in the choice of place, company, and amusements, and his excursions were bounded only by the limits of the island and the measure of his income. He had now reached his twenty-first year; and some faint efforts were made to procure him the employment of secretary to a foreign embassy. His step-mother recommended the study of the law; but the former scheme did not succeed, and the tatter he declined. Of his first two years in England, he passed about nine months in London, and the remainder in thecountry. But London had few charms, except the common ones that can be purchased. His father had no fixed residence there, and no circles into which he might introduce his son. He acquired an intimacy, however, in the house of David Mallet, and by his means was introduced to lady Hervey’s parties. The want of society seems never to have given him much uneasiness, nor does it appear that at any period of his life he knew the misery of having hours which he could not fill up. At his father’s house at Buriton, near Petersfield, in Hampshire, he enjoyed much leisure and many opportunities of adding to his stock of learning. Books became more and more the source of all his wishes and pleasures, and although his father endeavoured to inspire him with a love and knowledge of farming, he could not succeed farther than occasionally to obtain his company in such excursions as are usual with country gentlemen.

, an eminent composer of church music in the reign of James I. was born in 1583, and at the age of twenty-one was appointed organist of the chapel-royal. In 1622 he was honoured at Oxford with a doctor’s degree, in consequence of the strong recommendation of the learned Camden. Previously to this he had published “Madrigals of five parts for voices and viols,” London, 1612; but the most valuable of his works, which are still in constant use among the best productions of the kind, are his compositions for the church, consisting of services and anthems. Of the latter, the most celebrated is his “Hosanna.” He also composed the tunes to the hymns and songs of the church, translated by George Withers, as appears by the dedication to king James I. In 1625, being commanded, ex ojficio, to attend the solemnity of the marriage of his royal master Charles I. with the princess Henrietta of France, at Canterbury, for which occasion he had composed the music, he was seized with the small-pox, and dying on Whitsunday, in the same year, was “buried in that cathedral. His son, Dr. Christopher Gibbons, was also honoured with the notice of Charles I. and was of his chapel. At the restoration, besides being appointed principal organist of the chapel royal, private organist to his majesty, and organist of Westminster-abbey, he obtained his doctor’s degree in music at Oxford, in consequence of a letter written by his majesty Charles II. himself, in his behalf in 1664. His compositions, which were not numerous, seem never to have enjoyed a great degree of favour; and though some of them are preserved in the Museum collections, they have long ceased to be performed in our cathedrals. Orlando Gibbons had also two brothers, Edward and Ellis, the one organist of Bristol, and the other of Salisbury. Edward was a Cambridge bachelor of music, and incorporated at Oxford, 1592. Besides being organist of Bristol, he was priest-vicar, sub-chanter, ajid master of the choiristers in that cathedral. He was sworn a gentleman of the chapel, March 21, 1604, and was the master of Matthew Lock 1 In the” Triumphs of Oriana," there are two madrigals, the one in five, and the other in six parts, composed by Ellis Gibbons. Of Edward Gibbons, it is said, that in the time of the rebellion he assisted king Charles I. with the sum of one thousand pounds; for which instance of his loyalty, he was afterwards very severely treated by those in power, who deprived him of a considerable estate, and thrust him and three grand-children out of his house, though he was more than fourscore years of age.

As he was a bachelor, and had but few relations, and was unknown to these, he bequeathed the bulk of his fortune, amounting to about 14 or I5,000l. sterling, to those he esteemed his friends. He made a grateful return to the generosity of his noble patron the earl of Mar, by bequeathing to his son the lord Erskine, estates which yielded 280l. per annum, 1000l. in money, and all his plate. His religious principles were the same with those of his father, a nonjuror; but he was justly esteemed by good men of all persuasions, being courteous in his behaviour, moderate with regard to those who differed from him, humane, and charitable. He died on the 5th of August, 1754, and was buried in Marybone church.

His works are all written in Italian, except some orations, spoken upon extraordinary occasions, in Latin. They consist chiefly of tragedies: a collection of which was published at Venice 1583, in 8vo, by his son Celso Giraldi; who, in his dedication to the duke of Ferrara, takes occasion to observe, that he was the youngest of five sons, and the only one who survived his father. There are also some prose works of Giraldi: one particularly upon comedy, tragedy, and other kinds of poetry, which was printed at Venice by himself in 1554, 4to. Some make no scruple to rank him among the best tragic writers that Italy has produced; but perhaps the work by which he now is best known is his “Hecatommiti,” an hundred novels in the manner of Boccaccio, which have been frequently printed. There is a scarce volume of his poems printed at Ferrara in 1537, at the close of which is a treatise of Cielio Calcagnini, “De Imitatione,” addressed to Giraldi.

