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

But an end was now approaching to his pecuniary embarrassments. In 1762. while he was proceeding with his edition of Shakspeare, he was surprised by the information, that his present majesty had been pleased to grant him a pension of three hundred pounds a year, not, as has been invidiously asserted, in order to induce him to write for administration, but as the reward of his literary merit. Had it been otherwise, he had surely the strongest inducement to have exerted his talents in favour of lord Bute, by whose recommendation the pension was grained, and who at this time wanted much abler support than the hired writers of government could supply. But it is well known that he wrote no political tract for nearly eight years afterwards. He now took a house in Johnson’s court, Fleet-street, and allotted an apartment for Mrs. Williams. In 1765 he was introduced to the late Mr. Thrale and family, a circumstance which contributed much to alleviate the solicitudes of life, and furnished him with the enjoyment of an elegant table and elegant society. ' Here an apartment was fitted up for him, which he occupied when he pleased, and he accompanied the family in their various summer excursions, which tended to exhilarate his mind and render the return of his constitutional melancholy less frequent.

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

In 1770, his first political pamphlet made its appearance, in order to justify the conduct of the ministry and the House of Commons in expelling Mr. Wilkes, and afterwards declaring col. Luttrell to be duly elected representative for the county of Middlesex, notwithstanding Mr. Wilkes had the majority of votes. The vivacity and pointed sarcasm of this pamphlet formed its chief recommendation, and it continues to be read as an elegant political declamation; but it failed in its main object. It made no converts to the right of incapacitating Mr. Wilkes by the act of expulsion, and the ministry had not the courage to try the question of absolute incapacitation. Wilkes Jived to see the offensive resolutions expunged from the Journals of the House of Commons; and what seemed yet more improbable, to be reconciled to Johnson, who, with unabated dislike of his moral character, could not help admiring his classical learning and social talents* His pamphlet, which was entitled the “False Alarm,” was answered by two or three anonymous writers of no great note.

About this time, an ineffectual attempt was made by his steady friend Mr. Strahan, his majesty’s printer, to procure him a seat in parliament. His biographers have amused their readers by conjectures on the probable figure he would make in that assembly, and he owned frequently that he should not have been sorry to try. Why the interference of his friends were ineffectual, the minister only could tell, but he was probably not ill advised. It is not improbable that Johnson would have proved an able assistant on some occasions, where a nervous and manly speech was wanted to silence the inferiors in opposition, but it may be doubted whether he would have given that uniform and open consent which is expected from a party man. Whatever aid he might be induced to give by his pen on certain subjects, which accorded with his own sentiments, and of which he thought himself master, he by no means approved of many parts of the conduct of those ministers who carried on the American war; and he was ever decidedly against the principle (if it may be so called), that a man should go along with his party right or wrong, “This,” he once said, “is so remote from native virtue, from scholastic virtue, that a good man must have undergone a great change before he can reconcile himself tosuch a doctrine. It is maintaining that you may lie to the public, for you do lie when you call that right which you think wrong, or the reverse.”

In 1773, he carried into execution a design which he had long meditated, of visiting the western isles of Scotland. He arrived at Edinburgh on the 18th of August, and finished his journey on the 22jd of November. During this time be passed some days at Edinburgh, and then went by St. Andrew’s, Aberdeen, Inverness, and Fort Augustus, to the Hebrides, visiting the isles of Sky, Rasay, Col, Mull, Inchkenneth, and Icolmkill. He then travelled through Argyleshire by Inverary, and thence by Lochlomond and Dumbarton to Glasgow and Edinburgh. The popularity of his own account, which has perhaps been more generally read than any book of travels in modern times, and the “Journal” of his pleasant companion Mr. Boswell, render any farther notice of this journey unnecessary. The censure he met with is now remembered with indifference, and his “Tour” continues to be read without any of the unpleasant emotions which it first excited in those who contended that he had not stated the truth, or were unwilling that the truth should be stated.

During his absence, his humble friend and admirer, Thomas Davies, bookseller, ventured to publish two volumes, entitled “Miscellaneous and Fugitive Pieces,” which he advertised in the newspapers, as the productions of the “Author of the Rambler.” Johnson was inclined to resent this liberty, until he recollected Davies’s narrow circumstances, when he cordially forgave him, and continued his kindness to him as usual. A third volume appeared soon after, but all its contents are not from Dr. Johnson’s pen. On the dissolution of parliament in 1774, he published a short political pamphlet entitled “The Patriot,” the principal object of which appears to have been to repress the spirit of faction which at that time was too prevalent, especially in the metropolis. It was a hasty composition, called for, as he informed Mr. Boswell, on one day, and written the next. The success, since his days, of those mock-patriots whom he has so ably delineated, is too decisive a proof that the reign of politic delusion is not to be shortened by eloquence or argument. During his tour in Scotland, he made frequent inquiries respecting the authenticity of “Ossian’s Poems,” and received answers so unsatisfactory that both in his book of travels and in conversation, he did not hesitate to treat the whole as an imposture. This excited the resentment of Macpherson, the editor, to such a degree that he wrote a threatening letter to Johnson, who answered it in a composition, which in the expression of firm and unalterable contempt, is perhaps superior to that he wrote to lord Chesterfield. In it he mixed somewhat of courtesy; but Macpherson he despised both as a man and a writer, and treated him as a ruffian.

Of this edition it is yet necessary to say, that Dr. Johnson was not in all respects to be considered as the editor. He had not the choice of the poets to be admitted, although in addition to the list prepared by his employers, he recommended Blackmore, Watts, Pomfret, and Yalden. The selection was made by the booksellers, who appear to have been guided partly by the acknowledged merit of the poet, and partly by his popularity, a quality which, is sometimes independent of the former. Our author, however, felt himself under no restraint in accepting the list offered, nor did he in any instance consider himself bound to lean with partiality to any author merely that the admission of his works might be justified. This absurd species of prejudice which lias contaminated so many single lives and critical prefaces, was repugnant to his, as it must ever be to the opinion of every man who considers truth as essential to biography, and that the possession of talents, however brilliant, ought to be no excuse for the abuse of them. Every preliminary having been settled in the month of April, 1777, the new edition of the Poets was sent to press, and Johnson was informed that his lives might be written in the mean time, so as to be ready to accompany the publication.

Not long after he undertook this work, he was invited to contribute the aid of his aloquent pen in saving the forfeited life of Dr. William Dodd, a clergyman who was convicted of forgery. This unhappy man had long been a popular preacher in the metropolis; and the public sentiment was almost universal in deprecating so shameful a sight as that of a clergyman of the church of England suffering by a public, execution. Whether there was much in Dodd’s character to justify this sentiment, or to demand the interference of the corporation of London, backed by the petitions of thousands of the most distinguished and wealthy citizens, may perhaps be doubted. Johnson, however, could not resist what put every other consideration out of the question, “a call for mercy,” and accordingly contributed every thing that the friends of Dodd could suggest in his favour. He wrote his “Speech to the Recorder of London,” delivered at the Old Bailey when sentence of death was about to be passed on him “The Convict’s Address to his unhappy brethren,” a sermon delivered by Dodd in the chapel of Newgate Two Letters, one to the Lord Chancellor Bathurst, and one to Lord Chief Justice Mansfield A petition from Dr. Dodd to the King another from Mrs. Dodd to the Queen Observations inserted in the newspapers, on occasion of Earl Percy’s having presented to his Majesty a petition for mercy to Dodd, signed by twenty thousand persons; a petition from the city of London; and Dr. Dodd’s last solemn declaration, which he left with the sheriff at the place of execution. All these have been printed in Dr. Johnson’s VVorks, with some additional correspondence which Mr. Boswell inserted in his Life. Every thing is written in a style of pathetic eloquence; but, as the author could not be concealed, it was impossible to impress a stronger sense of the value of Dodd’s talents than had already been entertained. The papers, however, contributed to heighten the clamour, which was at that time raised against the execution of the sentence, and which was confounded with what was then thought more censurable, the conduct of those by whom the unhappy man might have been saved before the process of law had been begun.

Jn 1779 the first four volumes of his Lives of the Poets were published, and the remainder in 1781, which he wrote by uis own confession, “dilatorily and hastily, unwilling to work, and working with vigour and haste.” He had, however, performed so much more than was expected, that his employers presented him with an hundred pounds in addition to the stipulated sum. As he never was insensible to the pleasure or value of fame, it is not improbable that he was yet more substantially gratified by the eagerness with which his Lives of the Poets were read and praised. He enjoyed likewise another satisfaction, which it appears he thought not unnecessary to the reputation of a great writer. He was attacked on all sides for his contempt for Milton’s politics, and the sparing praise or direct censure he had bestowed on the poetry of Prior, Hammond, Collins, Gray, and a few others. The errors, indeed, which on any other subject might have passed for errors of judgment, were by the irascible tempers of his adversaries, magnified into high treason against the majesty of poetic genius. During his life, these attacks were not few, nor very respectful, to a veteran whom common consent had placed at the head of the literature of his country; but the courage of his adversaries was observed to rise very considerably after his death, and the name which public opinion had consecrated, was now reviled with the utmost malignity. Even some who during his life were glad to conceal their hostility, now took an opportunity to retract the admiration in which they had joined with apparent cordiality; and to discover faults in a body of criticism which, after all reasonable exceptions are admitted, was never equalled, and perhaps never will be equalled for justice, acuteness, and elegance. Where can we hope to find discussions that can be compared with those introduced in the lives of Cowley, Milton, Dryden, and Pope? His abhorrence, indeed, of Milton’s political conduct, Jed him to details and observations which can, never be acceptable to a certain class of politicians; but when he comes to analyze his poetry, and to fix his reputation on its proper basis, it must surely be confessed that no man, since the first appearance of Paradise Lost, has ever bestowed praise with a more munificent hand. He appears to have collected his whole energy to immortalize the genius of Milton; nor has any advocate for Milton’s democracy appeared, who has not been glad to surrender the guardianship of his poetical fame to Johnson.

In Midsummer 1784, he acquired sufficient strength to go for the last time into Derbyshire. During his absence, his friends, who were anxious for the preservation of so valuable a life, endeavoured to procure some addition to his pension, that he might be enabled to try the efficacy of a tour to the southern part of the continent. Application was accordingly made to the lord chancellor, who seconded it in the proper quarter, but without success. He evinced, however, his high respect for Johnson, by offering to advance the sum of five hundred pounds; and Johnson, when the circumstance was communicated, thanked his lordship in a letter elevated beyond the common expressions of gratitude, by a dignity of sentiment congenial to the feelings of his noble and liberal correspondent. Dr. Brocklesby also made a similar offer, although of a lesser sum; and such indeed was the estimation in which Johnson was held, that nothing would have been wanting which money or affection could procure, either to protract his days, or to make them comfortable.

But these offers were not accepted. The scheme of a continental tour, which he once thought necessary, was never much encouraged by his physicians, and had it promised greater effects, was now beyond his strength. The dropsy and asthma were making hasty approaches, and although he longed for life, and was anxiously desirous that every means might be used to gain another day, he soon became convinced that no hopes were left. During this period, he was alternately resigned to die, and tenacious of life, tranquil in the views of eternity, and disturbed by gloomy apprehensions; but at last his mind was soothed with the consolatory hopes of religion, and although the love of life occasionally recurred, he adjusted his worldly concerns with composure and exactness, as one who was conscious that he was soon to give an account. On Monday the 13th of December, he tried to obtain a temporary relief by puncturing his legs, as had been before performed by the surgeon, but no discharge followed the operation, and about seven o'clock in the evening, he breathed his last, so gently that some time elapsed before his death was perceived.

* His monument was reserved for sculpture was designed and finely exeSt. Paul’s church; and the expences cuted by Bacon. The epitaph is the having bee defrayed by a liberal and composition of Dr. Parr, and is coovoluntary contribution, it stands with cise, but strongly appropriated. The that of Howard, one of the first tributes monument was completed early in of national admiration and gratitude 1796, admitted into that cathedral. The from the generally received opinions as to the rank Johnson holds among men of genius and virtue, a rank which those who yet capriciously dwell on his tailings, will find it difficult to disturb. His errors have been brought forward with no sparing hand both by his friends and his enemies, yet when every fair deduction is made from the reputed excellence of his character as a man and a writer, enough in our opinion will remain to gratify the partiality of his admirers, and to perpetuate the public esteem.

It is unpleasant, however, to quit a subject, which, the more it is revolved, serves to gladden the mind with pleasing recollections. There are surely circumstances in the history of Johnson which compel admiration in defiance of prejudice or envy. That a man of obscure birth, of manners by no means prepossessing, whose person was forbidding, whose voice was rough, inharmonious, and terrifying, whose temper was frequently harsh and overbearing; that such a man should have forced his way into the.society of a greater number of eminent characters than perhaps ever gathered round an individual; that he should not only have gained but increased their respect to a degree of enthusiasm, and preserved it unabated for so long a series of years; that men of all ranks in life, and of the highest degrees of mental excellence, should have thought it a duty, and found it a pleasure, not only to tolerate his occasional roughness, but to study his humour, and submit to his controul, to listen to him with the submission of a scholar, and consult him with the hopes of a client All this surely affords the strongest presumption that such a man was remarkable beyond the usual standard of human excellence. Nor is this inference inconsistent with the truth, for it appears that whatever merit may be attributed to his works, he was perhaps yet more to be envied in conversation, where he exhibited an inexhaustible fertility of imagination, an elegance and acuteness of argument, and a ready wit, such as never appear to have been combined in one man. And it is not too much to say that whatever opinion was entertained by tftose who knew him only in his writings, it never could have risen to that pitch of admiration which has been excited by the labours of his industrious biographer.

His death formed a very remarkable aera in the literary world. For a considerable time the periodical journals, as well as general conversation, were eagerly occupied on an event which was the subject of universal regret; and every man hastened with such contributions as memory supplied, to illustrate a character in which all took a lively interest. Numerous anecdotes were published, some authentic and some imaginary, and the general wish to knew more of Johnson was for some years insatiable. At length the proprietors of his printed works met to consider of a complete and uniform edition, but as it was feared that the curiosity which follows departed genius might soon abate, some doubt was entertained of the policy of a collection of pieces, the best of which were already in the hands of the public in various forms; but this was fortunately overruled, and these collected Works have very recently been printed for the fifth time, and will probably be long considered as a standard book in every library. Less fortunately, however, sir John Hawkins, who was one of Johnson’s executors, and professed to be in possession of materials for his Life, was engaged to write that Life, as well as to collect his Works. They accordingly appeared in 1787, in 11 vols. 8vo. Of the Life it is unnecessary to add any thing to the censure so generally passed. Sir John spoke his mind, perhaps honestly but his judgment must have been as defective as his memory,when he decided with so much prejudice and so little taste or candour, on the merits of his author, and of other eminent persons, whom, as a critic humorously said, “he brought to be tried at the Middlesex quarter sessions.” In collecting the Works, he inserted some which no man could suspect to be Johnson’s, while he omitted other pieces that had been acknowledged. A more correct arrangement, however, has been since adopted.

Two years before this edition appeared, Mr. Boswell published his Tour to the Hebrides, and exhibited such a sample of Dr. Johnson’s conversation-talents as raised very high expectations from the Life which he then announced to be in a state of preparation. Mr. Boswell’s acquaintance with Dr. Johnson commenced in 1763; and from that time he appears to have meditated what he at length executed, the most complete and striking portrait ever exhibited of any human being. His “Tour” having shown the manner in which he was to proceed, Johnson’s friends willingly contributed every document they could collect from memory or writing; and Mr. Boswell, who meditated one volume only, was soon obliged to extend his work to two bulky quartos. These were published in 1791, and bought up with an avidity which their wonderful variety of entertainment, vivacity, anecdote, and sentiment, amply justified. Five or six very large editions have since appeared, and it seems to be one of those very fortunate and fascinating books of which the public is not likely to tire.

Mr. Boswell, indeed, has proved, contrary to the common opinion, and by means which will not soon be repeated, that the life of a mere scholar may be rendered more instructive, more entertaining, and more interesting, than than that of any other human being. And although the “confidence of private conversation” has been thought to be sometimes violated in this work, for which no apology is here intended, yet the world seems agreed to forgive this failing in consideration of the pleasure it has afforded; that wonderful variety of subjects, of wit, sentiment, and anecdote, with which it abounds; and above all, the valuable instruction it presents on many of the most important duties of life. It must be allowed that it created some enemies to Dr. Johnson among those who were not enemies before this disclosure of his sentiments. Vanity has been sometimes hurt, and vanity has taken its usual rerenge. It is generally agreed, however, that Mr. Boswell’s account of his illustrious friend is impartial: he conceals no failing that revenge or animosity has since been able to discover; all his foibles of manner and conversation are faithfully recorded, and recorded so frequently that it is easier to form a just estimate of Dr. Johnson than of any eminent character in the whole range of biography.