, advocate to the parliament of Paris, and to the council, and member of the French academy, was born at Paris in 1596. His abilities an 1 probity recommended him to some very honourable employments, and he particularly enjoyed the confidence of cardinal Mazarin. He was author of the following translations “Dialogues des Orateurs,” 4to. “l'Apologie de Socrate” “riiist. Sacree de Sulpice Severe;” “I'Apologetique de Tertullien,” for which he was received into the academy; “la Cite de Dieu, de St. Augustin,” I vol, 4to.; “Epitres Choisies de St. Augustin,” 5 vols. 12mo. He died in 1665, at Paris. His son, Francis, who was provincial of the Minim order, gained great reputation by some devotional works; but deserves little credit for his principal publication, “Les Vies des Saints,” fol. which although esteemed for its piety, is full of fables, and far from accurate as to facts. P. Raft'ron, of the same order, has written his life, 12mo.

, a musical composer of great originality, was born in the palatinate, on the frontiers of Bohemia, in 1712, or as Dr. Bumey says, in 1716. His father, a man in poor circumstances, removed, during the infancy of his son, into Bohemia, where he died, leaving fris offspring in early youth, without any provision, so that his education was totally neglected. He had, however, an instinctive love for music, which is taught to all children, with reading and writing, in the Bohemian schools. Having acquired this knowledge, he travelled about from town to town, supporting himself by his talents, till he had worked his way to Vienna, where he met with a nobleman who became his patron, took -him into his service, and carried him into Italy, where he procured him lessons in counterpoint, at Naples, by which he profited so well, that before he left Italy he composed several dramas for different theatres. These acquired him reputation sufficient to be recommended to lord Middlesex as a composer to the opera house in the Haymarket, then under his lordship’s direction. He arrived in England in 1745, and, in that year and the following, produced his operas of “Artamene” and “La Caduta de Giganti,” with indifferent success.

, eldest son of the preceding, was born July 17, 1580, at Geneva, and went to Paris in 1602, where he turned Catholic, was appointed counsellor of state 1643, and died Octobers, 1643, at Munster, in which city he then resided as counsellor and secretary to the French embassy for the general peace. He left many excellent works on law, history, the titles of the kingdom, &c. the principal of which are, I. “Le Ceremonial de France,” 4to, a work much valued reprinted in 2 vols. fol. by his son Denys Godefroi but this is unfinished and the 4to edition must be referred to for the funeral ceremonies. 2. “Genealogie des Rois de Portugal issus en Ligne directe masculine de la Maison de France qui regne aujourd'huis,” 4to. 3. “Mem. concernant la Preseance des Rois de France sur les Rois d'Espagne, 4to. 4.” Entreveue de Charles IV. Empereur, et Charles V, Roi de France; plus PEntreveue de Charles VII. Roi de France, et de Ferdinand, Roi de Arragon.“&c. 4to. 5.” Hist, de Charles VI. par Jean Juvenal des Ursins; de Louis XII. par Seyssell, et par d'Auton, &c. de Cha. VIII. par Saligny, et autres du Chevalier Bayard, avec le Supplement, par Expilly,“1651, 8vo. 6.” De Jean le Meinore, dit Boucicaut, Marechal de France,“4to. 7.” D'Artus III. Due de Bretagne,“4to. 8.” De Guillaume Marescot,“4to. 9.” De la veritable Origine de la Maison d'Autriche,“4to. 10.” Genealogie des Dues de Lorrain,“4to. 11.” L‘Ordre et les Ceremonies observers aux Manages de France et d’Espagne,“4to. 12.” Genealogie des Comptes et Dues de Bar,“<Ko. 13.” Traite touchant les Droits du Roi tres Chretien, sur plusieurs Etats et Seigneuries, possedes par plusieurs Princes Voisins," fol. under the name of Pierre Dupuy.

, the author of an ancient chronicle, is supposed to have been born in the twelfth century, at Viterbo, in Italy, and educated in his youth, at least, at Bamberg. He was afterwards chaplain and secretary to king Conrad III. the emperor Frederick, and his son Henry VI. He informs us that he spent forty years in searching among the manuscripts of the Greeks, Latins, Jews, Chaldeans, and barbarians, for materials proper for his Chronicle, had made himself acquainted with all these languages, and performed many voyages and travels in the same pursuit. This Chronicle, which does not, however, gratify all the expectations that might be formed from such learning and industry, begins with the creation of the world, and ends with 1186. It is written in Latin prose and verse, and entitled “Pantheon.” It was first printed at Basil, by Basilius John Herold, 1559, reprinted at Francfort in 1584, and at Hanover in 1613, in Pistorius’s collection of German writers; and Muratori has inserted in his great collection, that part which respects Italy. Lambecius speaks of another work by Godfrey, which exists in ms. in the imperial library at Vienna, entitled “Speculum regium, sive de genealogia regum et imperatorum a diluvii tempore ad Henricum VI. imperatorem.” Godfrey appears to have been a man of learning and observation, and is thought to deserve credit as to his relation of the events which occurred in his own time, and with which his situation at court enabled him to be acquainted.