, an English botanist, of the seventeenth century, was born at Selby, in Yorkshire, and bred an apothecary in London. He afterwards kept a shop on Snow- hill, where, says Wood, by his unwearied pains and good natural parts, he attained to be the best herbalist of his age in England. He was first known to the public by a small piece under the title of “Iter in agrum Cantianum,” 1620; and “Ericetum Hamstedianum,” 16&2; which were the first local catalogues of plants published in England. He soon after acquired great credit by his new edition and emendation of Gerard’s “Herbal.” In the rebellion, “his zeal for the royal cause led him into the army, in which he greatly distinguished himself;- and the university of Oxford, in consideration of his merit, learning, and loyalty, conferred upon him the degree of M. D. May 9, 1643. In the army he had the rank of lieutenantcolonel to sir Marmaduke Rawdon, governor of Basinghouse. Near this place, in a skirmish with the enemy, in Sept. 1644, he received a shot in the shoulder, of which he died in a fortnight after, and, as there is reason to think, in the meridian of life. Besides the works abovementioned, and his improved edition of Gerard’s” Herbal,“which was twice printed in his life-time, in 1633 and in 1636, fol. he published in 1634,” Mercurius Botanicus, sive plantarum gratia suscepti Itineris, anno 1634, descriptio,“Lond. 8vo. This was the result of a journey, with some associates of the company of apothecaries, through Oxford, to Bath and Bristol, and back by Southampton, the Isle of Wight, and Guiklford, with the professed design to investigate rare plants. To this was added his small tract,” De Thermis Bathonicis,“with plans of the baths, and one of the city, which, to antiquaries, are now interesting. This was followed by a second part of his excursion,” Pars altera," which extends to Wales. He was among the earliest botanists who visited Wales and Snowdon, with the sole intention of discovering the rarities of that country in the vegetable kingdom, He also translated the works of Ambrose Parey, the celebrated French surgeon, published at London in 1643, and reprinted in 1678. Miller consecrated the name of Johnson by assigning it to a berry-bearing shrub of Carolina, belonging to the tetrandrous class, but it has not been retained in the LinnaDan system, where the plant is called callicarpa.

, was born at Caskieben, near Aberdeen, the seat of his ancestors, in 1587, and probably was educated at Aberdeen, as he was afterwards advanced to the highest dignity in that university. The study to which he chiefly applied, was that of physic; and to improve himself in that science, he travelled into foreign countries. He was twice at Rome, but the chief place of his residence was at Padua, in which university the degree of M. D. was conferred on him in 1610, as appears by a ms copy of verses in the advocates’ library in Edinburgh. After leaving Padua, he travelled through the rest of Italy, and over Germany, Denmark, England, Holland, and other countries, and at last settled in France, where he met with great applause as a Latin poet. He lived there twenty years, and by two wives had thirteen children. At last, after twenty-four years absence, he returned into Scotland, as some say in 1632, but probably much sooner, as there is an edition of his “Epigrammata,” printed at Aberdeen in 1632, in which he is styled the king’s physician. It appears by the council-books at Edinburgh, that the doctor had a suit at law before that court about the same time. In the year following, Charles I. went into Scotland, and made bishop Laud, then with him, a member of that council; and by this accident it is probable the acquaintance began between the doctor and that prelate, which produced his “Psalmorum Davidis Paraphrasis Poetica.” We find, that in the same year the doctor printed a specimen of his Psalms at London, and dedicated them to his lordship, which is considered as a proof that the bishop prevailed upon Johnston to remove to London from Scotland, and then set him upon this work; neither can it be doubted but, after he had seen this sample, he also engaged him to perfect the whole, which took him up four years; for the first etlition'of all the Psalms was published at Aberdeen in 1637, and at London in the same year. In 1641, Dr. Johnston being at Oxford on a visit to one of his daughters, who was married to a divine of the church of England in that place, was seized with a violent diarrhoea, of which he died in a few days, in the fifty-fourth year of his age, not without having seen the beginning of those troubles which proved so fatal to his patron. He was buried in the place where he died, which gave occasion to the following lines of his learned friend Wedderburn in his “Suspiria,” on the doctor’s death:

In 1632, as already remarked, was published at Aberdeen “Epigrammata Arturi Johnstoni;” and in 1633, he translated Solomon’s Song into Latin elegiac verse, and dedicated it to his majesty; in 1637, he edited the “Deliciae Poetarum Scoticorum,” to which he was himself a large contributor, and which, says Dr. Johnson, would have done honour to any country. His Psalms were reprinted at Middleburg, 1642; London, 1657; Cambridge,; Amsterdam, 1706 Edinburgh, by William Lauder, 1739 and at last on the plan of the Delphin classics, at London, 1741, 8vo, at the expence of auditor Benson, who dedicated them to his late majesty, and prefixed to this edition memoirs of Dr. Johnston, with the testimonies of various learned persons. A laboured, but partial and injudicious comparison between the two translations of Buchanan and Johnston, was printed the same year by Benson, in English, in 8vo, entitled <* A Prefatory Discourse to Dr. Johnston’s Psalms,“&c. and” A Conclusion to it.“This was ably answered by the learned Ruddiman in” A Vindication of Mr. George Buchanan’s Paraphrase of the Book of Psalms,“1745, 8vo. Johnston’s translations of the” Te Deum, Creed, Decalogue,“&c. were subjoined to the Psalms. His other poetical works are his” Parerga,“and his” Musae Aulicse,“or commendatory verses upon persons of rank in church and state at that time. Johnston is evidently entitled to very high praise as a Latin poet; and the late lord Woodhouselee seems to admit that from his days the Latin muses have deserted the northern part of our island: Benson’s comparison between Buchanan and Johnston was absurd enough, but it is not fair that Johnston should suffer by his editor’s want of taste. The abler critic we have just mentioned, does not think Johnston’s attempt to emulate Buchanan as a translator of the Psalms, greatly beyond his powers; for, although taken as a whole, his version is certainly inferior (as indeed what modern has, in Latin poetry, equalled Buchanan) yet there are a few of his Psalms, such as the 24th, 30th, 74th, 81st, 82d, 102d, and above all, the 137th, which, on comparison, lord Woodhouselee says, will be found to excel the corresponding paraphrase of his rival. And Dr. Beattie seems to speak in one respect more decidedly. Johnston, he says,” is not so verbose as Buchanan, and has of course more vigour;" but he very justly censures the radical evil of Johnston’s Psalms, his choice of a couplet, which keeps the reader always in rnind of the puerile epistles of Ovid.

, author of <c Chrysal, or the Adventures 'of a Guinea,“and other works of a similar kind, was a native of Ireland, and descended from a branch of the Johnstons of Annandale. He was born in the early part of the last century, but in what year we have not been able to discover. After receiving a good classical education, he was called to the bar, and came over to England for practice in that profession, but being unfortunately prevented by deafness from attending the courts, he confined himself to the employment of a chamber counsel. It does not appear that his success was great, and embarrassed circumstances rendered him glad to embrace any other employment, in which his talents might have a chance to succeed. His” Chrysal“is said to have been his first literary attempt, two volumes of which he wrote while on a visit to Mount Edgecumbe, the seat of the late earl of Mount Edgecumbe. He appears to have had recourse to some degree of art, in order to apprize the public of what they were to expect from it. In the newspapers for April 1760, it is announced that” there will be speedily published, under the emblematical title of the f Adventures of a Guinea/ a dispassionate, distinct account of the most remarkable transactions of the present times all over Europe, with curious and interesting anecdotes of the public and private characters of the parties principally concerned in these scenes, especially in England; the whole interspersed with several most whimsical and entertaining instances of the intimate connection between high and low life, and the power of little causes to produce great events.“This, while it has the air of a puff, is not an unfaithful summary of the contents of these volumes, which were published in May of the same year, and read with such avidity, that the author was encouraged to add two more volumes in 1765, not inferior to the former, in merit or success; and the work has often been reprinted since. The secret springs of some political intrigues on the continent, are perhaps unfolded in these volumes, but it was the personal characters of many distinguished statesmen, women of quality, and citizens, which rendered the work palatable. A few of these were depicted in such striking colours as not to be mistaken; and the rest, being supposed to be equally faithful, although less obvious, the public were long amused in conjecturing the originals. With some truth, however, there is so much fiction, and in a few instances so much of what deserves a worse epithet, that” Chrysal“does not appear entitled to much higher praise than that of the best” scandalous chronicle of the day." In one case, it may be remembered, the author occasioned no little confusion among the guilty parties, by unfolding the secrets of a club of profligates of rank, who used to assemble at a nobleman’s villa in Buckinghamshire. In this, as well as other instances, it must be allowed, that although he describes his bad characters as worse than they were, he everywhere expresses the noblest sentiments of indignation against vice and meanness.

At Kidderminster Dr. Johnstone continued to act in a wide sphere of country practice, till the death of his eldest son, a physician fast rising into eminence, who fell a martyr to humanity in attending the prisoners at Worcester infected with jail-fever; and the coincidence of the death of his dearest friend the rev. Job Orton, induced him to remove to Worcester. In this city, famous from the days of Dr. Cole, the friend of Sydenham, for its physicians, he continued, vigorous, active, and sprightly, useful to the community, and beloved by his friends, to practise till a few days previous to his death. He had been subject to pulmonary complaints in his youth, which had been averted by temperance and caution. In his later years they recurred, and during the last spring he had bied himself rather too profusely. In the last attack, which was aggravated by excessive fatigue and exertion, his weakness was such as to forbid the repetition of more than one bleeding; and his strength gradually decayed, leaving his intellect clear and unimpaired. His death was a perfect euthanasia: he expired April 28, 1802, after a short and in no wise painful struggle, having sat up and conversed with his family, till within a few hours of the awful change, cheerful, patient, and resigned. He survived his wife, with whom he lived fifty years, only two months.

Dr. Johnstone was the correspondent and friend of Haller, Whytt, Cullen, and Fothergill; the bosom-friend of the virtuous Lyttelton and the pious Orton, and of many other wise and learned men, who still improve and adorn society the active and humane physician, the sagacious physiologist, the recondite antiquary and few men have occupied a larger space of professional utility and private regard, than Dr. Johnstone. Firm and undeviating in his own moral carriage, his vigorous and manly mind was perhaps, on some occasions, too little accommodating to characters and circumstances. In his temper he was cheerful, though sometimes hasty in his conversation lively and instructive in his affections warm and attached in his domestic relations, he was the best of fathers, his whole life was a sacrifice to the advantage of his children in fine, although the memory of his personal services cannot be soon forgotten, yet has he erected a still more durable monument to his fame, in those various practical improvements of the medical art, which rank his name among the benefactors of mankind.

, an eminent French statesman, who flourished about 1260, was descended from one of the noblest and most ancient families at Champagne. He was seneschal, or high-steward, of Champagne, and one of the principal lords of the court of Louis IX. whom he attended in all his military expeditions; and was greatly beloved and esteemed for his valour, his wit, and the frankness of his manners. That monarch placed so much confidence in him, that all matters of justice, in the palace, were referred to his decision; and his majesty undertook nothing of importance without consulting him. He died about 1318, at not much less than ninety years of age. Joinviile is known as an author by his “History of St. Louis,” in French, which he composed in 130.5: a very curious and interesting work. The best edition is that of Du Gauge, in 1668, folio, with learned remarks. On per-, using this edition, however, it is easily seen, that the language of the Sire de Joinviile has been altered. But aa authentic ms. of the original was found in 1748, and was published without alteration, in 1761, by Melot, keeper of the royal library at Paris. This edition is also in folio.

From 1758 to about 1768, he resided in Germany, being engaged in the service of the duke of Wurtemburg, at Stutgardt, or rather at Ludwigsburg, his new capital, where Jomelli’s works were performed. Here he produced a great number of operas and other compositions, by which he acquired great reputation, and totally changed the taste of vocal music in Germany. On his return to Italy, he left all these productions behind him, upon a supposition that he should again resume his station at Ludwigsburg, after visiting his native country. But as he never returned thither to claim these compositions, they fell into the hands of his patron, the duke of Wurtemburg, who preserved them as precious relics of this great master. Very few of his entire operas were ever performed in England. The first was “Attilio Regulo,” in 1753, and the second, in 1755, “Andromaca.” The operas of Jomelli will be always valuable to professors and curious collectors, for the excellence of the composition, though it has been thought necessary, in compliance with the general rage for novelty, to lay them aside and to have the same dramas new set for the stage, in order to display the talents, or hide the defects, of new singers.

As Jomelli was a great harmonist, and naturally grave and majestic in his style, he seems to have manifested abilities in writing for the church superior even to those for the stage. Dr. Burney speaks of three, the only ones he had seen, all written by Metastasio, and all admirably get. Dr. Burney had also a “Te Deum,” and a “Requiem” of his composition, which show him to have been a great master of the church style, although he appears not to have tried that species before 1751, when he, Perez, and Durante were employed to compose some music at Rome for passion week. But though he acquired considerable fame on this occasion, yet he was so far from being intoxicated by it, that in a visit to father Martini, at Bologna soon after, he told this learned contrapuntist that he had a scholar to introduce to him. Martini assured him that he should be glad to instruct any one so well recommended and, a few days after, Martini asking who and where was the disciple he had talked- of Jomelli answered that it was himself and pulling a studio of paper out of his pocket, on which he had been trying his strength in modulation and fugue upon canto fermo, begged of him to examine and point out his errors.

, a learned Icelander, who acquired a great reputation for astronomy and the sciences, was coadjutor to Gundebrand of Thorbac, bishop of Holum in Iceland, who was also of that nation, a man of great learning and probity, had been a disciple of Tycho Brahe, and understood astronomy very well. After his death, the see of Holum was offered by the king of Denmark to Anagrimus, who begged to be excused; desiring to avoid the envy that might attend him in that high office, and to be at leisure to prosecute his studies. He chose therefore to continue as he was, pastor of the church of Melstudt, and intendant of the neighbouring churches of the last-mentioned diocese. He died in 1640, at the age of ninety-five. He wrote several books in honour of his country, against the calumnies of Blefkenius and others, which are well esteemed; the titles whereof are, “Idea veri magistratus,” Copenhagen, 1589, 8vo. “Brevis commentarius de Islandia, ibid. 1593,” 8vo. “Anatome Blefkeniana. Holi in Iceland, 1612,” 8vi, and at Hamburgh, 1618, 4to. “Epistola pro patria defensoria,” ibid. 1618. “'ATrorpiGv calumniae,” ibid. 1622, 4to. “Crymogeea, seu rerum Islandicarum libri tres, ibid. 1630,” 4to. This was written in 1603, and printed at Hamburgh in 1609, with a map of Denmark, and, in 1710, without the map. “Specimen Islandi.i; historicum et magna ex parte chorographicum,” Amstelod. 1634, 4to. This piece is a vindication of the author’s opinion against the arguments of John Isaacus Pontanus. Anagrimus maintained that Iceland was not peopled till about the year 874, and therefore cannot be the ancient Thule. “Vita Gundebrandi Thorlacii,” Lugd. Bat. 1630, 4to.

, a pious divine and great benefactor to his country, Wales, was born in 1684, in the parish of Kilredin in the county of Carmarthen, and educated at Carmarthen school, where he made great proficiency in Greek, Latin, and other studies, but does not appear to have been at either university. Having, however, qualified himself for the ministry, he received deacon’s orders from bishop Bull in Sept. 1708, and priest’s orders from the same prelate in Sept. 1709. His learning and piety having recommended him to sir John Phillips, of Picton castle, bart. he was preferred by that gentleman to the rectory of Llanddowror, in Carmarthenshire. He was soon after fixed upon by the “Society for propagating the gospel in foreign parts,” as a person every way qualified to be sent as a missionary amongst the Indians, and at first gave his consent, but circumstances occurred which prevented his country from being deprived of his services. In his parish he soon became popular by his fervent and well digested discourses, delivered with a voice and action tranquil, easy, yet strongly impressive; and by his affectionate discharge of the other duties of his station in risking, catechizing, &c. But he was principally distinguished for his zeal in procuring subscriptions for the support of what were called circulating Welsh schools, to teach poor Welsh men, women, and children to read their native language; and such was his diligence, and the effect of his superintendence of these schools, that he could enumerate 158,000 poor ignorant persons who had been taught to read; and equal care was taken to catechize and instruct young people in the principles of the Christian religion. Having applied to the “Society for promoting Christian knowledge,” of which he was a corresponding member, that body caused to be printed two large editions of the Welsh Bible, of 15,000 copies each, which were sold cheap for the benefit of the poor in Wales. He likewise wrote and published several instructive treatises in the Welsh as well as the English language; and was enabled by the assistance of some charitable friends to print editions of from 8000 to 12,000 of these useful manuals, which were distributed throughout all Wales. His own charitable exertions were extensive, and having studied medicine in a certain degree, he laid in a large stock of drugs, which he made up and dispensed to the poor gratis, taking that opportunity also to give them spiritual advice. This truly good man died April 8, 1761, lamented as a father to his flock, and a general benefactor to the whole country.

, who deserves a place in the catalogue of English writers for having first introduced the numerous and popular little books for the amusement and instruction of children, which have been received with universal approbation, was born in 1721, and served his apprenticeship to Mr. Bowyer, the learned printer. His education was probably not neglected, or at least it was very much improved by his own efforts. He was many years editor of the London Chronicle and Public Ledger. He was also associated with Dr. Johnson in the “Literary Magazine,” and with Smollett and Goldsmith in “The British Magazine,” and published a great number of translations from the French, to none of which, however, was his name prefixed. One little publication, entitled “Great events from little causes,” was his composition, and met with a rapid and extensive sale. In conjunction with Mr. John Newbery, and a brother of his own, Mr. Giles Jones, he wrote many of those little books or Lilliputian histories which were the delight of the youth of many yet living. Mr. Jones, who was a very amiable man, died Sept. 12, 1786. Mr. Giles Jones, his brother (who was more than five-andforty years secretary to the Vork Buildings Water company) left a son,- Mr. Stephen Jones, who, among other literary productions, was editor of the last edition of the “Biographia Dramatica,” which was consigned to his care by the late Mr. Isaac Reed.

, a dramatic writer, was a native of Drogheda, in Ireland, and was bred a bricklayer; but, having a natural inclination for the muses, pursued his devotions to them even during the labours of his mere mechanical avocations, and composing a line of brick and a line of verse alternately, his walls and poems rose in growth together, but not with equal degrees of durability. His turn, as is most generally the case with mean poets, or bards of humble origin, was panegyric. This procured him some friends; and, in 1745, when the earl of Chesterfield went over to Ireland as lord-lieutenant, Mr. Jones was recommended to the notice of that nobleman, who, delighted with the discovery of this mechanic muse, not only favoured him with his own notice and generous munificence, but also thought proper to transplant this opening flower into a warmer and more thriving climate. He brought him with him to England, recommended him to many of the nobility there, and not only procured him a large subscription for the publishing a collection of his “Poems,” but it is said, even took on himself the alteration and correction, of his tragedy, and also the care of prevailing on the managers of Covent-garden theatre to bring it on the stage. This nobleman also recommended him in the warmest manner to Colley Gibber, whose friendly and humane disposition induced him to shew him a thousand acts of friendship, and even made strong efforts by his interest at court to have secured to him the succession of the laurel after his death. With these favourable prospects it might have been expected that Jones would have passed through life with so much decency as to have ensured his own happiness, and done credit to the partiality of his friends; but this was not the case. “His temper,” says one, who seems to have known him, “was, in consequence of the dominion of his passions, uncertain and capricious; easily engaged, and easily disgusted; and, as ceconomy was a virtue which could never be taken into his catalogue, he appeared to think himself born rather to be supported by others than under a duty to secure to himself the profits which his writings and the munificence of his patrons from time to time afforded.” After experiencing many reverses of fortune, which an overbearing spirit, and an imprudence in regard to pecuniary concerns, consequently drew on him, he died in great want, in April 1770, in a garret belonging to the master of the Bedford coffee-house, by whose charity he had been some time supported, leaving an example to those of superior capacities and attainments, who, despising the common maxims of life, often feel the want of not pursuing them when it is too late. His principal performance, “The Earl of Essex,” appeared in 1753, and he also left a tragedy unfinished, called “The Cave of Idra,” which falling into the hands of Dr. Hiffernan, he enlarged it to five acts, and brought it out under the title of “The Heroine of the Cave.” His last publications were, “Merit” “The Relief;” and “Vectis, or the Isle of Wight,” poems but his poetical worth, though not contemptible, was far from being of the first-rate kind.

, a learned dissenting divine, was born in 1693, and received his academical learning under his uncle, the rev. Samuel Jones, first of Gloucester, then of Tewksbury, the tutor of Chandler, Butler, and Seeker. He was fellow-student with the latter in 1711, and was a distinguished scholar, when he entered upon academical studies. It is apprehended, that he was a native of the North of England, and that his father was a gentleman in affluent circumstances. There was with him, at the above seminary, a younger brother, a youth of quick parts, who afterwards settled as a dissenting minister at Manchester. Mr. Jones, soon after he had finished his course of preparatory studies, became the minister of the congregation of Protestant dissenters, who assembled for worship in Forest Green, Avening, Gloucestershire, and resided at Nailsworth, where he also kept an academy. He had the character of being an eminent linguist. He was popular as a preacher; for the place of worship was considerably enlarged in his time. His discourses met with the approbation of the more judicious, for his salary amounted to one hundred pounds per annum, and the whole subscription came from persons of superior rank in life. Though a deep scholar and hard student, he was not a man of severe manners; but of an open and social disposition, and one of a bowling party at a place still called the Lodge, on Hampton common, at which healthy exercise he relaxed from his studies, and by his presence and influence preserved decorum in the company. His character secured him the marked respect of a neighbouring clergyman. His anxiety to fulfil an engagement, which he had made, to perform some ministerial service at a place on the other side of the Severn, hastened his death. It escaped his recollection, till the time drew near; to prevent disappointment, he made so much speed, that his tender constitution was injured by it, and a complaint contracted, from which he never recovered. He died in 1724, aged 31.

In respect to his character, we are assured, by one who knew him well, that his scientific abilities surpassed most of his age. He was a perfect master of the mathematics, and was not unacquainted with the two learned languages, Greek and Latin, especially the latter; neither was he without some turn for poetry . A copy of verses composed by him is published in the “Odcombian Banquet,” prefixed to Tom Coryate’s “Crudities,” in 1611, 4to. But his proper character was that of an architect, and the most eminent of his time on which account he is still generally styled the British Vitruvius the art of designing being little known in England till Mr. Jones, under the patronage of Charles I. and the earl of Arundel, brought it into use. This is the character given him by Mr. Webb, who was his heir; and who, being born in London, and bred in Merchant Taylors’-school, afterwards resided in Mr. Jones’s family, married his kinswoman, was instructed by him in mathematics and architecture, and designed by him for his successor in the office of surveyor-general of his majesty’s works, but was prevented by Sir John Denham. Mr. Webb published some other pieces besides his “Vindication of Stone-henge restored ;” and dying at Butleigh, his seat in Somersetshire, Oct. 24, 1672, was buried in that church. Walpole enumerates among his works which are still in part extant, the new quadrangle of St. John’s college, Oxfqrd the queen’s chapel at St. James’s the arcade of Oovent-garden and the church Gunnersbury, near Brentford Lincoln’s Inn Chapel, and one or two of the houses in Lincoln’s-inn-fields Coleshill in Berkshire, and Cobham hall in Kent; the Grange, in Hampshire; the queen’s house at Greeirwich, &c. Several other of his buildings may be seen in Campbell’s “Vitruvius Britannicus.” The principal of his designs were published by Mr. Kent in 1727, fol. as also some of his less designs in 1744, foL Others were published by Mr. Isaac Ware. Our artist left in ms. some curious notes upon Palladio’s “Architecture,” now in Worcester college, Oxford, some of which are inserted in an edition of Palladio, published at London, 1714, fol. by Mr. Leoni; which notes, he says, raise the value of the edition above all the preceding ones. His original drawings for Whitehall-palace are also in Worcester library.

, an English divine of some note for exciting a controversy respecting the Liturgy, was born in 1700, and is supposed to have been a native of Carmarthen. He was admitted of Worcester college, Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. about 1721, and quitted the university in or before 1726, in which year he received priest’s orders at Buckden, from Dr. Reynolds, bishop of Lincoln. He had a curacy in that diocese, but in what partis not known. In 1741 he was resident at AbbotsRipton in Huntingdonshire, and soon after was presented to the vicarage of Alconbury, which he resigned in 1751 for the rectory of Boulne-Hurst in Bedfordshire. In 1755 he was vicar of Hitchin, and in 1759 accepted the curacy of Welwyn from Dr. Young, and continued there until 1765, when that celebrated poet died, and Mr. Jones was appointed one of his executors. He afterwards returned to Boulne-Hurst, and probably obtained no other preferment. He was killed by a fall from his horse in going to Abbots-Ripton, but in what year we have not been able to discover, although such a circumstance must have been known to his friends, who, however, have neglected to record it. After his death, many, if not all his manucripts, passed into the hands of the Rev. Thomas Dawson, M. D. a dissenting minister of Hackney, whence they passed to the dissenters’ library in Redcross-street. Some biographical notices which have appeared in the Gentleman’s Magazine were extracted from them. Mr. Nichols has given an extensive series of extracts from his literary correspondence with Dr. Birch, from which many particulars of his talents and character may be gleaned. His chief work was entitled “Free and Candid Disquisitions,” published in 1749. These contained many observations on the defects and improprieties in the liturgical forms of faith and worship of the established church, and proposals of amendments and alterations of such passages as were liable to reasonable objections. There was also a compilation of authorities taken from the writings of some eminent divines of the church of England, with a view to shew the necessity, or at least the expedience, of revising the liturgy, &c. Schemes like this have succeeded each other since the time of Dr. Clarke, but have never been attended with complete conviction, either of their necessity or expedience. The author’s name did not appear to this publication, and Mr. Blackburne, whom he consulted previous to publication, was dissatisfied with his timidity. He wrote, however, a pamphlet in defence of it, and other pamphlets appear pro and con; but the controversy was of no long duration. In 1765 he published “Catholic Faith and Practice,” and “A Letter to a Friend in the Country;” but with the subjects of these we are unacquainted.

, an eminent and learned tutor of the university of Cambridge, was born at Beriew in Montgomeryshire, June 23, 1756. His education, till he entered on his twelfth year, was confined to the instruction of a common country school, first at Beriew, and afterwards in the neighbouring parish of Kerry. During the time that he frequented the latter school, the vicar of the parish, discovering in him those talents which he afterwards so eminently displayed, advised his mother (for he lost his father at an early age) to send him to the grammar-school at Shrewsbury, where he continued nearly seven years, and was inferior to none of his schoolfellows, either in attention to study or in regularity of conduct. In May 1774, he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, and came to reside there in October following. From that time the excellence of his genius became more particularly conspicuous. He had acquired, indeed, at school, a competent share of classical learning; but his mind was less adapted to Greek and Latin composition than to the investigation of philosophical truths. At the public examinations of St. John’s college he not only was always in the first class, but was without comparison the best mathematician of his year. His first summer vacation was devoted entirely to his favourite pursuit; and at that early period he became acquainted with mathematical works, which are seldom attempted before the third year of academical study. He remained at St. John’s college till after the public examination in June 1776, when, having no prospect of obtaining a fellowship, there being already a fellow of the diocese of St. Asaph in that college, and the statutes limiting the fellowships to one from each diocese, he removed to Trinity college. Here he took his bachelor’s degree in 1779, and his superiority was so decided, that no one ventured to contend with him. The honour of senior wrangler, as it is called in academical phrase, was conceded before the examination began, and the second place became the highest object of competition. If any thing was wanting to shew his superiority, it would be rendered sufficiently conspicuous by the circumstance, that he was tutor to the second wrangler, now the learned Dr. Herbert Marsh, professor of divinity at Cambridge, who acknowledged that for the honour which he then obtained, he was indebted to the instruction of his friend. In the same year in which Mr. Jones took his bachelor’s degree he was appointed assistant tutor at Trinity college. In Oct. 1781 he was elected fellow, and in Oct. 1787, on the resignation of Mr. Cranke, he was appointed to the office of head tutor, which he held to the day of his death. In 1786 and 1787 he presided as moderator in the philosophical schools, where his acuteness and impartiality were equally conspicuous. It was about this time that he introduced a grace, by which fellow-commoners, who used to obtain the degree of bachelor of arts with little or no examination, were subjected to the same academical exercises as other under-graduates. During many years he continued to take an active part in the senate-house examinations; but for some years before his death confined himself to the duties of college- tutor. These, indeed, were sufficiently numerous to engage his whole attention and he displayed in them an ability which was rarely equalled, with an integrity which never was surpassed. Being perfect master of his subjects, he always placed them in the clearest point of view; and by his manner of treating them he made them interesting even to those who had otherwise no relish for mathematical inquiries. His lectures on astronomy attracted more than usual attention, since that branch of philosophy afforded the most ample scope for inculcating (what, indeed, he never neglected in other branches) his favourite doctrine of final causes; for arguing from the contrivance to the contriver, from the structure of the universe to the being and attributes of God. And this doctrine he enforced, not merely by explaining the harmony which results from the established Jaws of nature, but by shewing the confusion which would have arisen from the adoption of other laws. His lectures on the principles of fluxions were delivered with unusual clearness; and there was so much originality in them, that his pupils often expressed a wish that they might be printed. But such was his modesty, that though frequently urged, he never would consent; and when he signed his will a short time before his death, he made the most earnest request to Dr. Marsh, that none of his manuscripts should be printed. But it is a consolation to know, that his lectures in philosophy will not be buried in oblivion: all his writings on those subjects were delivered to his successor in the tuition, and, though less amply than by publication, will continue to benefit mankind. The only things he ever published were “A Sermon on Duelling,” and “An Address to the Volunteers of Montgomeryshire.” The former was published as a warning to the young men of the university, soon after a fatal duel had taken place there. The latter, which he wrote with great animation (for he was a zealous advocate of the volunteer system) was calculated to rouse the volunteers to a vigorous defence of their country.

His academical character has been already described. As a companion he was highly convivial; he possessed a vein of humour peculiar to himself; and no one told a story with more effect. His manners were mild and unassuming, and his gentleness was equalled only by his firmness. As a friend he had no other limit to his kindness than his ability to serve. Indeed his whole life was a life of benevolence, and he wasted his strength in exerting himself for others. The benefits he conferred were frequently so great, and the persons who subsisted by his bounty were so numerous, that he was often distressed in the midst of affluence. And though he was head tutor of Trinity-college almost twenty years, with more pupils than any of his predecessors, he never acquired a sufficient capital to enable him to retire from office, and still continue his accustomed benevolence.

, an eminent mathematician, was born in 1680, in the island of Anglesey, North Wales. His parents were yeomen, or little farmers, in that island, and gave to their son the best education which their circumstances would allow; but he owed his future fame and fortune to the diligent cultivation of the intellectual powers by which he was eminently distinguished. Addicted from early life to the study of mathematics, he commenced his career of advancement in the humble office of a teacher of these sciences on board a man of war. In this situation he attracted the notice, and obtained the friendship of lord Anson. He appeared as an author in his 22d year; when his treatise on the art of navigation was much approved. We may judge of his predominant taste for literature and science by a trivial circumstance which occurred at the capture of Vigo, in 1702. Having joined his comrades in pillaging the town, he selected a bookseller’s shop, in hope of obtaining some valuable plunder; but, disappointed in his expectations, he took up a pair of scissars, which was his only booty, and which he afterwards exhibited' to his friends as a trophy of his military success. On his return to England, he established himself as a teacher of mathematics in London; and here, in 1706, he published his “Synopsis Palmariorum Matheseos; or, a new Introduction to the Mathematics,” a work which has ever since been held in the highest estimation as a compendious but comprehensive summary of mathematical science. Mr. Jones was no less esteemed and respected on account of his private character and pleasing manners, than for his natural talents and scientific attainments; so that he reckoned among his friends the most eminent persons of the period in which he lived. Lord Hardwicke selected him as a companion on the circuit, when he was chief justice; and when he afterwards held the great seal, conferred upon him the office of secretary for the peace, as a testimony of his friendship and regard. He was also in habits of intimate acquaintance with lord Parker, president of the royal society, sir Isaac Newton, Halley, Mead, and Samuel Johnson. So highly was his merit appreciated by sir Isaac Newton, that he prepared, with his permission, and very much to his satisfaction, a very elegant edition of small tracts in the higher mathematics. Upon the retirement of lord Mace lesfi eld to Sherborne castle, Mr. Jones resided in his family, and instructed his lordship in the sciences. Whilst he occupied this situation he had the misfortune, by the failure of a banker, to lose the greatest part of that property which he had accumulated Uy the most laudable industry and economy; but the loss was in a great measure repaired to him by the kind attention of his lordship, who procured for him a sinecure place of considerable emolument. He was afterwards offered, by the same nobleman, a more lucrative situation; which, however, he declined, that he might be more at leisure to devote himself to his favourite scientific pursuits. In this retreat he formed an acquaintance with miss Mary Nix, the daughter of a cabinet-maker, who had become eminent in his profession, and whose talents and manners had recommended him to an intimacy with lord Macclesfield. This acquaintance terminated in marriage; and the connection proved a source of personal satisfaction to Mr. Jones himself, and of permanent honour to his name and family. By this lady Mr. Jones had three children two sons and a daughter. One son died in infancy the other will be the subject of the next article and the daughter, who was married to Mr. Rainsford, an opulent merchant retired from business, perished miserably, in 1802, in consequence of her clothes accidentally taking fire. The death of Mr. Jones was occasioned by n polypus in the heart, which, notwithstanding the medical attention and assistance of Dr. Mead, proved incurable. He died in July 1749. Mr. Jones’s papers in the Philosophical Transactions are: “A compendious disposition of Equations for exhibiting, the relations of Goniometrical Lines,” vol. XLIV. “A Tract on Logarithms,” vol. LXI. “Account of the person killed by lightning in Tottenham-court-chapel, and its effects on the building,” vol. LXII. “Properties of the Conic Sections, deduced by a compendious method,” vol. LXIII. In all these works of Mr. Jones, a remarkable neatness, brevity, and accuracy, everywhere prevails. He seemed to delight in a very^ short and comprehensive mode of expression and arrangement; insomuch that sometimes what he has contrived to express in two or three pages, would occupy a little volume in the ordinary style of writing. Mr. Jones, it is said, possessed the best mathematical library in England; which by will he left to lord Macclesfield. He had collected also a great quantity of manuscript papers and letters of former mathematicians, which have often proved useful to writers of their lives, &c. After his death, these were dispersed, and fell into different persons hands many of them, as well as of Mr. Jones’s own papers, were possessed by the late Mr. John Robertson, librarian and clerk to the royal society at whose death Dr. Hutton purchased a considerable quantity of them. From such collections as these it was that Mr. Jones was enabled to give that first and elegant edition, 1711, in 4to, of several of Newton’s papers, that might otherwise have been lost, entitled “Analysis per quantitatum Series, Fluxiones, ac Differentias: cum Enumeratione Linearum Tertii Ordinis.”

We learn from the “Anecdotes of Bowyer,” that the plan of another work was formed by this eminent mathematician, intended to be of the same nature with the “Synopsis,” but far more copious and diffusive, and to serve as a general introduction to the sciences, or, which is the same thing, to the mathematical and philosophical works of Newton. A work of this kind had long been a desideratum in literature, and it required a geometrician of the first class to sustain the weight of so important an undertaking; for which, as M. d'Alembert justly observes, “the combined force of the greatest mathematicians would not have been more than sufficient.” The ingenious author was conscious how arduous a task he had begun; but his very numerous acquaintance, and particularly his friend the earl of Macclesfield, never ceased importuning and urging him to persist, till he had finished the whole work, the result of all his knowledge and experience through a life of near 7O years, and a standing monument, as he had reason to hope, of his talents and industry. He had scarcely sent the first sheet to the press, when a fatal illness obliged him to discontinue the impression; and a few days before his death, he intrusted the ms. fairly transcribed by an amanuensis, to the care of lord Macclesfield, who promised to publish it, as well for the honour of the author as for the benefit of his family, to whom the property of the book belonged. The earl survived his friend many years but the “Introduction to the Mathetics” was forgotten or neglected and, after his death, the ms. was not to be found whether it was accidentally destroyed, which is hardly credible, or whether, as hath been suggested, it had been lent to some geometrician, unworthy to bear the name either of a philosopher or a man, who has since concealed it, or possibly burned the original for fear of detection. Lord Teignmouth, however, informs us, in his life of Mr. Jones’s illustrious Son, that there is no evidence in his memoranda to confirm or disprove this account.