The see of Bath and Wells had in 1584 been vacant since the death of Dr. Gilbert Berkley in Nov. 1581. To this bishopric the queen now nominated dean Godwin, who accordingly was consecrated Sept. 13, 1584. He immediately resigned the deanery of Canterbury; and as he arrived at the episcopal dignity “as well qualified,” says his contemporary, sir John Harrington, “for a bishop as might be, umeproveable, without simony, given to good hospitality, quiet, kind, and affable,” it is to be lamented that he was unjustly opposed in the enjoyment of what he deserved. At the time of his promotion there prevailed among the courtiers no small dislike to the bishops; prompted by a desire to spoil them of their revenues. To cover their unjust proceedings, they did not want plausible pretences, the effects of which Godwin too severely experienced. He was a widower, drawing towards seventy, and much enfeebled by the gout, when he came to the see; but in order to the management of his family, and that he might devote his whole time to the discharge of his high office, he married a second wife, a widow, of years suitable to his own. An illiberal misrepresentation, however, of this affair was but too readily believed by the queen, who had a rooted aversion to the marriages of the clergy, and the crafty slanderers gratified their aim in the disgrace of the aged prelate, and in obtaining part of his property. This unfortunate affair, which affected his public character as well as his private happiness, contributed not a little to increase his infirmities. He continued, however, attentive to the duties of his function, and frequently gave proof that neither his diligence nor his observation were inconsiderable. During the two last years of his life, his health more rapidly declined, and he was also attacked with a quartan ague. He was now recommended by his physicians to try the benefit of his native air. Accordingly he came to Oakingham with this intention, but breathed his last there, Nov. 19, 1590. He was buried in the chancel of Oakingham church, where is a modest inscription to his memory, written by his son, the subject of the next article.

In 1616 he published in Latin, “Rerum Anglicarum Henrico VIII. &c.” which was translated and published by his son, Morgan Godwin, under the title of “Annales of England, containing the reigns of Henry VIII. Edward VI. and queen Mary,” fol. These, as well as his lives of the bishops, are written in elegant Latin, and with much impartiality. In 1630, he published a small treatise, entitled “A computation of the value of the Roman Sesterce and Attic Talent.” After this he fell into a low and languishing disorder, and died in April 1633. He married, when a young man, the daughter of Wollton, bishop of Exeter, by whom he had many children. He appears to have been a man of great learning and personal worth, and a zealous champion for the church of England. His son, Dr. Morgan Godwin, was archdeacon of Shropshire, and translated, as we have noticed, his father’s “Annales.” He was ejected by the parliamentary commissioners, and his family reduced to distress: he died in 1645, leaving a son of his own names, who was educated at Oxford, and afterwards became a minister in Virginia, under the government of sir William Berkeley, but was at last beneficed near London. When he died is not mentioned. He wrote some pamphlets, while in Virginia, on the state of religion there, and the education of the negroes. The late rev. Charles Godwin, an antiquary, and benefactor to Baliol college, Oxford, who died in 1770, appears to have been a son of Charles Godwin, of Mon mouth, another son of bishop Francis Godwin.

, a native of Scotland, was an excellent draughtsman, and a good Grecian, who resided many years in Italy, visited most parts of that country, and had also travelled into France, Germany, &c. In 1736 he was appointed secretary to the society for the encouragement of learning, with an annual salary of 50l. which he resigned in 1739. In the same year (1736) he succeeded Dr. Stukeley as secretary to the society of antiquaries, which office he resigned in 1741 to Mr. Joseph Ames, and was for a short time secretary to the Egyptian club, composed of gentlemen who had visited Egypt, viz. lord Sandwich, Dr. Shaw, Dr. Pococke, &c. In 1741 he went to Carolina with governor Glen, where, besides a grant of land, he had several offices, such as register of the province, &c. and died about 1750, a justice of the peace, leaving a handsome estate to his family. He published, 1. “Itinerarium Septentrionale, or a Journey through most parts of the counties of Scotland, in two parts, with 66 copper-plates, 1726,” folio. 2. “Additions and Corrections, by way of supplement, to the Itinerarium Septentrionale; containing several dissertations on, and descriptions of, Roman antiquities, discovered in Scotland since publishing the said Itinerary. Together with observations on other ancient monuments found in the North of England, never before published, 1732,” folio. A Latin edition of the “Itinerarium,” including the Supplement, was printed in Holland, in 1731. 3. “The Lives of pope Alexander VI. and his son Caesar Borgia, comprehending the wars in the reign of Charles VIII. and Lewis XII. kings of France; and the chief transactions and revolutions in Italy, from 1492 to 1516. With an appendix of original pieces referred to in the work, 1729,” folio. 4. “A complete History of the ancient Amphitheatres, more particularly regarding the Architecture of these buildings, and in particular that of Verona, by the marquis Scipio Maffei; translated from the Italian, 1730,” 8vo, afterwards enlarged in a second edition. 5. “An Essay towards explaining the Hieroglyphical Figures on the Coffin of the ancient Mummy belonging to capt. William Lethieullier, 1737,” folio, with cuts. 6. “Twenty-five plates of all the Egyptian Mummies, and other Egyptian Antiquities in England,” about 1739, folio.