, one of the most accomplished scholars in Europe, the son of the preceding, was born Sept. 28, 1746. As his father died when he had scarcely reached his third year, the care of his education devolved on his mother, whose talents and virtues eminently qualified her for the task. Her husband, with affectionate precision, characterized her as one who “was virtuous without blemish, generous without extravagance, frugal but not niggard, cheerful but not giddy, close but not sullen, ingenious but wot conceited, of spirit but not passionate, of her company cautious, in her friendship trusty, to her parents dutiful, and to her husband ever faithful, loving, and obedient.” She must have been yet a more extraordinary woman than all this imports; for we are told that under her husband’s tuition she became a considerable proficient in Algebra, and with a view to act as preceptor to her sister’s son, who was destined for the sea, she made herself perfect in trigonometry, and the theory of navigation, sciences of which it is probable she knew nothing before marriage, and which she now pursued amidst the anxious, and, usually, monopolizing cares of a family. In educating her son, she appears to have preferred a method at once affectionate and judicious. Discovering in him a natural curiosity and thirst for knowledge, beyond what children generally display, she made the gratification of these passions to depend on his own industry, and constantly pointed to a book as the source of information. So successful was this method, that in his fourth year he was able distinctly and rapidly to read any English book, while his memory was agreeably exercised in getting by heart such popular pieces of poetry as were likely to engage the fancy of a child. His taste for reading gradually became a habit; and having in his fifth year, while looking over a Bible, fallen upon the sublime description of the Angel in the tenth chapter of the Apocalypse, the impression which his imagination received from it was never effaced.

Although he did not yet cease to be the boy, he frequently gave indications of the man, and perhaps in nothing more than the useful turn of his amusements, which generally had some reference to his studies, and proved that learning was uppermost in his mind. Of this disposition, the following anecdote, related by lord Teignmouth, is pleasingly characteristic. " He invented a political play, in which Dr. William Bennet, bishop of Cloyne, and the celebrated Dr. Parr, were his principal associates. They divided the fields in the neighbourhood of Harrow, according to a map of Greece, into states and kingdoms; each fixed upon one as his dominions, and assumed an ancient name. Some of their schoolfellows consented to be styled barbarians, who were to invade their territories, and attack their hillocks, which were denominated fortresses. The chiefs vigorously defended their respective domains against the incursions of the enemy; and in these imitative wars, the young statesmen held councils, made vehement harangues, and composed memorials; all doubtless very boyish, but calculated to fill their minds with ideas of legislation and civil government. In these unusual amusements, Jones was ever the leader; and he might justly have appropriated to himself the words of Catullus: ‘ Ego gymnasii flos, ego decus oleiY’

When he had attained the age of seventeen, his friends determined to remove him to one of the universities, but his mother had been advised to place him in the office of some special pleader. He had, in the course of his desultory reading, perused a few law books, and frequently amused his mother’s visitors by discussing topics of legal subtlety. But the law had not taken a complete hold on his inclination at this time, and his prereptor Dr. Sumner easily prevailed in recommending an academical course. He was, accordingly, in the spring of 1764, entered of University college, Oxford, in which city his mother now took up her residence. This latter circumstance was peculiarly grateful to Mr. Jones, who was as much distinguished above the mass of mankind for filial affection, as for his literary accomplishments.

During his residence at Oxford, his time was regularly divided into portions, each of which was filled up with the study of the ancients or moderns, and there have been few examples of such extensive accumulation of knowledge by one so young; yet, amidst this severe course of application, he regularly apportioned some time for the practice of those manly exercises which promote health. As all this necessarily became expensive, he anxiously wished for a fellowship, that he might be enabled to relieve his mother from a burthen which she could ill support. He had obtained a scholarship a few months after his matriculation, but a fellowship appeared more remote, and he was beginning to despair of achieving this object, when he received an offer to be private tutor to lord Althorpe, now earl Spencer. He had been recommended to the Spencer family by Dr. Shipley, who had seen and approved some of his performances at Harrow, and particularly a Greek oration in praise of Lyon, who founded the school at that place in the reign of Elizabeth.

This proposal was cheerfully accepted by Mr. Jones, and, in the summer of 1765, he went for the first time to Wimbledon Park, to take upon him the education of his pupil, who was just seven years old, and with whose manners he was delighted. It would be needless to point out the advantages of such a situation as this to a young man of Jones’s accomplishments and expectations. It presented every thing he could wish, liberal patronage to promote his views, elegant society to form his manners, and opportunities for study, which were inferior only to what he enjoyed at Oxford. In the course of the following summer, he obtained a fellowship, which, although not exceeding one hundred pounds, appeared to him a sufficient provision, and a solid independency. His time was now divided between Oxford, London, Wimbledon, and Althorpe; and in 1767, he visited the Continent with the Spencer family, and during this trip, which was but short, acquired some knowledge of the German language. Before setting out, and in the twenty-first year of his age, he began his Commentaries on Asiatic Poetry, in imitation of Dr. Lowth’s Prelections at Oxford on the sacred poetry of the Hebrews; and soon after his return, in the winter of 1767, he nearly completed his Commentaries, transcribed an Asiatic manuscript on Egypt and the Nile, and copied the keys of the Chinese language, which he wished to add to his other acquisitions.

“The king of Denmark, then upon a visit to this country (1768), had brought with him an eastern manuscript, containing the life of Nadir Shah, which he was desirous of having translated in England. The secretary of state, with whom the Danish minister had conversed upon the subject, sent the volume to Mr. Jones, requesting him to give a literal translation of it in the French language: but he wholly declined the task, alleging for his excuse, the dryness of the subject, the difficulty of the style, and chiefly his want both of leisure and ability, to enter upon an undertaking so fruitless and laborious. He mentioned, however, a gentleman, with whom he was not then acquainted, but who had distinguished himself by the translation of a Persian history, and some popular tales froi the Persic, as capable of gratifying the wishes of his Danish Majesty. Major Dow, the wriu-r alluded to, excuse himself on account of his numerous engagements; and tl application to Mr.lono, uus renewed. It was hinted, th his compliance would be of no small advantage to him, at his entrance into life; that it would procure him some mark of distinction, which would be pleasing to him; and above all, that it would be a reflection upon this country, if the king should be obliged to carry the manuscript to France. Incited by these motives, and principally the last, unwilling to be thought churlish or morose, and eager for reputation, he undertook the work, and sent the specimen of it to his Danish majesty, who returned his approbation of the style and method, but desired that the whole translation might be perfectly literal, and the oriental images accurately preserved. The task would have been far easier to him, if he had been directed to finish it in Latin; for the acquisition of a French style was infinitely more tedious, and it was necessary to have every chapter corrected by a native of France, before it could be offered to the discerning eye of the public, since in every language there are certain peculiarities of idiom, and nice shades of meaning, which a foreigner can never attain to perfection. The work, however arduous and unpleasant, was completed in a year, not without repeated hints from the secretary’s office, that it was expected with great impatience by the court of Denmark. The translation was not, however, published until 1770. Forty copies upon large paper were sent to Copenhagen; one of them, bound with uncommon elegance, for the king himself: and the others as presents to his courtiers.”

What reward he received for this undertaking is but obscurely related. His Danish majesty, we are told, sent him a diploma, constituting him a member of the royal society of Copenhagen, and recommended him in the strongest terms, to the favour and benevolence of his own sovereign. In all this there seems but an inadequate recompense for a work which at that time perhaps no person could have executed but himself. His noble pupil being removed to Harrow, Mr* Jones had an opportunity of renewing his intimacy with Dr. Sumner, who had always estimated his talents and learning at their full value. While here, he transcribed a Persian grammar, which he had three years before composed for the use of a schoolfellow destined for India, and also began a Dictionary of the Persian language, in which the principal words were illustrated from the most celebrated authors of the East; but he appears to have been aware of the expence attending this work, and was unwilling to continue it, unless the East India company would purchase it. In 1770 he issued proposals for a new edition of Meninski’s Dictionary, which was to have been published in 1773, but the scheme was dropt for want of encouragement.

In 1770, he passed the winter on the Continent with the Spencer family, during which, he informs one of his correspondents, his occupations were “music, with all its sweetness and feeling difficult and abstruse problems in mathematics and the beautiful and sublime in poetry and painting.” He wrote also in English a tract on “Education in the analytic manner;” a tragedy founded on the story of Mustapha, who was put to death by his father Soliman; and made various translations from the oriental poets. He appears on this tour to have been less intent on those objects of curiosity which usually interest travellers, than on adding to his knowledge of languages, and habituating himself to composition in all its modes, from the gay and familiar letter of friendship, to the serious and philosophical disquisition. Of the “Tract on Education,” just mentioned, a fragment only remains, which his biographer has published. It appears to include the pla winr-h he pursued in his own case. The tragedy has bee totally lost, except part of a preface in which he profess to have taken Shakspeare for his model, not by adopting his sentiments, or borrowing his expressions, but by aiming at his manner, and by striving to write as he supposes he would have written himself, if he had lived in the eighteenth century. The loss of such a curiosity cannot be too much regretted, unless our regret should be lessened by reflecting on the hazard of any attempt to bring Shakspeare on the modern stage. It is surely not less difficult than that of Mason, who unsuccessfully strove to write as the Greek tragedians “would have written, had they lived in the eighteenth century.”

On his return from this tour, he appears to have contemplated his situation as not altogether corresponding with the feelings of an independent mind, and with the views he entertained of aiming at the dignity and usefulness of a public character. The advice given by some of his friends, when he left Harrow school, probably now recurred to his memory, and was strengthened by additional and more urgent. motives, for he finally determined on the law as a profession; and, having resigned his charge in lord Spencer’s family, was admitted into the Temple on the 19th of September, 1770, in the twenty -fourth year of his age. Those who consider the study of the law as incompatible with a mind devoted to the acquisition of polite literature, and with a taste delighting in frequent excursions to the regions of fancy, will be ready to conclude that Mr. Jones would soon discover an invincible repugnance to his new pursuit. But the reverse was in a great measure the fact. He found nothing in the study of the law so 'dry or laborious as not to be overcome by the same industry which had enabled him to overcome, almost in childhood, the difficulties which frequently deter men of mature years; and he was stimulated by what appears to have predominated through life, an honest ambition to rise to eminence in a profession which, although sometimes successfully followed by men of dull capacity, does not exclude the most brilliant acquirements. Still, however, while labouring to qualify himself for the bar, he regarded his progress in literature as too important or too delightful to be altogether interrupted; and from the correspondence published by lord Teignmouth, it appears that he snatched many an hour from his legal inquiries, to meditate plans connected with his oriental studies. What he executed, indeed, did not always correspond with what he projected, but we find that within the first two years of his residence in the Temple, he sketched the plan of an epic poem, and of a Turkish history, and published a French letter to Anquetil du Perron, who, in his Travels in India, had treated the university of Oxford, and some of its learned members and friends of Mr. Jones, with disrespect In this letter he corrected the petulance of the French writer with more asperity than perhaps his maturer judgment would have approved, but yet without injustice, for Perron stood convicted not only of loose invective, but of absolute falsehood. Besides these Mr. Jones published, in 1772, a small volume of poems, consisting chiefly of translations from the Asiatic languages, with two elegant prose dissertations on Eastern poetry, and on the arts commonly called imitative. Most of these poems had been written long before this period, but were kept back until they had received all the improvements of frequent revisal, and the criticisms of his friends.

In 1778, he published his translation of the “Orations of Iseeus,” in causes concerning the succession to property at Athens; with a prefatory discourse, notes historical and critical, and a commentary. This work he dedicated to earl Bathurst, who among all his illustrious friends, was as yet his only benefactor, by conferring on him the place of commissioner of bankrupts. The elegant style, profound research, and acute criticism, displayed in this translation, attracted the applause of every judge of classical learning. His next publication was a Latin ode to liberty, under the title of “Julii Mdesigoni ad Libertatem” a name formed by the transposition of the letters of* 6 Gulielmus Jonesius" In this ode, the author of which was soon known, he made a more ample acknowledgment of his political principles; and this, it is feared, had an unfavourable influence on the hopes which he was encouraged to entertain of promotion by the then administration. In 1780, there was a vacant seat on the bench of Fort William in Bengal, to svhicli the kindness of lord North Jed him to aspire; but, for some time, he had very little prospect of success. While this matter was in suspense, on the resignation of sir Roger Newdigate, he was advised to come forward as a candidate for the representation of the university of Oxford in parliament; but, finding that there was no chance of success, he declined the contest before the day of election. His principles on the great question of the American war were so avowedly hostile, not only to the measures pursued by administration, but to the sentiments entertained by the majority of the members of the university, that, although he might be disappointed, he could not be surprised at his failure, and accordingly appears to have resigned himself to his former pursuits with tranquil satisfaction.

He arrived at Calcutta in September, and was eagerly welcomed by all who were interested in the acquisition of a magistrate of probity and independence, of a scholar who was confessedly at the head of oriental literature, and one in the prime and vigour of life, who bade fair to be long the ornament of the British dominions in India. His own satisfaction was not less lively and complete. He had left behind him the inconstancy and the turbulence of party, and felt no longer the anxieties of dependence and delay. New scenes were inviting his enthusiastic research, scenes which he had delighted to contemplate at a distance, and which promised to enlarge his knowledge as a scholar, and his usefulness as a public character. He was now brought into those regions, whose origin, manners, language, and religion, had been the subject of his profound inquiries; and while his curiosity was heightened, he drew nearer to the means of gratification. He had not been long in his new situation before he began, with his usual judgment, to divide his time into such regular portions, that no objects connected with duty or science should interfere. One of his first endeavours was to institute a society in Calcutta, the members of which might assist him in those scientific pursuits which he foresaw would be too numerous and extended for his individual labour; and he had no sooner suggested the scheme than it was adopted with avidity. The new association assembled for the first time in January 1784. The government of Bengal readily granted its patronage, and Mr.Hastings,then governor general, who had ever been a zealous encourager of Persian and Sanscrit literature, was offered the honorary title of president; but, as his numerous engagements prevented his acquiescence, sir William Jones was immediately and unanimously placed in the chair. The importance of this society has been long acknowledged, and their-“Transactions” are a sufficient testimony of their learning, acuteness, and perseverance, qualities the more remarkable that they have been found in men most of whom embarked for India with views of a very different kind, and which might have occupied their whole attention without their incurring the imputation of neglect or remissness. To detail the. whole of sir William Jones’s proceedings and labours, as president of this society, would be to abridge their Transactions, of which he lived to see three volumes published; but the following passage from lord Teignmouth’s narrative appears necessary to complete this sketch of his life.

Soon after his arrival “he determined to commence the study of the Sanscrit. His reflection had before suggested that a knowledge of this ancient tongue would be of the greatest utility, in enabling him to discharge with confidence and satisfaction to himself, the duties of a judge; and he soon discovered, what subsequent experience fully confirmed, that no reliance could be placed on the opinions or interpretations of the professors of the Hindoo law, unless he were qualified to examine their authorities and quotations, and detect their errors and misrepresentations. On the other hand, he knew that all attempts to explore the religion or literature of India through any other medium than a knowledge of the Sanscrit, must be imperfect and unsatisfactory; it was evident that the most erroneous and discordant opinions on these subjects had been circulated by the ignorance of those who had collected their information from oral communications only, and that the pictures exhibited in Europe, of the religion and literature of India, could only be compared to the maps constructed by the natives, in which every position is distorted, and all proportion violated. As a lawyer, he knew the value and importance of original documents and records, and as a scholar and man of science, he disdained the idea ofamusing the learned world with secondary information on subjects which had greatly interested their curiosity, when he had the means of access to the original sources. He was also aware, that much was expected by the literati of Europe, from his superior abilities and learning, and he felt the strongest inclination to gratify their expectations in the fullest possible extent.”

The plan to be promoted by his knowledge of the “Sanscrit was at this time very distant as to probability of execution, but he had carefully weighed it in his mind, and was gradually preparing the way for its accomplishment. It was, indeed, worthy of his great and liberal mind, to provide for the due administration of justice among the Indians, by compiling a digest of Hindu and Mahomoiedan Jaws, similar to that which Justinian gave to his Greek and Roman subjects. When he had made such progress in the language as might enable him to take a principal part in this important design, he imparted his views to lord Cornwallis, then (1788) governor general, in a long letter, which will ever remain a monument of his extensive understanding, benevolence, and public spirit. That his plan met with acceptance from lord Cornwallis will not appear surprizing to those who knew that excellent nobleman, who, while contemplating the honour which such an undertaking would confer on his own administration, conceived the highest hopes from sir William Jones’s offer to co-operate, or rather to superintend the execution of it.” At the period,“says his biographer,” when this work was undertaken by sir William Jones, he had not resided in India more than four years and a half; during which time he had not only acquired a thorough knowledge of the Sanscrit language, but had extended his reading in it so tar as to be qualified to form a judgment upon the merit and authority of the authors to be used in the compilation of his work; and although his labour was only applied to the disposition of materials already formed, he was enabled by his previous stuuies to give them an arrangement superior to any existing, and which the learned natives themselves approved and admired. In the dispensations of Providence, it may be remarked, as an occurrence of no ordinary nature, that the professors of the Braminical faith should so far renounce their reserve and distrust as to submit to the direction of a native of Europe, for compiling a digest of theii' own laws."

In 1789 the first volume of the “Asiatic Researches” was published, and the same year sir William Jones finished his translation of “Sacontala, or the Fatal Ring,” an ancient Indian drama, and one of the greatest curiosities that the literature of Asia had yet brought to light. In 1794 he published, as an institute, prefatory to his larger work, a translation of the ordinances of Menu, who is esteemed by the Hindus the first of created beings, and not only the oldest, but the holiest of legislators. The judgment and candour of the translator, however, led him to appreciate this work no higher than it deserved, as not being calculated for general reading, but exhibiting the manners of a remarkable people in a remote age, as including a system of despotism and priestcraft, limited by law, yet artfully conspiring to give mutual support, and as filled with conceits in metaphysics and natural philosophy, which might be liable to misconstruction. Amidst these employments, he still carried on his extensive correspondence with his learned friends in Europe, unfolding with candour his various pursuits and sentiments, and expressing such anxiety about every branch of science, as proved that even what he called relaxation, was but the diversion of his researches from one channel into another. In addition to the various studies already noticed, botany appears to have occupied a considerable share of his attention; and in this, as in every new acquisition, he disdained to stop at a moderate progress, or be content with a superficial knowledge.

The indisposition of lady Jones in 1793, rendered it absolutely necessary thatsiie should return to England; and her affectionate husband proposed to follow her in 1795, but still wished to complete a system of Indian laws before he left the situation in which he could promote this great work with most advantage. But he had not proceeded long in this undertaking before symptoms appeared of that disorder which deprived the world of one of its brightest ornaments. The following account of his dissolution is given in the words of his biographer. "On the evening of the twentieth of April, or nearly about that date, after prolonging his walk to a late hour, during which he had imprudently remained in conversation, in an unwholesome situation, he called upon the writer of these sheets, and complained of aguish symptoms, mentioning his intention to take some medicine, and repeating jocularly an old proverb, that * an ague in the spring is medicine for a king. 7 He had no suspicion at the time of the real nature of his indisposition, which proved, in fact, to be a complaint common in Bengal, an inflammation in the liver. The disorder was, however, soon discovered by the penetration of the physician, who, after two or three clays, was called in to his assistance; but it had then advanced too far to yield to the efficacy of the medicines usually prescribed, and they were administered in vain. The progress of the complaint was uncommonly rapid, and terminated fatally on the twenty-seventh of April 1794. On the morning of that day his attendants, alarmed at the evident symptoms of approaching dissolution, came precipitately to call the friend who has now the melancholy task of recording the mournful event. Not a moment was lost in repairing to his house. He was lying on his bed in a posture of meditation; and the only symptom of remaining life was a small degree of motion in the heart, which after a few seconds ceased, and he expired without a pang or groan. His bodily suffering, from the complacency of his features and the ease of his attitude, could not have been severe; and his mind must have derived consolation from those sources where he l?ad been in the habit of seeking it, and where alone, in our last moments, it can ever be found.' 1

Thus ended the life of a man who was the brightest example of rational ambition, and of extensive learning, virtue, and excellence, that modern times have produced; a man who must ever be the subject of admiration, although it can happen to the lot of few to equal, and, perhaps, of none to excel him. When we compare the shortness of his life with the extent of his labours, the mind is overpowered; yet his example, however disgraceful to the indolent, and even apparently discouraging to the humble scholar, will not be without the most salutary effects, if it be allowed to prove that no difficulties in science are insurmountable by regular industry, that the human faculties can be exalted by exercise beyond the common degrees with which we are apt to be satisfied, and that the finest taste is not incompatible with the profoundest studies. It was the peculiar felicity of this extraordinary man, that the whole plan of his life appears to have been the best that could have been contrived to forward his views and to accomplish his character. In tracing its progress we see very little that could have been more happily arranged: few adverse occurrences, and scarcely an object of serious regret, especially when we consider how gently his ambition was chastened, and his integrity purified, by the few delays which at one time seemed to cloud his prospects. In 1799 his Works were published in six volumes quarto, and have been since reprinted in thirteen volumes octavo, with the addition of his life by lord Teignmouth, which first appeared in 1804. Among the public tributes to his memory are, a monument by Flaxman in University college, at the expence of lady Jones; a monument in St. Paul’s, and a statue at Bengal, both voted by the hon. East India company. A society of gentlemen at Bengal who were educated at Oxford, subscribed a sum for a private dissertation on his character and merits, which was adjudged to Mr. Henry Philpots, M. A. of Magdalen college. Among the many poetical tributes paid to his memory, that by the rev. Mr. Maurice, of the British Museum, seems entitled to the preference, from his accurate knowledge of sir William Jones’s character and studies.

“A mere catalogue of the writings of sir William Jones,” says his biogragher, “would shew the extent and variety of his erudition; a perusal of them will prove that it was no less deep than miscellaneous. Whatever topic he discusses, his ideas flow with ease and perspicuity, his style is always clear and polished; animated and forcible, when his subject requires it. His philological, botanical, philosophical, and chronological disquisitions, his historical researches, and even his Persian grammar, whilst they fix the curiosity and attention of the reader, by the novelty, depth, or importance of the knowledge displayed in them, always delight by elegance of diction. His compositions are never dry, tedious, nor disgusting; and literature and science -come from his hands adorned with all their grace and beauty. No writer, perhaps, ever displayed so much learning, with so little affectation of it.” With regard to his law publications, it is said that his “Essay on Bailments” was sanctioned by the approbation of lord Mansfield and all his writings in this department shew that he had thoroughly studied the principles of law as a science. As to his opinion of the British constitution, it appears from repeated declarations that occur in his letters, and particularly in his 10th discourse, delivered to the Asiatic society in 1793, that he considered it as the noblest and most perfect that ever was formed. With regard to his political principles, he was an enlightened and decided friend to civil and religious liberty. Like many others of the same principles, he entertained a favourable opinion of the French revolution at its commencement, and wished success to the exertions of that nation for the establishment of a free constitution; but subsequent events must have given him new views, not so much of the principles on which the revolution was founded, as of the measures which have been adopted by some of its zealous partizans. To liberty, indeed, his attachment was enthusiastic, and he never speaks of tyranny or oppression but in the language of detestation. He dreaded, and wished to restrain, every encroachment on liberty; and though he never enlisted under the banners of any party, he always concurred in judgment and exertion with those who wished to render pure and permanent the constitution of his country.

It is needless to add any thing in commendation of his private and social virtues. The independence of his integrity, his probity and humanity, and also his universal philanthropy and benevolence, are acknowledged by all who knew him. In every domestic relation, as a son, a brother, and a husband, he was attentive to every dictate of love, and to every obligation of duty. In his intercourse with the Indian natives he was condescending and conciliatory; liberally rewarding those who assisted him, and treating his dependents as friends. His biographer records the following anecdote of a circumstance that occurred after his demise: “The pundits who were in the habit of attending him, when I saw them at a public durbar a few days after that melancholy event, could neither restrain their tears for his loss, nor find terms to express their admiration at the wonderful progress which he had made in the sciences which they professed.” Upon the whole, we may join with Dr. Parr, who knew his talents and character, in applying to sir William Jones his own words, “It is happy for us that this man was born.”

Having attained, by the assiduous exertion of his abilities, and in a course of useful service to his country and mankind, a high degree of reputation, and by economy that did not encroach upon his beneficence, a liberal competence, he was prepared, one would have thought, at the age of forty-seven years, to enjoy dignity with independence. His plans, and the objects of his pursuit, in the prospect of future life, were various and extensive and he would naturally indulge many pleasing ideas in the view of returning, at a fixed period, to his native country, and to beloved friends, who would anxiously wish for his arrival. Few persons seemed to be more capable of improving and enjoying prolonged life than sir William Jones; and few persons seemed to be better prepared for a more exalted state of progressive improvement, and of permanent felicity, than that to which the most distinguished and prosperous can attain within the regions of mortality. Since his death lady Jones has presented to the royal society a collection of Mss. Sanscrit and Arabic, which he reckoned inestimable, and also another large collection of Eastern Mss. of which a catalogue, compiled by Mr. Wilkins, is inserted in the 13th volume of sir William Jones’s Works, 8vo edition.

, a late venerable and pious divine of the church of England, was born at Lowick in Northumberland, July 30, 1726. His father was Morgan Jones, a Welsh gentleman, a descendant of Colonel Jones (but of very different principles) who married a sister of Oliver Cromwell. His mother was Sarah, the daughter of the Rev. Mr. Lettin, of Lowick. He was remarkable from his childhood for unwearied industry and ingmium versatile. As soon as he was of the proper age, he was admitted, on the nomination of the duke of Dorset, a scholar at the Charterhouse, where he made a rapid progress in Greek and Latin, and laid the foundation of that knowledge which has since given him a distinguished name in the Christian world. His turn for philosophical studies soon began to shew itself; for meeting, when at the Charter- house, with Zachary Williams, author of a magnetical theory, which is now lost, he copied some of his tables and calculations, was shewn the internal construction of his instrument for finding the variation of the compass in all parts of the world; and saw all the diagrams by which his whole theory was demonstrated and explained. At this school, too, he commenced an acquaintance with the late earl of Liverpool, which was farther cultivated at the university, where they were of the same college, and continued to the last, notwithstanding the great difference in their future destination, to entertain a respect for each other. When about eighteen years of age, he left the school, and went to University college, Oxford, on a Charterhouse exhibition. Among the several companions of his studies whom he loved and respected, there was no one dearer to him than Mr. George Home, afterwards bishop of Norwich. Between them “there was a sacred friendship a friendship made up of religious principles, which increased daily, by a similitude of inclinations, to the same recreations and studies.” Having taken the degree of B. A. in 1749, he was ordained a deacon by Dr. Thomas, bishop of Peterborough; and in 1751 was ordained a priest by another Dr. Thomas, bishop of Lincoln, at Bugden. On leaving the university, his first situation was that of curate of Finedon in Northamptonshire. There he wrote “A full Answer to bishop Clayton’s Essay on Spirit,” published in 1753. In this tract, many curious and interesting questions are discussed, and several articles in the religion and learning of heathen antiquity explained, particularly the Hermetic, Pythagorean, and Platonic Trinities. In 1754 he married Elizabeth, daughter of the Rev. Brook Bridges, and went to reside at Wadenhoe in Northamptonshire, as curate to his brother-in-law, the Rev. Brook Bridges, a gentleman of sound learning, singular piety, and amiable manners.

It is mentioned in bishop Porteus’s Life of archbishop Seeker, that all the tracts, written by Dr. Sharp in the Hutchinsonian controversy, were submitted to his grace’s inspection previous to their publication, who corrected and improved them throughout; from whence we are to conclude he approved them. But whatever his prejudices were originally against what is called Hutchinsonianism, and they were supposed at one time to be pretty strong, they must have been greatly done away before he became the patron of Mr. Jones. When the “Essay on the first principles of Natural Philosophy” was published, his grace observed to a gentleman who saw it lying on his table, “this work of Mr. Jones’s is not to be treated with neglect; it is sensibly and candidly written, and if it is not answered, we little folks shall conclude it is, because it cannot be answered:” and he told Mr. Jones himself by way of consolation (knowing probably how difficult it was to get rid of old prejudices) that he must be contented to beaccounted, for a time, an heretic in philosophy. In 1773 Mr. Jones collected together into a volume, Disquisitions on some select subjects of Scripture, which had been before printed in separate tracts; and, in 1776, in the character of a “Presbyter of the church of England,” he published, in a Letter to a friend at Oxford, “Reflections on the growth of Heathenism among modern Christians.”

When he was induced to remove from Pluckley, and accept the perpetual curacy of Nayland in Suffolk, he went thither to reside with his family. Soon after, he effected an exchange of Pluckley for Paston in Northamptonshire, which he visited annually, but he determined to settle at Nayland for the remainder of his days, nor was he (as his biographer notices with some regret for neglected merit) ever tempted to quit that post by any offer of higher preferment. The “Physiological Disquisitions” before alluded to, having received their last revise, were published in 1771, and the impression was soon sold off. A notion, says his biographer, is entertained by some persons, that the elementary philosophy naturally leads to Atheism,' and sir Isaac Newton himself is charged with giving countenance to materialism by his aether; but nothing can be farther from the truth. “It is,” adds Mr. Stevens, “the aim and study of the elementary, called the Hutcliinsoniau, philosophy, not to confound God and nature, but to distinguish between the Creator and the creature; not with the heathens to set up the heavens for God, but to believe and confess, with all true worshippers, ”that it is Jehovah who made the heavens." And td maintain that the operations in nature are carried on by the agency of the elements, which, experiment demonstrates, is no more excluding God from being the Creator of the world, than to maintain that motion once given to a watch will continue without the immediate application of the artist’s hand every moment to it, is asserting that the watch made itself. Let any one read the Physiological Disquisitions, and he will soon be convinced that North and South are not more opposite than Hutchinsonianism and materialism.

In the autumn of 1798 he was presented by the archbishop of Canterbury to the sinecure rectory of Hollingbourn in Kent, benevolently intended as a convenient addition to his income, after the discontinuance of pupils; but in the following year he lost his wife, which was soon followed by another affliction, probably occasioned by the shock her death gave him, a paralytic attack which deprived him of the use of one side. In this infirm state of body, but with full exercise of his faculties, he lived several months. At length, he suddenly quitted his study, and retired to his chamber, from whence he came out no more, breaking off in the middle of a letter to a friend, which, after abrupt transition from the original subject, he left unfinished, with these remarkable words, the last of which are written particularly strong and steady. “I begin to feel as well as understand, that there was no possible way of taking my poor broken heart from the fatal subject of the grief that was daily preying upon it to its destruction, but that which Providence hath been pleased to take, of turning my thoughts from my mind, to most alarming symptoms of approaching death.” Like many other good and pious men before him, he had long very much dreaded the pains of death; but, to his own great comfort, this dread he completely overcame. The sacrament had been frequently administered to him during his confinement; and he received it, for the last time, about a week prior to his death. A little while previous to his dissolution, as his curate was standing by his bed-side, he requested him to read the 71st psalm, which was no sooner done than he took him by the hand, and said with great mildness and composure, “If this be dying, Mr. Sims, I had no idea what dying was before;” and then added, in a somewhat stronger tone of voice, “thank God, thank God, that it is n,o worse.” He continued sensible after this just long enough to take leave of his children (a son and daughter), who, being both settled at no great distance, had been very much with him, and had done every thing in their power to alleviate his sorrows; and, on the morning of Feb. 6, 1800, be expired without a groan or a sigh.

Our poet was first sent to a private school in the church of St. Martin’s in the Fields, and was afterwards removed to Westminster-school. Here he had for his preceptor the illustrious Camden, for whom he ever preserved the highest respect, and, besides dedicating one of his best plays to him, commemorates him in one of his epigrams, as the person to whom he owed all he knew. He was making very extraordinary progress at this school, when his mother, who, soon after her husband’s death, had married a bricklayer, took him home to learn his step-father’s business. How long he continued in this degrading occupation is uncertain: according to Fuller he soon left it, and went to Cambridge, but necessity obliged him to return to his father, who, among other works, employed him on the new building at Lincoln’s-inn, and here he was to be seen with a trowel in one hand and a book in the other. This, Mr. Malone thinks, must have been either in 1588 or 1593, in each of which years, Dugdale informs us, some new buildings were erected by the society. Wood varies the story, by stating that he was taken from the trowel to attend Sir Walter Raleigh’s son abroad, and afterwards went to Cambridge; but young Raleigh was not born till 1594, nor ever went abroad, except with his father in 1617 to Guiana, where he lost his life. So many of Jonson’s contemporaries, however, have mentioned his connection with the Raleigh family, that it is probable he was in some shape befriended by them, although not while he worked at his father’s business, for from that he ran away, enlisted as a common soldier, and served in the English army then engaged against the Spaniards in the Netherlands. “Here,” says the author of his life in the Biographia Britannica, “he acquired a degree of military glory which rarely falls to the lot of a common man in that profession. In an encounter with a single man of the enemy, he slew his opponent, and stripping him, carried off the spoils in the view of both armies.” As our author’s fame does not rest on his military exploits, it can be no detraction to hint, that one man killing and stripping another is a degree of military prowess of no very extraordinary kind. His biographer, however, is unwilling to quit the subject until he has informed us, that “the glory of this action receives a particular heightening from the reflection, that he thereby stands singularly distinguished above the rest of his brethren of the poetical race, very few of whom have ever acquired any reputation in arms.”

On his return he is said to have resumed his studies, and to have gone to St. John’s college, Cambridge. This fact rests chiefly upon a tradition in that college, supported by the gift of several books now in the library with his name in them. As to the question why his name does not appear in any of the lists, it is answered that he was only a sizar, who made a short stay, and his name could riot appear among the admissions, where no notice was usually taken of any young men that had not scholarships and as to matriculation, there was at that time no register. If he went to St. John’s, it seems probable enough that the shortness of his stay was occasioned by his necessities and this would be the case whether he went to Cambridge in 1588, as Mr. Malone conjectures, or after his return from the army, perhaps in 1594. In either case he was poor, and received no encouragement from his family in his education. His persevering love of literature, however, amidst so many difficulties, ought to be mentioned to his honour.

During his early engagements on the stage, he had the misfortune to kill one of the players in a due), for which he was thrown into prison, “brought near the gallows,” but afterwards pardoned. While in confinement, a popish priest prevailed on him to embrace the Roman catholic faith, in which he continued about twelve years. As soon as he was released, which appears to have been about 1595, he married, to use his own expression, “a wife who was a shrew, yet honest to him,” and endeavoured to provide for his family by his pen. Having produced a play which was accidentally seen by Shakspeare, he resolved to bring it on the stage, of which he was a manager and acted a part in it himself. What play this was, we are not told, but its success encouraged him to produce his excellent comedy of “Every Man in his Humour,” which was performed on the same stage in 1598. Oldys, in his manuscript notes on Langbaine, says that Jonson was himself the master of a play-house in Barbican, which was at a distant period converted into a dissenting meetinghouse. He adds that Ben lived in Bartholomew-close, in the house which was inhabited, in Oldys’s time, by M. James, a letter-founder. Mention is made in his writings, of his theatre, of thje &un and Moon tavern, in Aldersgatestreet, and of the Mermaid. But the want of dates renders much of this information useless.