, a physician, was born in 1689 t at Eukhuysen, and after having been a disciple of the celebrated Boerhaave, became a distinguished teacher of medicine at Harderwick, in consequence of which he wa elected a member of the academies of Petersburg, Rome, and Haerlem, and obtained the title of physician to Elizabeth, empress of all the Russias. He died Sept. II, 1762. He was the author of several works, which are written with excellent method, and contain many interesting and original observations, relating to physiological and practical subjects, as well as to the practice of the ancients. The principal are, 1. “De Perspiratione insensibili,” Leyden and Padua, 1725, 4to, often reprinted. 2. “De Secretione humorum in sanguine,” ibid. 1727. 3. “Madicinae Compendium,” 1731—1737, 2 vols. 4to. 4. “Exercitationes quatuor medicse,” Amst. 1737, 4to, &c. His son, David de Gorter, professor of physic and botany in the Dutch university of Harderwick, was author of several local Floras of that neighbourhood, and of Elementa Botanica. He died in 1783, aged sixty-six.

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

, a canon of St. James de l‘Hopital, and an associated academician of Marseilles, Rouen, Angers., and Auxerre, was born at Paris, Oct. 19, 1697. His father was a taylor, with a tradesman-like aversion to learning, in the pursuit of which, however, he found it impossible to prevent his son from employing his early years. He began his studies at Paris, and carried them on principally in the Jesuits’ college, and in the congregation of the oratory. In 1720 he obtained a canonry of St. James de l’Hopital. He died at Paris, Feb. 2, 1767. His whole life appears to have been a scene of literary labour, always useful, and often conducted with great judgment. In order to pursue his studies without interruption at home, or the necessity of having recourse to foreign assistance, he accumulated a fine library of 10,000 volumes, in all branches of literature, but particularly literary history and biography. For fifty years he continued to publish one voluminous compilation after another; and by close application, so impaired his sight that he was almost blind some time before his death. The last editor of Moreri divides his publications into translations, works of piety, works of literary history, lives and eloges, papers in the literary Journals, and lastly prefaces; in all amounting to eighty-three articles. Of these the most useful appear to be, 1. “Les Vies des Saints,” Paris, 1730, 7 vols. 12 mo, often reprinted in 4to, and other forms. 2. “Bibliotheque des auteurs ecclesiastiques du XVIII. siecle, pour servir de continuation a celle de M. du Pin, c.” ibid. 1736, 3 vols. 8vo. 3. “Supplement” to Moreri’s Dictionary, ibid. 1735, 2 vols. fol. He also pointed out many hundred errors in the early editions of that work. 4. “Nouveau Supplement” to the same dictionary, ibid. 1749, fol. with a volume of “Additions,” 1750, fol. 5. “Bibliotheque Franchise, ou histoire de la litterature Frangaise,” from the invention of printing, 21 vols. 12mo, ibid. 1740—1759. This is the most useful of all his works. It was undertaken at the request of M. D'Aro-enson, the secretary of state. It in some measure resembles Niceron, whom he also assisted in his useful “Memoires,” and wrote his life. 6. “De l‘etatdes Sciences en France, depuis la mort de Charlemagne jusqu’a cello du roi Robert,” 1737, 12mo. This learned dissertation obtained the prize of the academy of belles lettres, and the members of this academy are said to have done for Goujet what they had never done for any other man. Without any solicitation, or knowledge of the matter on his parr, they sent a deputation of six of their number to him, requesting the honour of choosing him, in the room of the deceased abbé de Vertot. 7. A new edition of Richelet’s Dictionary, Lyons, 1756, 3 vols. fol. 8. “L'Histoire du College Royal de France,” 4to. 9. “Hist, du Pontificat de Paul V.” Amsterdam (Paris) 1765, 2 vols. 12mo. This was his last work, in which he is much less favourable to the Jesuits than might have been expected from one educated among them.

, a French writer of some note, was the son of Nicholas Goulu, royal professor of Greek in the university of Paris, in 1567, and author of a translation from Greek into Latin of Gregentius’s dispute with the Jew Herbanus, which De Noailles, the French ambassador, had brought from Constantinople, and of other works, a collection of which was printed at Paris in 1580. His son was born at Paris Aug. 25, 1576, and educated for the bar; but, having failed in the first cause he pleaded, he felt the disappointment so acutely as to relinquish the profession, and retire into a convent. He chose the order of the Feuillans, and entered amongst them in 1604. He was so much esteemed in his order that he always enjoyed some office in it, and was at last made general. The name he took when he became a monk, was Dom John of St. Francis. As he understood the Greek tongue, he translated into French Epictetus’s Manual, Arrian’s Dissertations, some of St. Basil’s treatises, and the works of Dionysius Areopagita; to which he added a vindication of this St. Dionysius’s works. He also revised his father’s Latin translation of St. Gregory Nyssen against Eunomius, and published it. He also wrote a book against Du Moulin’s treatise of the calling of pastors, “De la Vocation des Pasteurs” the Life of Francis de Sales, bishop of Geneva; and a Funeral Oration on Nicholas le Fevre, preceptor to Lewis XIII.; but it is said that he never delivered it. He did not, however, gain so great reputation by all those writings as by his angry controversy with Balzac, already noticed in our account of that writer. Goulu died Jan. 5, 1629.