In 1613 he went to Paris, where he was admitted to an interview with cardinal Perron, and with his usual frankness told the cardinal that his translation of Virgil was “nought.” About this time he commenced a quarrel with Inigo Jones, and made him the subject of his ridicule in a comedy called “Bartholomew- Fair,” acted in 1614. Jones was architect or machinist to the masques and entertainmerits for which Jon son furnished the poetry, but the particular cause of their quarrel does not appear. “Whoever,” says lord Orford, “was the aggressor, the turbulent temper of Jonson took care to be most in the wrong. Nothing exceeds the grossness of the language that he poured out, except the badness of the verses that were the vehicle. There he fully exerted all that brutal abuse which his contemporaries were willing to think wit, because they were afraid of it; and which only serves to show the arrogance of the man who presumed to satirize Jones and rival Shakspeare. With the latter, indeed, he had not the smallest pretensions to be compared, except in having sometimes written absolute nonsense. Jonsort translated the ancients, Shakspeare transfused their very soul into his writings.” If Jonson was the rival of Shakspeare, he deserves all this; but with no other claims than his (t Cataline,“and” Sejanus,“how could he for a moment fancy himself the rival of Shakspeare?” Bartholomew Fair“was succeeded by the” Devil’s an Ass,“in 1616, and by an edition of his Works in folio, in which his” Epigrams" were first printed, although they appear to have been written at various times, and some long before this period. He was now in the zenith of his fame and prosperity. Among other marks of respect, he was presented with the honorary degree of M. A. by the university of Oxford. He had been invited to this place by Dr. Corbet, senior student, and afterwards dean of Christchurch and bishop of Norwich. According to the account he gave of himself to Drummond, he was M. A. of both universities.

Although it is not our purpose to notice all his dramatic pieces, it is necessary to mention, that in 1629 he produced a comedy called the “New Inn, or the light heart,” which was so roughly handled by the audience, that he was provoked to write an “Ode to Himself,” in which he threatened to abandon the stage. Threats of this kind are generally impotent, and Jonson gained nothing but the character of a man who was so far spoiled by public favour as to overrate his talents. Feltham and Suckling reflected on him with some asperity on this occasion, while Randolph endeavoured to reconcile him to his profession. His temper, usually rough, might perhaps at this time have been exasperated by disease, for we find that his health was declining from 1625 to 1629 , when his play was condemned. He was also suffering about this time the usual vexations which attend a want of ceconomy; in one case of pecuniary embarrassment, king Charles relieved him by the handsome present of an hundred pounds. This contradicts a story related by Gibber and Smollett, that when the king heard of his illness, he sent him ten pounds, and that Jonson said to the messenger, “His Majesty has sent me ten pounds, because I am old and poor, and live in an alley; go and tell him that his soul lives in an alley.” Jonson’s blunt manners and ready wit make the reply sufficiently credible, had the former part of the story been true, but the lines of gratitude which he addressed to his majesty are a satisfactory refutation. Jonson, however, continued to be thoughtlessly lavish and poor, although in addition to the royal bounty he is said to have enjoyed a pension from the city, and received occasional assistance from his friends. The pension from the city appears to have been withdrawn in 1631, if it be to it he alludes in the postscript of a letter in the British Museum, dated that year, “Yesterday the barbarous court of aldermen have withdrawn their chandler-ly pension for verjuice and mustard 33l. 6s. 8rf.” Sutton, the founder of the Charter-house, is said to have been one of his benefactors, which renders it improbable that Jonson could have intended to ridicule so excellent a character on the stage: yet, according to Mr. Oldys, “Volpone” was intended for him. But although it is supposed that Jonson sometimes laid the rich under contributions by the dread of his satire, it is not very likely that he would attack such a man as Sutton.

As many points of his character are obscure or disputed, it may not be unnecessary in this place to exhibit the evidence of his contemporaries, or of those who lived at no great distance of time. The following particulars Aubrey collected from Dr. Bathurst, sir Bennet Hoskyns, Lacy the player, and others .

“I remember when I was a scholar at Trin. Coll. Oxon. 1646, I heard Mr. Ralph Bathurst (now dean of Welles) say, that Ben: Johnson was a Warwyckshire man. ‘Tis agreed that his father was a minister; and by his epistle D. D. of Every Man to Mr. W. Camden, that he was a Westminster scholar, and that Mr. W. Camden was his schoolmaster. His mother, after his father’s death, married a bricklayer, and ’tis generally said that he wrought for some time with his father-in-lawe, and particularly on the garden wall of Lincoln’s inne next to Chancery lane; and that a knight, a bencher, walking thro‘, and hearing him repeat some Greeke verses out of Homer, discoursing with him and finding him to have a witt extraordinary, gave him some exhibition to maintain him at Trinity college in Cambridge, where he was: then he went into the Lowe Countryes, and spent some time, not very long, in the armie; not to the disgrace of [it], as you may find in his Epigrames. Then he came into England, and acted and wrote at the Greene Curtaine, but both ill; a kind of nursery or obscure playhouse somewhere in the suburbs (I think towards Shoreditch or Clerkenwell). Then he undertook again to write a play, and did hitt it admirably well, viz. Evtry Man which was his first good one. Sergeant Jo. Hoskins of Herefordshire was his Father. I remember his sonne (sir Bennet Hoskins, baronet, who was something poetical in his youth) told me, that when he desired to be adopted his sonne, No, sayd he, ’tis honour enough for me to be your brother I am your father’s sonne 'twas he that polished me I do acknowledge it. He was (or rather had been) of a clear and faire skin. His habit was very plain. I have heard Mr. Lacy the player say, that he was wont to weare a coate like a coachman’s coate, with slitts under the arm-pitts. He would many times exceede in drinke: Canarie was his beloved liquour: then he would tumble home to bed; and when he had thoroughly perspired, then to studie. I have seen his studyeing chaire, which was of strawe, such as old women used: and as Aulus Gellius is drawn in. When I was in Oxon: Bishop Skinner (Bp. of Oxford) who lay at our college was wont to say, that he understood an author as well as any man in England. He mentions in his Epigrames, a son that he had, and his epitaph. Long since in king James time, I have heard my uncle Davers (Danvers) say, who knew him, that he lived without Temple Barre at a combe- maker’s shop about the Elephant’s castle. In his later time he lived in Westminster, in the house under which you passe as you go out of the church-yard into the old palace; where he dyed. He lyes buried in the north-aisle, the path square of stones, the rest is lozenge, opposite to the scutcheon of Robert de Ros, with this inscription only on him, in a pavement square of blue marble, 14 inches square, O Rare Ben: Jonson: which was done at the charge of Jack Young, afterwards knighted, who walking there when the grave was covering, gave the fellow eighteen pence to cutt it.”

"I only knew Ben Jonson But my Lord of Winton (Dr. Morley, bishop of Winchester) knew him very well and says, he was in the 6, that is, the upermost fforme in Westminster scole, at which time his father dyed, and his mother married a brickelayer, who made him (much against his will) help him in his trade; but in a short time, his scolemaister, Mr. Camden, got him a better employment, which was to atend or acompany a son of sir Walter Rauley’s in his travills. Within a short time after their return, they parted (I think not in cole bloud) and with a loue sutable to what they had in their travilles (not to be comended). And then Ben began to set up for himselfe in the trade by which he got his subsistance and fame, of which I need not give any account. He got in time to have 100l. a yeare from the king, also a pension from the cittie, and the like from many of the nobilitie and some of the gentry, which was well pay'd, for love or fere of his railing in verse, or prose, or boeth. My lord told me, he told him he was (in his long retyrement and sickness, when he saw him, which was often) much afflickted, that hee had profained the scripture in his playes, and lamented it with horror: yet that, at that time of his long retyrement, his pension (so much as came in) was^ giuen to a woman that gouern‘d him (with whome he liu’d & dyed nere the Abie in Westminster) and that nether he nor she tooke much care for next weike and wood be sure not to want wine of which he usually took too much before he went to bed, if not oftener and soner. My lord tells me, he knowes not, but thinks he was born in Westminster. The question may be put to Mr. Wood very easily upon what grounds he is positive as to his being born their; he is a friendly man, and will resolve it. So much for brave Ben.

“Mr. Camden recommended (Jonson) to sir Walter Raleigh, who trusted him with the care and instruction of his eldest son Walter, a gay spark, who could not brook Ben’s rigorous treatment, but, perceiving one foible in his disposition, made use of that to throw oft* the yoke of his government. And this was an unlucky habit Ben had contracted, through his love of jovial company, of being overtaken with liquor, which sir Walter did of all vices most abominate, and hath most exclaimed against. One day, when Ben had taken a plentiful dose, and was fallen into a sound sleep, young Raleigh got a great basket, and a touple of men, who laid Ben in it, and then with a pole carried him between their shoulders to sir Walter, telling him their young master had sent home his tutor. This I had from a ms memorandum-book written in the time of the civil wars by Mr. Oldisworth, who was secretary, I think, to Philip earl of Pembroke. Yet in 1614, when sir Walter published his History of the World, there was a good understanding between him and Ben Jonson; for the verses, which explain the grave frontispiece before that history, were written by Jonson, and are reprinted in his” Underwoods,“where the poem is called” The Mind of the frontispiece to a book;“but he names not this book.”

“About the year 1622 some lewd, perjured, woman deceived and jilted him; and he writes a sharp poem on the occasion. And in another poem, called his picture, left in Scotland, he seems to think she slighted him for his mountain belly and his rocky face.” We have already seen by bishop Morley’s account that he lived with a woman in his latter days, who assisted him in spending his money.

“Ben Jonson,” says Oldys, “was charged in his” Poetaster," 1601, with having libelled or ridiculed the lawyers, soldiers, aud players so he afterwards joined an anologetical dialogue at the end of it, wherein he says he had been provoked for three years on every stage by slanderers, as to his self-conceit, arrogance, insolence, railing, and plagiarism by translations. As to law, he says he only brought in Ovid chid by his father for preferring poetry to it. As to the soldiers, he swears by his Muse they are friends; he loved the profession, and once proved or exercised it, as I take it, and did not shame it more then with his actions, than he dare now with his writings. And as to the players, he had taxed some sparingly, but they thought each man’s vice belonged to the whole tribe. That he was not moved with what they had done against him, but was sorry, for some better natures, who were drawn in by the rest to concur in the exposure or derision of him. And concludes, that since his comic muse had been so ominous to him, he will try if tragedy has a kinder aspect.

The account Jonson gave of himself to Drummond is jiot uninteresting. It was first published in the folia editiort of Drummond’s Works, 1711. “He,” Ben Jonson, "said that his grandfather came from Carlisle, to which he had come from Annandale in Scotland that he served king Henry VIII. and was a gentleman. His father lost his estate under queen Mary, having been cast in prison and forfeited; and at last he turned minister. He was posthumous, being born a month after his father’s death, and was put to school by a friend. His master was Camden. Afterwards he was taken from it, and put to another craft, viz. to be a bricklayer, which he could not endure, but went into the Low Countries, and returning home he again betook himself to his wonted studies. In his service in the Low Countries, he had, in the view of both the armies, killed an enemy, and taken the opima spolia from him; and since coming to England, being appealed to in. a duel, he had killed his adversary, who had hurt him in the arm, and whose sword was ten inches longer than his. For this crime he was imprisoned, and almost at the gallows. Then he took his religion on trust of a priest, who visited him in prison. He was twelve years a papist; but after this he was reconciled to the church of England, and left off to be a recusant. At his first communion, in token of his true reconciliation, he drank out the full cup of wine. He was master of arts in both universities. In the time of his close imprisonment under queen Elizabeth, there were spies to catch him, but he was advertised of them by the keeper. He had an epigram on the spies. He married a wife, who was a shrew, yet honest to him. When the king came to England, about the time that the plague was in London, he (Ben Jonson) being in the country at sir Robert Cotton’s house, with old Camden, saw in a vision his eldest son, then a young child, and at London, appear unto him with the mark of a bloody cross on his forehead, as if it had been cut with a sword; at which, amazed, he prayed unto God, and in the morning he came to Mr. Camden’s chamber to tell him, who persuaded him it was but an apprehension, at which he should not be dejected. In the mean time came letters from his wife, of the death of that boy in the plague. He appeared to him, he said, of a manly shape, and of that growth he thinks he shall be at the resurrection.

“He was accused by sir James Murray to the king, for writing something against the Scots in a play called” Eastward Hoe," and voluntarily imprisoned himself with Chapman and Marston, who had written it amongst them, and it was reported should have their ears and noses cut. After their delivery, he entertained all his friends; there were present Camden, Selden, and others. In the middle of the feast, his old mother drank to him, and showed him a paper which she designed (if the sentence had past) to have mixed among his drink, and it was strong and lusty poison; and to show that she was no churl, she told that she designed first to have drank of it herself.

Lord Clarendon’s character of our author is more favourable, and from so accurate a judge of human nature, perhaps more valuable. “His name,” lord Clarendon says, <l can never be forgotten, having by his very good learning, and the severity of his nature and manners, very much reformed the stage; and indeed the English poetry itself. His natural advantages were, judgment to order and govern fancy, rather than excess of fancy, his productions being slow and upon deliberation, yet then abounding with great wit and fancy, and will live accordingly; and surely as he did exceedingly exalt the English language in eloquence, propriety, and masculine expressions, so he was the best judge of, and fittest to prescribe rules to poetry and poets, of any man who had 'lived with, or before him, or since: if Mr. Cowley had not made a flight beyond all men, with that modesty yet, as to ascribe much of this to the example and learning of Ben Jonson. His conversation was very good, and with the men of most note; and he had for many years an extraordinary kindness for Mr. Hyde (lord Clarendon), till he found he betook himself to business, which he believed ought never to be preferred before his company. He lived to be very old, and till the palsy made a deep impression upon his body and his mind."

From these accounts it may surely be inferred that Jonson in his life-time occupied a high station in the literary world. So many memorials of character, and so many eulogiums on his talents, have not fallen to the lot of many writers of that age. His failings, however, appear to have been so conspicuous as to obscure his virtues. Addicted to intemperance, with the unequal temper which habitual intemperance creates, and disappointed in the hopes of wealth and independence, which his high opinion of his talents led him to form, degenerating even to the resources of a libeller who extorts from fear what is denied to genius, he became arrogant, and careless of pleasing even those with whom he associated. Of the coarseness of his manners there can be no doubt, but it appears at the same time that his talents were such as made his temper be tolerated for the sake of his conversation. As to his high opinion of himself, he did not probably differ from his contemporaries, who hailed him as the reformer of the stage, and as the most learned of criticsand it is no great diminution of his merit, that an age of more refinement cannot find enough to justify the superior light in which he was contemplated. It is sufficient that he did what had not been done before, that he displayed a judgment to which the stage had been a stranger, and furnished it with examples of regular comedy which have not been surpassed. His memory was uncommonly tenacious, and his learning certainly superior to that of most of his contemporaries. Pope gives him the praise of having “brought critical learning into vogue,” and having instructed both the actors and spectators in what was the proper province of the dramatic muse. His “English Grammar,” and his “Discoveries,” both written in his advanced years, display a-n attachment to the interests of literature, and a habit of reflection, which place his character as a scholar in a very favourable point of view. The editor of a recent edition: of his Discoveries, justly attributes to them “a closeness and precision of style, weight of sentiment, and accuracy of classical learning.”

For they who durst not censure, scarce could praise."

In May 1715, he was admitted of Jesus-college, Cambridge; and, about two years after, recommended by his tutor Dr. Styan Thirlby, who was very fond of him, and always retained a friendship for him, to make extracts from Eustathius, for the use of Pope’s “Homer.” He was not employed directly by Pope, nor did it ever happen to him to see the face of that poet: for, being of a shy modest nature, he felt no impulse to force his way to him; nor did the other make inquiry about him, though perfectly satisfied with what he had done for him. He took the degree of B. A. in 1718-19, and M. A. in 1722: he had been chosen fellow of his college soon after the taking of his first degree. This year he distinguished himself by the publication of a few Latin poems, entitled, “Lusus Poetici;” which were well received, and were twice reprinted, with additions. In Sept. 1723, he entered into deacon’s orders, and into priest’s the June following. In Jan. 1726 -7, he was presented by his college to Swavesey, near Cambridge; but, marrying in 1728, he resigned that living, and spon after settled himself in London, where he was engaged as a reader and preacher at a chapel in street, near Russell-street, Bloomsbury. ID this town he spent the next twenty-five years of his life: for though, in 1737, the earl of Winchelsea gave him the living of Eastvvell in Kent, where he resided a little time, yet he very soon quitted it, and returned to London. Here for many years he had employment as a preacher, in the abovementioned and other chapels; with the emoluments of which occasional services, and a competency of his own, he supported himself and family in a decent though private manner, dividing his leisure hours between his books and his friends, especially those of the literati, with whom he always kept up a close and intimate connection. In 1730, he published “Four Sermons upon the Truth of the Christian Religion:” the substance of which was afterwards incorporated in a work, entitled, “Discourses concerning the Truth of the Christian Religion, 1746,” 8vo.