, in Latin Goveanus, a learned Portuguese, of the fourteenth century, was born at Beja, and appointed principal of the college of St. Barbe at Paris, where he educated three nephews, who became celebrated for their learning. Martial Govea, the eldest, was a good Latin poet, and published a “Latin Grammar” at Paris. Andrew, his next brother, a priest, born in 1498, succeeded his uncle as principal of St. Barbe, and gained so great a reputation there, that he was invited to accept the same office in the college of Guienne, at Bourdeaux. This invitation he accepted in 1534, and continued at Bourdeaux till 1547, when John III. king of Portugal, recalled him to his dominions, to establish a college at Coimbra, similar to that of Guienne; and Govea took with him into Portugal the celebrated Buchanan, Grouchi, Guerenti, Fabricius, la Costa, and other men of learning, well qualified to instruct youth. He died June 1S48, at Coimbra, leaving no printed work. Anthony Govea, the youngest of these three brothers, and the most eminent of all, wrote several pieces on philosophy and law, and is mentioned with great encomiums by Thuanus, Ronsard, and all the learned. He taught with reputation at Bourdeaux, afterwards at Cahors, and Valence in Dauphiny, and died in 1565, aged sixty, at Turin, to which place Philibert had invited him. His principal works are, an “Apologetical Discourse” against Calvin, who had accused him of atheism in his treatise on scandal; some works on law, fol.; “ Variarum lectionum Libri duo,” fol. editions of Virgil and Terence, with notes “Epigrammatum Libri duo,” and “Epistolee.” The whole was printed at Rotterdam, 1766, fol. Manfred Govea, his son, born at Turin, became distinguished for his knowledge of the belles lettres, civil and canon law, and was counsellor of state at the court of Turin. He died in 1613, leaving “Consilia;” “Notes on Julius Florus;” some “Poetry,” and a funeral oration on the death of Philip II. king of Spain.

, the learned editor of the “Septuagint,” from the Alexandrian ms. in the royal library at Buckingham-house, was the son of Martyn Sylvester Grabe, professor of divinity and history in the university of Koningsberg, in Prussia, where his son Ernest was borti Jan. 10, 1666. He had his education there, and took the degree of M. A. in that university; after which, devoting himself to the study of divinity, he read the works of the fathers with the utmost attention. These he took as the best masters and instructors upon the important subject of religion. He was fond of their principles and customs, and that fondness grew into a kind of unreserved veneration for their authority. Among these he observed the uninterrupted succession of the sacred ministry to be universally laid down as essential to the being of a true church: and this discovery so powerfully impressed his mind, that at length he thought himself obliged, in conscience, to quit Lutheranism, the established religion of his country, in which he had been bred, and enter within the pale of the Roman ctyurch, where that succession was preserved. In this temper he saw likewise many other particulars in the Lutheran faith and practice, not agreeable to that of the fathers, and consequently absolutely erroneous, if not heretical.

, an ingenious Frenchman, was a native of Caen in the seventeenth century, and the discoverer of the art of making figured diaper. He did not, however, bring it to perfection, for he only wove squares and flowers; but his son Richard Graindorge, living to the age of eighty-two, had leisure to complete what his father had begun, and found a way to represent all sorts of animals, and other figures. This work he called Hautelice, perhaps because the threads were twisted in the woof. They are now called damasked cloths, from their resemblance to white damask. This ingenious workman, also invented the method of weaving table napkins; and his son, Michael, established several manufactures in different parts of France, where these damasked cloths are become very common. The same family has produced several other persons of genius and merit among these is James Graindorge, a man of wit and taste, and well skilled in antiquities he is highly spoken of by M. Huet, who was his intimate friend. His brother Andrew, also, doctor of physic of the faculty at Montpellier, was a learned philosopher, who followed the principles of Epicurus and Gassendi. He died January 13, 1676, aged sixty. He left, “Traite de la Nature du Feu, de la Lumiere, et des Couleurs,” 4to; “Traite de TOrigine des Macreuses,” 1680, 12mo, and other works. M. Huet dedicated his book “De Interpretatione” to this gentleman.

, an English poet and physician, was born at Dunse, a small town in the southern part of Scotland, about 1723. His father, a native of Cumberland, and once a man of considerable property, had removed to Dunse, on the failure of some speculations in mining, and there filled a post in the excise. His son, after receiving such education as his native place afforded, went to Edinburgh, where he was apprenticed to Mr. Lawder, a surgeon, and had an opportunity of studying the various branches of medical science, which were then begun to be taught by the justly celebrated founders of the school of medicine in that city. Having qualified himself for such situations as are attainable by young men whose circumstances do not permit them to wait the slow returns of medical practice at home, he first served as surgeon to lieut.-general Pulteney’s regiment of foot, during the rebellion (of 1745) in Scotland, and afterwards went in the same capacity to Germany, where that regiment composed part of the army under the earl of Stair. With the reputation and interest which his skill and learning procured abroad, he came over to England at the peace of Aix-laChapelle, sold his commission, and entered upon practice as a physician in London.

, an English divine and miscellaneous writer, was a younger son of Richard Graves, esq. of Mickleton, in Gloucestershire, where he was born in 1715. His father, who was an able antiquary, died in 1729. His son, Richard, was educated partly at home, under the rev. Mr.Smith, curate of the parish in which his father resided, and partly at a public school at Abingdon, in Berkshire, whence, at the age of sixteen, he was chosen a scholar of Pembroke college, Oxford. Soon after his arrival he joined a party of young men who met in the evening to read Epictetus, Theophrastus, and other Greek authors, seldom read at schools; and a short time after became the associate of his contemporaries, Shenstone the poet, and Anthony Whistler, who used to meet to read poetry, plays, and other light works. In 1736 he was elected a fellow of All Souls college, where he acquired the particular intimacy of sir William Blackstone; but instead of pursuing the study of divinity, according to his original intention, he now devoted his attention to physic, and attended in London two courses of anatomy. A severe illness, however, induced him to resume the study of divinity, and in 1740, after taking his master’s degree, he entered into holy orders. About the same time he removed with Mr. Fitzherbert, fatlier of lord St. Helen’s, to the estate of that gentleman at Tissington, in Derbyshire, where he remained three years enjoying in his house the highest pleasures of refined society. At the end of that period, he set off‘ to make the tour of the north, and while at Scarborough, accidentally met with a distant relation, Dr. Samuel Knight, archdeacon of Berkshire, and the author of the Lives of Colet and Erasmus, by whose recommendation he obtained a curacy near Oxford. This was particularly gratifying to Mr. Graves, who was then coming, by turn, into office in the college, and had been for some time desirous of procuring such a situation. He immediately took possession of his curacy, but as the parsonage-house was out of repair, he took a lodging with a gentleman -farmer in the neighbourhood. The attractions of the farmer’s youngest daughter made such a powerful impression on the heart of Mr. Graves that he resigned his fellowship and married her. After residing about two years on his curacy, he was presented by Mr. Skrine to the rectory of Claverton, where he went to reside in 1750, and till his death, was never absent from it a month at a time. As the narrowness of his circumstances obliged him to superintend in person the education of his children, he likewise -resolved to take other pupils under his tuition; and this practice he continued, with great credit to himself, upwards of thirty years. In 1763, through the interest of Ralph Allen, esq. of Prior-Park, he was presented to the living of Kilmersdon, in addition to tbat of Claverton, and that gentleman likewise procured him the appointment of chaplain to lady Chatham. His conversation was rendered highly agreeable by that epigrammatic turn which points his writings of the lighter kind. His constant good humour rendered him an acceptable companion in every society, his colloquial impromptus being frequently as happy as the jeux d’e^prit of his pen, while both were invariably the unmeditated effusions of a sportive fancy and guileless heart. He died at Claverton, Nov. 23, 1804, at the advanced age of ninety.

, an eminent mathematician and antiquary, was eldest son of John Greaves, rector of Colmore, near Alresford, in Hampshire, where, his son was born in 1602, and probably instructed in grammar learning by his father, who was the most celebrated school-master in that country. At fi/teen years of age he was sent to Baliol college, in Oxford, where he proceeded B. A. July 6, 1621. -Three years after, his superiority in classical learning procured him the first place of five in an election to a fellowship of Merton-college. On June 25, 1628, he commenced M. A. and, having completed his fellowship, was more at liberty to pursue the bent of his inclination, which leading him chiefly to oriental learning and the mathematics, he quickly distinguished himself in each of these studies; and his eminent skill in the latter procured him the professorship of geometry in Gresham college, which he obtained February 22^ 1630.

, 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.

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.

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.

The doctor’s death happened while he was lecturing on the pleurisy. His son, Dr. James Gregory, finished that course of lectures, to the general satisfaction of the university and published in 1774, a small tract of his father’s, entitled “A Father’s Legacy to his Daughters” which was written solely for their use (about eight years before the author died) with the tenderest affection, and deepest concern for their happiness. This work evinces great knowledge of human nature, and of the world, and manifests such solicitude for their welfare as strongly recommends the advice which he gives. In 1788, all his works were published together in 4 vols. 8vo, with a life of himself, and an account of his family.

, 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.

, 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 landscape painter, born at Amsterdam in 1645, was a pupil of Roland Roghman, whose manner he relinquished after he became acquainted with the more perfect one of A. Vandervelde and Lingelbach. He settled in England, and made views of many of the principal places, which are highly wrought, but with rather an artificial tone of colouring. His execution was minute and laboured, but his pictures are very well completed in that style. He likewise employed his talents in imitations of Rembrandt, Rysdael, Polemburg, and Teniers; and so successfully, that his productions are often taken for originals. He died in the seventy-third year of his age, in 1718. He was known by the appellation of the old Griffier.-^-His son, Robert Griffier, or the young Griffier, practised the same profession as his father, and in the same style. He resided chierly upon the continent, and produced a great number of elaborate pictures of views on the Rhine, &c. with many figures in them. He was alive in 1713.