But whatever Dr. Jortin’s wishes mightbe as to retirement, he was to live hereafter neither so studiously nor so obscurely as his imagination had figured out to him: more public scenes than any he had yet been engaged in still awaited him. For, Hayter, bishop of London, with whom he had been upon intimate terms, dying in 1762, and Osbaldiston, who was also his friend, succeeding to that see, he was made domestic chaplain to this bishop in March, admitted into a prebend of St. Paul’s the same month, and in October presented to the living of Kensington, whither he went to reside soon after, and there performed the office of a good parishpriest as long as he lived. In 1764, he was appointed archdeacon of London, and soon after had the offer of the rectory of St. James, Westminster; which, however, he refused, from thinking his situation at Kensington more to his honour, as well as better adapted to his now advanced age. Here he lived occupied (when his clerical functions permitted) amongst his books, and enjoying himself with his usual serenity, till Aug. 27, 1770: when, being seized with a disorder in the breast and lungs, he grew continually worse in spite of all assistance; and, without undergoing much pain in the course of his illness, died Sept. 5, in his 72d year. He preserved his understanding to the last; and, in answer to a female attendant who offered him something, “No,” said he, with much composure, “I have had enough of every thing.” He was buried in the new church-yard at Kensington, as he had directed; and had a flat stone laid over him, with this inscription, dictated by himself:

This son died in July 1795. He had considerable practice in the court Exchequer. His wife, who survived him, was one of the daughters of Dr, Mat ried to the rev. Samuel Darby, fellow of Jesus-college, in Cambridge, and afterwards rector of Whatfield, in Sutfolk.

, the celebrated historian of the Jews, was born at Jerusalem, of parents who belonged to the illustrious Asmonean family, about the year 37. He soon discovered great acuteness and penetration, and made so quick a progress in the learning of the Jews, that he was occasionally consulted by the chief priests and rulers of the city, even at the age of sixteen. For the purpose of studying the history and tenets of the several Jewish sects, he became for three years a pupil of Banun, a hermit, who had acquired great fame for wisdom; and with him lived a recluse and abstemious life. After this he became of the sect of the Pharisees, of which he was a very great ornament. In the year 63, he went to Rome, where a Jew comedian, who happened to be in favour with Nero, served him much at court, by making him known to Poppaea, whose protection was very useful to him, and enabled him to procure liberty for some of his countrymen. Upon his return to his country, where he found all things in confusion, he had the command of some troops, and distinguished himself at the siege of Jotapata, which he defended seven weeks against Vespasian and Titus, but was taken prisoner. A short time after, Vespasian granted him his life, at the intercession of Titus, who had conceived a great esteem for him. He now visited Egypt, and took up his residence at Alexandria, where he doubtless studied the Grecian and Egyptian philosophy. His patron, Titus, carried him with him to the siege of Jerusalem, after the taking of which, he attended Titus to Rome, where Vespasian gave him the freedom of the city, and settled a pension upon him. At Rome he cultivated the Greek language, and began to write his History. He continued ta experience favour under Titus and Domitian, and lived beyond the 13th year of Domitian, when he was fifty-six for his books of “Antiquities” end there and after that period he composed his books against Apion. In what year he died is uncertain.

, a supposed heretic of the fourth century, was an Italian monk, and observed all the austerities of a monastic life for a time, and taught some points of doctrine directly opposite to the growing superstitions; for this he was expelled Rome, and fled to Milan, with an intent to engage Ambrose, bishop of that place, and the emperor Theodosius, who was then in that city, in his favour; but Syricius, then bishop of Rome, dispatched three presbyters to Milan, Crescentius, Leopardus, and Alexander, with letters to that church, which are still extant in Ambrose’s works, acquainting them with the proceedings of himself and his followers, in consequence of which he was rejected by Ambrose, and driven out of the town by the emperor. From Milan, Jovinian returned to the neighbourhood of Home, where his followers continued to assemble under his direction, till the year 398, when the emperor Honorius commanded him and his accomplices to be whipped and banished into different islands. Jovinian himself was confined to Boas, a small island on the coast of Dal matin, where he died about the year 406. Jovinian wrote several books, which were answered by Jerome in the year 392, but in such a manner as to render it difficult to know what were Jovinian’s errors, or what his general character, except that he was no friend to celibacy or fasting.

, or Paullo Giovio, an Italian historian, was a native of Como, and was born in 1483. Being early deprived of his father, he was educated under the care of his elder brother Benedict, who was also a historical writer. After having studied at Padua, Milan, and Pavia, he took the degree of M. D. and practised for some time; but an early propensity led him to the study and composition of history. Having completed a volume, he presented it to Leo X. at Rome, in 1516, who expressed a very high opinion of him, and gave him a pension and the rank of knighthood. Jovius now became intimate with the literati of Rome, and wrote several Latin poems, which appeared in the “Coryciana,” and other collections. After the death of Leo, Adrian VI. presented him to a canonry in the cathedral of Como, and Clement VII. appointed him one of his attendant courtiers, provided him with a handsome establishment in the Vatican, gave him the precentorship of Como, and lastly the bishopric of Nocera. During the sacking of the city of Rome, in 1527, Jovius was robbed of a considerable sum of money and of his manuscripts, but recovered the latter. Under the pontificate of Paul III. he wished to exchange his bishopric of Nocera for that of Como, and even carried his ambition to the place of cardinal, but was disappointed in both. His favourite residence was at a beautiful villa on the banks of the lake of Como, where he pursued his studies, and in his museum made a collection of portraits of eminent characters, to each of which he affixed an inscription, or brief memoir, some highly favourable, others sarcastically severe. These memoirs have been frequently printed under the title “Elogia doctorum Virorum,” and the portraits, engraved in wood, have been published under the title of “Musaei Jovian i Imagines,” Basil, 1577. About two years before his death, he quitted his retirement, and took up his residence in Florence, where he died in 1552, and was buried in the church of St. Laurence, in that city.

His other writings are a small tract, “De Piscibus Romanis,” published in 1524, fol. and reprinted in 1527, 8vo; the lives of the twelve Visconti lords and dukes of Milan; a description of the island of Great Britain, of Muscovy, of the lake of Como; and the eulogies of men who have distinguished themselves in arms. Three of the last books of the history of Paul, with some works of his brother Benedict, have lately been discovered among the domestic Mss, of a descendant of the family. His brother Benedict appears to have been equally conversant with science and literature. Among his writings are, the history of Como, his native place; a treatise on the transactions and manners of the Swiss; a collection of 100 letters; several translations from the Greek, and some specimens of Latin poetry.

, a learned physician, and royal professor at Montpellier, was born at Valence, in the province of Dauphine, in France, on the 16th of December, 1529, of a good family. After he had finished his school education, he went to Mompellier, where he was matriculated in the faculty of medicine on the 1st of March, 1550, and took his degree of bachelor the following year. He afterwards studied at Padua, where he attended the lectures of the celebrated Fallopius, and at some other places; but, returning to Montpellier, he finished his exercises, and received the degree of doctor in 1558. The manner in which he had performed his acts procured for him so much of the confidence and esteem of Honore Castellan, that this professor, being summoned to court in the following year, to hold the office of first physician of Catharine de Medicis, queen of Henry II. he nominated Joubert to give the lectures in the schools during his absence; and Joubert acquitted himself in so distinguished a manner, that on the death of professor Rondelet in 1566, he was immediately named his successor, in the chair. He was likewise the second successor of Rondelet, in the dignity of chancellor, having followed Saporta in 1574. He was called to Paris by Henry III. in 1579, who entertained hopes that Joubert would be able to cure the barrenness of Louisa de Lorraine, his queen. But his attempts proved unsuccessful; and he returned to Montpellier with the title of physician in ordinary to the king, and continued to practise there to his death, October 21, 1583.

, or rather Jouvancey (Joseph de), a celebrated Jesuit, was born September 14, 1643, at Paris. He taught rhetoric with uncommon reputation at Caen, la Fleche, and Paris. At length he was invited to Rome, in 1669, that he might continue “The History of the Jesuits,” with more freedom than he could have done in France, and died in that city May 29, 1719. His principal works are, two volumes of Latin Speeches, 12mo; a small tract entitled “De ratione discendi et docendi,” much esteemed; Notes, in Latin, on P-ersius, Juvenal, Terence, Horace, Martial, Ovid’s Metamorphoses, &c. The fifth part of the “History of the Jesuits,” in Latin, from 1591 to 1616, fol.; as a supplement to Fathers Orlandino, Sacchini, and Poussines. All Jouvenci’s works are written in pure Latin, and in this consists their principal excellence. His History of the Jesuits, in which he undertakes to justify his brother, Pere Guignard, who was hanged by sentence of parliament on account of Chatel’s infamous attempt, and to represent him as a martyr, being printed at Rome, 1710, fol. made much noise, and was condemned by two decrees of the parliament of Paris one Feb. 22, 1713 the other, March 24th the same year. This last sentence suppresses the work, and contains the declaration which had been demanded from the Jesuits. Several pieces appeared on this occasion against P. Jouvenci’s history, 1713, 12mo.

* In the Oen?. Mag. for 1781, p 38, daleo, Oxford, on Edward Joyner, is a curious- Latin epitaph, taken from alias Lyde, who was probably the elthe parish church of St. Mary Mag- der brother of William. piety, and great fidelity. At his return he lived very retired in London; till, on the breaking out of the popish plot in 1678, he retired to Horspath, where some time after he was seized for a Jesuit, or priest, and hound to appear at the quarter-sessions at Oxford. Being found to be a mere lay-papist, and discharged, he went to Ickford, an obscure village in Buckinghamshire, near Thame, and there spent many years in devout retirement. In 1687 he was restored to his fellowship by James II. but expelled from it after a year’s enjoyment, and retired to his former recess, where, says Wood, his apparel, which was formerly gay, was then very rustical, little better than that of a day-labourer, and his diet and lodging suitable. In one of his letters to Wood, April 12, 1692, he told him that “the present place of his residence is a poor thatcht-house, where the roof is of the same stuff in the chamber where he lodged, which he assured me was never guilty of paying chimney-tax. However, he hoped that all this would not make a person neglected and despicable who had formerly slept in the royal palaces of France, under a roof fretted and embossed with gold; whereas, this is doubly and trebly interweaved only with venerable cobwebs, which can plead nothing of rarity besides the antiquity.” This personage has written, 1. “The Roman Empress,” a comedy, Lond. 1670, 4to. 2. “Some Observations on the Life of Cardinal Pole,” 1686, 8vo. 3. Various Latin and English poems, scattered in several books, especially a large English copy in “Horti Carolini Rosa altera,” 1640. He died at Ickford, Sept. 14, 1706. He was great uncle to Thomas Philips, canon of Tongres, who wrote the “Life of Cardinal Pole,” published in 1766.

, a learned Spanish mathematician, knight of Malta, and commander of the band of gentlemen marine guards, was chosen, with Ulloa, to attend the French academicians, who went to Peru', for the purpose of measuring a degree on the meridian, in order to determine the earth’s figure. They embarked May 26, 1735. Ulloa undertook the historical part of the voyage, which appeared translated into French, Amsterdam, 1752, 2 vols. 4to; and D. George Juan the astronomical part, who accordingly published a large work on the earth’s figure, printed in Spanish. On his return he went to Paris, 171 where the academy of sciences admitted him a member. He died at Madrid, 1773, leaving several works in Spanish on naval affairs, a translation of which would be useful.

, or Jehuda, Hakkadosh, or the Saint, a rabbi celebrated for his learning and riches, according to the Jewish historians, lived in the time of the emperor Marcus Antoninus, whom he made a proselyte to Judaism, and it was by his order that Jehuda compiled the Mishna, the history of which is briefly this: The sect of the Pharisees, after the destruction of Jerusalem, prevailing over the rest, the study of traditions became the chief object of attention in all the Jewish schools. The number of these traditions had, in a long course of time, so greatly increased, that the doctors, whose principal employment it was to illustrate them by new explanations, and to confirm their authority, found it necessary to assist their recollection by committing them, under distinct heads, to writing. At the same time, their disciples took minutes of the explanations of their preceptors, many of which were preserved, and grew up into voluminous commentaries. The confusion which arose from these causes was now become so troublesome, that, notwithstanding what Hillel had before done in arranging the traditions, Jehuda found it necessary to attempt a new digest of the oral law, and of the commentaries of their most famous doctors. This arduous undertaking is said to have employed him forty years. It was completed, according to the unanimous testimony of the Jews, which in this case there is no sufficient reason to dispute, about the close of the second century. This Mishna, or first Talmud, comprehends all the laws, institutions, and rules of life, which, beside the ancient Hebrew scriptures, the Jews supposed themselves bound to observe. Notwithstanding the obscurities, inconsistencies, and absurdities with which this collection abounds, it soon obtained credit among the Jews as a sacred book. But as the Mishna did not completely provide for many cases which arose in the practice of ecclesiastical law, and many of its prescriptions and decisions were found to require further comments and illustrations, the task of supplying these defects was undertaken by the rabbis Chiiam and Oschaiam, and others, disciples of Jehudah; who not only wrote explanations of the Mishna, but made material additions to that voluminous compilation. These commentaries and additions were collected by the rabbi Jochanan ben Eliezer, probably in the fifth century, under the name of the “Gemara,” because it completed the Mishna. This collection was afterwards called the Jerusalem Gemara, to distinguish it from another of the same kind made in Babylon, at the beginning of the sixth century.

, one of the reformers, son of John Judah, a German priest, was born in 1482, in Alsace. Some authors have reported that he was a converted Jew, but father Simon has proved that he neither was a Jew, nor of Jewish extraction, but the son of the above John Judah, or de Juda, who, according to the custom of those times, kept a concubine, by whom he had this Leo. He was educated at Slestadt, and thence in 1502, was sent to Basil to pursue his academical studies. Here he had for a fellowstudent, the afterwards much celebrated Zuinglius; and from him, who had at a very early age been shocked at the superstitious practices of the church of Rome, he received such impressions, as disposed him to embrace the reformed religion. Having obtained his degree of M. A. in 1512, he was appointed minister of a Swiss church, to the duties of which he applied himself with indefatigable zeal, preaching boldly in defence of the protestant religion. At length he was appointed by the magistrates and ecclesiastical assembly of Zurich, pastor of the church of St. Peter in that city, and became very celebrated as an advocate, as well from the press as the pulpit, of the reformed religion, for about eighteen years. At the desire of his brethren, he undertook a translation, from the Hebrew into Latin, of the whole Old Testament; but the magnitude of the work, and the closeness with which he applied to it, impaired his health; and before he had completed it, he fell a sacrifice to his labours, June 9, 1542, when he was about sixty years of age. The translation was finished by other hands, and was printed at Zurich in 1543, and two years afterwards it was reprinted at Paris by Robert Stephens, accompanying the Vulgate version, in adjoining columns, but without the name of the author of the new version. Judah was likewise the author of “Annotations upon Genesis and Exodus,” in which he was assisted by Xuinglius, and upon the four gospels, and the greater part of the epistles. He also composed a larger and smaller catechism, and translated some of Zuinglius’s works into Latin. The Spanish divines, notwithstanding the severity of the Inquisition, did not hesitate to reprint the Latin Bible of Leo Judah, with the notes ascribed to Vatabius, though some of them were from the pen of Calvin. Some particulars of Judah and of this translation, not generally known, may be found in a book written by a divine of Zurich, and printed in that city in 1616, entitled “Vindicise pro Bibliorum translatione Tigurina.”

, one of the principal writers of the Centuries of Magdeburg, was born Sept. 21, 1528, at Tippolswald, in Misnia. His inclination to literature induced his father to send him to study at Dresden: but the college of Wittenberg being more to his mind, he removed thither, and afterwards was driven, by necessity, to Magdeburg. Here he supported himself by being tutor in the family of a lawyer, who sent him with his son to Wittenberg, in 1546. This gave him an opportunity of completing his own studies; and he obtained the degree of M. A. in this university, 1548. He then returned to Magdeburg, and taught the second form there for some years; and in 1554, was chosen minister of St. Ulric’s church.

, a Roman emperor, commonly, although perfcaps not very justly, styled the Apostate, was the younger son of Constantius, brother of Constantine the Great. He was the first fruit of a second marriage of his father with Basilina, after the birth of Gallus, whom he had by Galla his first consort. He was born Nov. 6, in the year 331, at Constantinople; and, according to the medals of him, named Fiavius Claudius Julianus. During the life of Constantine, he received the first rudiments of his education at the court of Constantinople; but, upon the death of this emperor, all his relations being suspected of criminal actions, Julian’s father was obliged to seek his safety by flight; and his son Julian’s escape was entirely owing to Marc, bishop of Arethusa, without whose care he had inevitably perished in the persecution of his family. As soon as the storm was over, and Constantius, the son of Constantine, quietly seated on the imperial throne, he sent young Julian to Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, who was related to him by his mother’s side, and who educated him in the Christian faith; but at the same time employed an eunuch called Mardonius, who was a pagan, to teach him grammar, while Eulolius, a Christian of doubtful character, was his master in rhetoric. Julian made a very quick progress in learning; and, being sent afterwards to Athens to complete his education, he became the darling of that nursery of polite literature, and particularly commenced an acquaintance with St. Basil and Gregory of Nazianzen. This last, however, observed something in him which rendered his sincerity in the Christian faith suspected: and it is certain, that, notwithstanding all the care of his preceptor Eusebius, this young prince was entirely perverted by Maximus, an Ephesian philosopher and magician. His cousin Constantius the emperor was advertised of his conduct; and Julian, to prevent the effects, and save his life, professed himself a monk, and took the habit, but, under this character in public, he secretly embraced paganism. Some time before, his brother Gallus and he had taken orders, and executed the office of reader in the church; but the religious sentiments of the two brothers were widely different.