, an eminent patron of literature, was born at Lyons in 1479; and very early displayed a propensity towards those elegant and solid pursuits, which afterwards secured him the admiration and esteem of his contemporaries. His address was easy, his manners were frank, yet polished; his demeanour was engaging, and his liberality knew no bounds. As he advanced in years, he advanced in reputation; enjoying a princely fortune, the result, in some measure, of a faithful and honourable discharge of the important diplomatic situations which he filled. He was grand treasurer to Francis I. and ambassador from that monarch to pope Clement VII. During his abode at Rome he employed the Alduses to print for him an edition of Terence in 1521, 8vo, and another of Budaeus’s work “De Asse,” 1522, 4to. Of his liberality while in thiscity Egnatio gives the following instance “I dined along with Aldus, his son Manutius, and other learned men at Grollier’s table. After dinner, and just as the dessert had been placed on the table, our host presented each of his guests with a pair of gloves filled with ducats.” De Thou speaks very highly of his character. During his travels he had secured from Basil, Venice, and Rome, the most precious copies of books that could be purchased, which he bound in a peculiar style, described in our authority. Every library and every scholar has boasted of a book from Grollier’s library since it was dispersed, and during his life-time it was his pride to accommodate his friends with the use of them. He died at Paris in 1565.

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.”

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.

, a physician and botanist of considerable learning, the son, we presume, of the preceding, was born in Holland, in 1690. He took his doctor’s degree at Leyden in 1715, on which occasion he published a dissertation upon camphor, of the natural history and preparation of which he gives much new information. He settled at Leyden, and became one of the chief magistrates. He adopted the prevailing taste of his coun­ trymen for making collections of natural history, and in 1740 published his “Index Suppellectilis Lapideae,” or a scientific catalogue of his own collection of minerals, drawn up under the inspection, and with the assistance of Linnaeus. In a letter to Haller, in 1737, Linnæus mentions Gronovius, with Burmann and Adrian Van Royen, as principally anxious to increase their collections of dried plants, instead of studying genera; which study Linnæus was destined to revive. Grouovius received from Clayton various specimens of Virginian plants, which he, with the assistance of Linnæus, then resident in Holland, arranged according to the sexual system, and with proper specific characters, descriptions, and synonyms, published under the title of “Flora Virginica,” 1739, 8vo. A second part or supplement of the same work appeared in 1743, and a third was preparing when he died. This last being afterwards incorporated with the two former, the whole was published in 1762, 4to, by his son.

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.

, 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.

After the rising of that synod, our three prisoners were brought in order to their trial, the issue of which was the execution of Barnevelt, May 13, 1619. Five days after came on the trial of Grotius. He had been treated, as well as his fellow-prisoner, with inconceivable rigour during their imprisonment, and also while their cause was depending. He tells us himself, that, when they were known to be ill, it was concerted to examine them that they had not liberty to defend themselves that they were threatened and teazed to give immediate answers and not suffered to have their examinations read over to them. Grotius, having asked leave to write his defence, was allowed only five hours, and one sheet of paper; he was also told, that if he would own he had transgressed, and ask pardon, he might obtain his liberty; but, as he had nothing to reproach himself with, he would never take any step that might imply consciousness of guilt. His wife, his father, brother, and friends, all approved this resolution. His, sentence, after reciting the several reasons thereof, concludes thus: " For these causes, the judges, appointed to try this affair, administering justice in the name of the States General, condemn the said Hugo Groiius to perpetual imprisonment, and to be carried to the place appointed by the States General, there to be guarded with all precaution, and confined the rest of his days; and de-s clare his estate confiscated. Hague, May 18, 1619. In pursuance of this sentence he was carried from the Hague to the fortress of Louvestein near Gorcuni in South Holland, June 6, 1619, and 24 sols per day assigned for his maintenance, and as much for Hoogerbetz; but their respective wives declared they had enough to support their husbands, and that they chose to be without an allowance, which was considered as an affront. Grotius’s father asked leave to see his son, but was denied; they consented to admit his wife into Louvestein, but, if she came out, not to be suffered to return. However, in the sequel, it was granted that she might go abroad twice a week.

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.

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

, 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.

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.

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 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.

, 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.

, an English physician of considerable eminence in his day, was the son of Edward Gwinne, descended from an ancient family in Wales, who at this time resided in London. His son was educated at Merchant Taylors’ school, whence in 1574 he was elected a scholar of St. John’s college, Oxford, took the degree of B. A. May 14, 1578, and was afterwards perpetual fellow of the college. It was the custom at that time in Oxford for the convocation to appoint a certain number of regent masters, to read each of them upon some one of the liberal arts two years, for which they received a small stipend, levied upon the younger scholars. This provision was made, before the public professorships were settled and supported by fixed salaries. Agreeably to this practice, Mr. Gwinne was made regent-master in July 1582, and appointed to read upon music, and there is extant a manuscript oration of his upon that subject, spoken Oct. 15, of that year, in which he calls himself prelector musica publicus. When he had taken his degrees in arts, he studied physic, and practised in and about Oxford for several years. In 1588 he was chosen junior proctor of the university, and in 1592 distinguished himself in a disputation at Oxford before queen Elizabeth. On July 17, 1593, he was created doctor of physic. He obtained leave of the college in 1595, to attend sir Henry Union, ambassador from queen Elizabeth to the French court, and continued with him during his absence abroad.

On the detection of the gunpowder plot, he again fell under the displeasure of government, by concealing some of the agents in that affair in his house, and was condemned to die, but pardoned by the intercession of his brother-in-law, lord Morley, who discovered the plot by the famous letter of warning, which Mrs. Habington is reported to have written. The condition of his pardon was, that he should never stir out of Worcestershire. With this he appears to have complied, and devoted his time, among other pursuits, to the history and antiquities of that county, of which he left three folio volumes of parochial antiquities, two of miscellaneous collections, and one relating to the cathedral. These received additions from his son and from Dr. Thomas, of whom bishop Lyttelton purchased them, and presented them to the society of antiquaries. They have since formed the foundation of Dr. Nash’s elaborate history. Wood says he had a hand in the “History of Edward IV.” published afterwards under the name of his son, the poet, whom he survived dying in 1647, at the advanced age of eighty -seven.

, a celebrated German poet of the last century, was born at Hamburgh in 1708. His father was minister from the king of Denmark to the circles of Lower Saxony, a well informed man, who associated with men of letters, and was capable of giving a direction to his son’s studies suitable to his genius. By various misfortunes, however, he lost his property, and died when our poet was only fourteen, and very ill provided for the liberal education which his father intended. His mother endeavoured to make up this loss by placing him at a college at Hamburgh, where, having previously imbibed a taste for poetry, he read the ancient as well a* the modern poets with eagerness and assiduity. Without the help of a master, or the salutary aid of criticism, he endeavoured to draw from his own stock the power of dissipating the fogs of dulness in the north, as Haller had done in the south of Germany. In 1728 or 1729, he published a small collection of poems, which have many marks of youth, and though his versification is free, and his language often very pure, the thoughts are frequently cold, and the expression too concise. In subjects which require little taste and philosophy, he has succeeded better than in works of sentiment and imagination. Of his taste at this time, he has given a bad specimen in his satire entitled “The Poet,” in which he puts Pietsch by the side of Virgil.

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

, an eminent English philosopher and astronomer, was born at Haggerston, in the parish of St. Leonard, Shoreditch, near London, October 29, 1656. His father, a wealthy soap-boiler in Winchester-street, put him to St. Paul’s school, under the learned Dr. Thomas Gale, but his h'rst tutor is said to have been his father’s apprentice, who taught him writing and arithmetic at nine years old. At school he not only excelled in all parts of classical learning, but made such uncommon progress in mathematics, that, as Wood says, he had perfectly learnt the use of the celestial globe, and could make a complete dial; and we are informed by Halley himself, that he observed the change of the variation of the magnetic needle at London, in 1672, that is, one year before he left school. In 1673 he was entered a commoner of Queers-college, in Oxford, where he applied himself to practical and geometrical astronomy, in which he was greatly assisted by a curious apparatus of instruments which his father, willing to encourage his son’s genius, had purchased for him. At nineteen he began to publish new observations and discoveries, and continued to do so to the end of a very long life; nor did he distinguish himself less in the practical part of the science. Several observations made by him concerning a spot in the sun, seen at Oxford in July and August 1676, were published, with others by Flamsteed upon the same subject, in the Philosophical Transactions. By these the motion of the sun round its own axis, a phenomenon till then not well ascertained, was finally determined. The same year he likewise observed there, on Aug. 21, a.n occultation of Mars by the Moon, which he made use of afterwards, with others, in settling the longitude of the Cape of Good Hope against the objections of the French astronomers.

Dr. Hamilton’s works have lately been collected and published by his son, in 1809, 2 vols. 8vo. The first contains his treatise on conic sections already mentioned; the second, “An Essay on the existence and attributes of the Supreme Being;” “An Essay on the permission of Evil;” three philosophical essays on the ascent of vapours, the aurora borealis, and the principles of mechanics;“Remarks and hints on the improvement of Barometers;” “On the power of fixed alkaline salts to preserve flesh from putrefaction;” and “Four introductory Lectures on Natural Philosophy,” written originally in discharge of his duty as professor of natural philosophy; and received at their first publication, as the work of an acute and sound philosopher. In every office, whether ecclesiastical or otherwise, he seems to have been anxious to perform all the duties it imposed with fidelity and care.