As soon as Julian had attained the age of manhood, according to the Roman law, Constantius, at the solicitation of his consort, the empress Eusebia, raised him to the dignity of Caesar, on his birth-day, Nov. 6, in the year 355; and at the same time the emperor gave him his sister Helena in marriage, and made him general of the army in Gaul. Julian filled his command with surprizing abilities, and shewed himself every way equal to the trust; which was the more extraordinary, as he had never any instructions in the military art. The principal officers under him, from whom he was to expect assistance, were very backward in performing this service; restrained apparently by the danger of seeming too much attached to him, and thereby incurring the emperor’s displeasure, whose jealousy on this head was no secret. Under all these disadvantages, our young warrior performed wonders: he was not afraid to undertake the enterprize of driving the barbarians out of Gaul; and he completed the design in a very little time, having obtained one of the most signal victories of that age, near Strasbourg. In this battle he engaged no less than seven German kings, one of whom was the famous Chrodomairus; who had always beaten the Romans till this time, but was now Julian’s prisoner. The defeat of the Salii and Chamavi, French people, followed at the heels of this victory; and the Germans, being conquered again, were constrained to beg a peace. Our hero was crowned with these glorious laurels, when Constantius, who was hard pressed by the Persians, sent for a detachment of troops from the army in Gaul to augment his forces. This order was ill relished by the Gauls, who were reluctant to fight out of their own country. Julian took advantage of this ill humour, and got himself declared emperor by the army; but, not being able to prevail with Constantius to acknowledge him in that character, he went with these troops to Illyria, where he continued till the death of Constantius, which happened Nov. 2, 361.

Julian no sooner saw himself master of the world, than he threw off all the disguise of his religion, for it merely was a disguise. There appears very little reason to think that Julian had ever cordially embraced, or ever studied with attention, the principles of Christianity. Had this been the case, he might have seen that those principles led to a conduct very opposite to that which he beheld in the conduct of Constantius, whose cruelty to his relations perhaps first excited his hatred against Christianity. From his youth he had practised dissimulation with consummate artifice, and it was rather hypocrisy than Christianity which he had now to shake off. Accordingly he now expressly professed himself a pagan, ordered their temples to be set open, and re-established their worship: he also assumed the character and station of the sovereign pontiff, and was invested with the whole pagan ceremonial, resolving to efface the mark of his baptism by the blood of the heathen sacrifices. In short, he resolved to effect the utter ruin of Christianity, and in this attempt united solid judgment witli indefatigable assiduity. Neither address nor dexterity was wanting, nor all that the wit or prudence of man could do. We find, indeed, in this emperor all the great qualities which a projector could conceive, or an adversary would require, to secure success. He was eloquent and liberal, artful, insinuating, and indefatigable; which, joined to a severe temperance, a love of justice, and a courage superior to all trials, first gained him the affections, and soon after the peaceable possession, of the whole empire. He had been, as we have just remarked, compelled to profess the Christian religion to the time when he assumed the purple; but his aversion to his uncle Constantine and his cousin Constantius, on account of the cruelties exercised on his family, had prejudiced him against the Christian religion; and his attachment to some Platonic sophist, who had been employed in his education, gave him as violent a bias towards paganism. He was ambitious; and paganism, in some of its theurgic rites, had flattered and encouraged his views of the diadem. He was vain, which made him aspire to the glory of re-establishing the ancient rites. He was very learned, and fond of Grecian literature, the very soul of which, in his opinion, was the old theology: but, above all, notwithstanding a considerable mixture of enthusiasm, his superstition was excessive, and what nothing but the blood of hecatombs could appease.

With these dispositions he came to the empire, and consequently with a determined purpose of subverting the Christian and restoring the pagan worship. His predecessors had left him the repeated experience of the inefficacy of downright force. The virtue of the past times then rendered this effort fruitless, the numbers of the present would have made it now dangerous: he found it necessary, therefore, to change his ground. His knowledge of human nature furnished him with arms; and his knowledge of the faith he had abandoned, enabled him to direct those arms to most advantage. He began with re-establishing paganism by law, and granting a full liberty of conscience to the Christians. On this principle, he restored those to their civil rights who had been banished on account of their religion, and even affected to reconcile to a mutual forbearance the various sects of Christianity. Yet he put on this mask of moderation for no other purpose than to inflame the dissensions in the church. He then fined and banished such of the more popular clergy as had abused their power, either in exciting the people to burn and destroy pagan temples, or to commit violence on an opposite sect: and it cannot be denied, but that in the turbulent and insolent manners of some of them, he found a plausible pretext for this severity. He proceeded to revoke and take away those immunities, honours, and revenues, which his uncle and cousin had granted to the clergy. Neither was his pretence for this altogether unreasonable. He judged the grants to be exorbitant; and, besides, as they were attendant on a national religion, when the establishment came to be transferred from Christianity to paganism, he concluded they must follow the religion of the state. But there was one immunity he took away, which no good policy, even under an establishment, should have granted them and this was an exemption from the civil tribunals. He went still farther he disqualified the Christian laity for bearing offices in the state and even this the security of the established religion may often require. But his most illiberal treatment of the Christians, was his forbidding, the professors of that religion to teach polite letters, and the sciences, in the public schools; and Amm. Marcellinus censures this part of his conduct as a breach in his general character of humanity, (lib. xx. c. 10.) His more immediate design, in this, was to hinder the youth from taking impressions to the disadvantage of paganism; his remoter view, to deprive Christianity of the support of human literature. Not content with this, he endeavoured even to destroy what was already written in defence of Christianity. With this view he wrote to the governor and treasurergeneral of Egypt, to send him the library of George bishop of Alexandria, who, for his cruelty and tyranny, had been ton) in pieces by the people: nay, to such a length did his aversion to the name of Christ carry him, as to decree, by a public edict, that his followers should be no longer called Christians, but Galileans; well knowing the efficacy of a nick-name to render a profession ridiculous. In the mean time, the animosities between the different sects of Christianity, furnished him with the means of carrying on these projects. Being, for example, well assured that the Arian church oi Edessa was very rich, he took advantage of their oppressing and persecuting the Valentinians to seize every tiling belonging to that church, and divided the plunder among his soldiers; scornfully telling the Edessians, he did this to ease them of their burthens, that they might proceed more lightly, and with less impediment, in their journey to heaven. He went farther still, if we may believe the historian Socrates, and, in order to raise money to defray the extraordinary expence of his Persian expedition, he imposed a tax or tribute on all who would not sacrifice to the pagan idols. The tax, it is true, was proportioned to every man’s circumstances, but was as truly an infringement upon his act of toleration. And though he forbore persecuting to death by law, which would have been a direct contradiction to that act, yet he connived at the fury of the people, and the brutality of the governors of provinces, who, during his short reign, brought many martyrs to the stake. He put such into governments, whose inhumanity and blind zeal for their country superstitions were most distinguished. And when the suffering churches presented their complaints to him, he dismissed them with cruel scoffs, telling them, their religion directed them to suffer without murmuring.

Such were Julian’s efforts to subvert Christianity; and it cannot be denied, that the behaviour of many of the Christians at that time furnished pretence enough for most of the proceedings against them in the view of state-policy. Besides that they branded the state religion, and made a merit of affronting the public worship, it is well known that they were continually guilty of seditions; and did not scruple to assert, that nothing hindered them from engaging in open rebellion, but the improbability of succeeding in it for want of numbers. During these measures, his projects to support and reform paganism went hand in hand with his attempts to destroy Christianity. He wrote, and he preached, in defence of the Gentile superstition, and has himself acquainted us with the ill-success of his ministry at Beroea. Of his controversial writings, his answerer, Cyril, hath given us a large specimen, by which we see he was equally intent to recommend paganism, and to discredit revelation. In his reformation of the Geatile superstition, he endeavoured to hide the absurdity of its traditions by moral and philosophical allegories. These he found provided for him principally by philosophers of his own sect, the Platonists. For they, not without the assistance of the other sects, had, ever since the appearance of Christianity, been refining the theology of paganism, to oppose it to that of revelation; under pretence, that their new-invented allegories were the ancient spirit of the letter, which the first poetical divines had thus conveyed to posterity. He then attempted to correct the morals of the pagan priesthood, and regulate them on the practice of the first Christians. In his epistle to Arsacius, the chief priest of Galacia, he not only requires of them a personal behaviour void of offence, but that they reform their household on the same principle: he directs, that they who attend at the altar should abstain from the theatre, the tavern, and the exercise of all ignoble professions that in their private character they be meek and humble but that, in the acts and offices of religion, they assume a character conformable to the majesty of the immortal gods, whose ministers they are. And, above all, he recommends to them the virtues of chanty and benevolence. With regard to discipline and religious policy, he established readers in divinity planned an establishment for the order, and parts of the divine offices designed a regular and formal service, with days and hours of worship. He had also decreed to found hospitals for the poor, monasteries for the devout, and to prescribe and enjoin initiatory and expiatory sacrifices; with instructions for converts, and a course of penance for offenders; and, in all things, to imitate the church discipline at that time. In this way he endeavoured to destroy Christian principles, and at the same time to establish Christian practice.

But as the indifference and corruptions of Paganism, joined to the inflexibility and perseverance of the Christians, prevented his project from advancing with the speed he desired, he grew chagrined, and even threatened, after his return from the Persian expedition, effectually to ruin the Christian religion. He had before, in pursuance of his general scheme of opposing revelation to itself, by setting one sect against another, written to the body or community of the Jews; assuring them of his protection, his concern for their former ill usage, and his fixed purpose to screen them from future oppression, that they might be at liberty, and in a disposition to redouble their vows for the prosperity of his reign; and concluded with a promise, that, if he came back victorious from the Persian war, he would rebuild Jerusalem, restore them to their possessions, live with them in the holy city, and join with them in their worship of the great God of the universe. The rebuilding of the temple at Jerusalem was thought a sure means of destroying Christianity, since the final destruction of that temple had been foretold both by Christ and his apostles; if therefore the lye could be given to their predictions, their religion would be no more. This scheme, therefore, he set about immediately. The completing of such an edifice would be a work of time, and he pleased himself with the glory of atchieving so bold an enterprize. Accordingly, the attempt was made, and what was the consequence will be seen by the following account of it from Ammianus Marcellinus. “Julian, having been already thrice consul, taking Sallust prsefect of the several Gauls for his colleague, entered a fourth time on this high magistracy. It appeared strange to see a private man associated with Augustus; a thing of which, since the consulate of Dioclesian and Aristobulus, history afforded no example. And although his sensibility of the many and great events, which this year was likely to produce, made him very anxious for the future, yet he pushed on the various and complicated preparations for this expedition with the utmost application: and, having an eye in every quarter, and being desirous to eternize his reign by the greatness of his achievements, he projected to rebuild, at an immense expence, the proud and magnificent temple of Jerusalem, which, after many combats, attended with much bloodshed on both sides, during the siege by Vespasian, was, with great difficulty, taken and destroyed by Titus. He committed the conduct of this affair to Alypius of Antioch, who formerly had been lieutenant in Britain, When, therefore, this Alypius had set himself to the vigorous execution of his charge, in which he had all the assistance that the governor of the province could afford him, horrible bails of fire breaking out near the foundations, with frequent and reiterated attacks, rendered the place from time to time inaccessible to the scorched and blasted workmen; and the victorious element continuing in this manner, obstinately and resolutely bent, as it were, to drive them to a distance, Alypius thought best to give over the enterprize. In the mean time, though Julian was still at Antioch when this happened, yet he was so wholly taken up by the Persian expedition, that he had not leisure to attend to it. He set out soon after upon that expedition, in which he succeeded very well at first; and, taking several places from the Persians, he advanced as far as Ctesipho without meeting with an) body to oppose him. However, there passed several engagements in this place, in which it is said the Romans had almost always the advantage; but the distressed condition of their army, for want of necessaries, obliged them to come to a decisive battle. This was begun June 26, in the year 363, and victory appeared to declare itself on their side; when Julian, who was engaged personally irr the fight without |iis helmet, received a mortal wound upon his head, which put a period to his life the following night.” This fact of the interruption given to the rebuilding of the temple of Jerusalem has been denied by some modern infidels, but nothing of the kind seems better attested; and although it may be supposed that the eruption was not without natural causes,' and that the seeds of it lay in the bowels of the earth, yet, as Dr. Jortin observes, the fire’s breaking out at the very instant when the Jews and Pagans were attempting to rebuild the temple, its being renewed upon their renewed attempt to go on, and ceasing when they gave over, are circumstances which plainly shew a providential interposition.

We have, in the course of his memoir, had occasion to exhibit some qualities to the disadvantage of Julian; yet we must in justice add, that he was sober and vigilant, free from the debaucheries of women; and, to sum up all, remarkably mild, merciful, good-natured, and, in general, most amiable; except in his passions which arose from his aversion to Christianity. He not only encouraged letters by his patronage, but was himself a learned writer. As a philosopher, he strictly adhered to the Alexandrian or Eclectic school. He professes himself a warm admirer of Pythagoras and Plato, and recommends an union of their tenets with those of Aristotle. The later Platonists, of his own period, he loads with encomiums, particularly Jamblichus, whom he calls “The Light of the World,” and “The Physician of the Mind.” Amidst the numerous traces of an enthusiastic and bigoted attachment to Pagan theology and philosophy, and of an inveterate enmity to Christianity, which are to be found in his writings, the candid reader will discern many marks of genius and erudition. Concerning the manners of Julian, Libanius writes, that no philosopher, in the lowest state of poverty, was ever more temperate, or more ready to practise rigorous abstinence from food, as the means of preparing his mind for conversing with the gods. Like Plotinus, Porphyry, Jambiichus, and others of this fanatical sect, he dealt in visions and extasies, and pretended to a supernatural intercourse with divinities. Suidas relates, probably from some writings of the credulous Eunapius now lost, an oracular prediction concerning his death. Besides his answer to St. Cyril, and “Misopogon,” he wrote some other discourses, epistles, &c. in which are many proofs of genius and erudition, conveyed in an elegant style. And his rescripts in the Theodosian code shew, that he made more good laws, in the short time of his reign, than any emperor either before or after him. His works were published in Greek and Latin by Spanheim in 1696, 2 vols. fol.; and a selection from them in England by Mr. Buncombe, 1784, 2 vols. 8vo, translated principally from La Bleterie, who wrote an excellent Life of Julian.

, a native of Leipsic, was the first who published an ancient Greek translation of “Caesar’s Commentaries,” Francfort, 1606, 2 vols. 4to, a work much in request and gave a Latin version of the “Pastorals” of Longus, with notes, Han. 1605, 8vi. Some of his letters are also printed. He died August 16, 1610, at Hanau. Lewis Jungerman, his brother, born also at Leipsic, was an excellent botanist, and to him are attributed, “Hortus Eystettensis,” “Catalogus plantarum quae circa Altorfinuui nascuntur,” Altorf, 1646, 8vi; and “Cornucopias Floras Giessensis,” Giessae, 1623, 4to. He died June 7, 1653, at Altorf. Gaspard Jungerman, another brother, was also a man of learning.

Jungius seems to have eminently distinguished himself in the several studies of theology, medicine, mathematics, metaphysics, and botany, upon all which pursuits his opinions and observations are handed down to us in his writings, though the most famous part of his work, entitled “Doxoscopiae Physicze Minores,” is upon the last mentioned subject, botany. This book was first printed at Hamburgh, in 4to, A.D. 1662, and again, in 1679, under the care of Martin Fogel, with this additional title, “Prsecipuarum opinionum physicarum.” A copy of the former edition of this work is in the Linnoean library, having been presented to Linnæus by his pupil, professor P. D. Giseke, of Hamburgh. The botanical part of it, included in the third section of the second part, occupies about 100 pages, and contains many judicious and acute rules for making distinct species of plants, as well as some curious remarks upon genera. He was a great critic in botanical nomenclature; and constructed a variety of terms which agree with those of Linnasus, and his remarks upon botanical discrimination have been of considerable advantage to succeeding botanists, and many of his definitions are repeatedly made use of by our immortal countryman, Ray. He was the first who projected and raised a literary society in Germany, though this institution did not share a better fate than the one which had just before been founded in this country (and which appears to have served for its model) by Hugh Latimer, Thomas Linacre, and others, for the purpose of discussing and illustrating Aristotle’s philosophy. They both Bourished but for a short period, though the Heunetic or Ereunetic society, as it was called, established by professor Jungius, was on a far more comprehensive plan than the other, and may indeed be considered as having, in some measure, embraced the same views with which the royal society was afterwards instituted in Great Britain. The fame of Jungius was originally diffused through this country by his noble pupil, the honourable Charles Cavendish, who appears to have studied under him at Hamburgh. This gentleman was brother to the earl of Newcastle, who had the care of Charles I. when a youth.

After a long life, spent in the acquirement and diffusionof general philosophical knowledge, and having always manifested a strong attachment to the Lutheran church, professor Jungius departed this life September 23, 1657, iind was buried in the church of St. John at Hamburgh, where a handsome tablet was inscribed to his memory by his friend and pupil, Michael Kirsten. The following is a list of his works, as given by Martin Fogel, who edited the second edition of his “Doxoscopise.” 1. “Logica Hamburgensis,” Hamb. 1638, 8vo. 2. “Geometria Empirica,” Rostock and Hamb. 4to. 3. “Doxoscopiae Physicae Minores, sive Isagoge Physica Doxoscopica.” Hamb. 1662, 4to. 4. “Kurzer Bericht von der Didactica oder Lehrkunst Wolfgangi Ratichii, durch Christoph. Helvicum und Joach. Jungium,” Giessen, 1614, 4to. 5. “Disputationes de naturali Dei cognitione de potentia activa de loco Aristotelis, lib. 3. de ccelo, t. 66 de figuris locum replentibus de relationibus de notionibus secundis de demonstratione tritermina: de definitionibus,” &c.

, a learned Hollander, was born, in 1511 or 1512, at Hoorn, of which place his father had been secretary, and five times burgomaster. Having passed through his first studies at Haeriem and Louvain, he fixed Upon physic for his profession, and, for his improvement, resolved to travel abroad. Accordingly, going first to France, he put himself under the care of James Houlier, a celebrated physician at Paris. Thence he went to Bologna in Italy, where he was admitted M. D. and afterwards, passing through several parts of Germany, arrived in England, and became physician to the duke of Norfolk in 1543, and was afterwards retained in that quality by a certain great lady. He continued in England several years, and wrote many books there; among others, a Greek and Latin lexicon, to which he added above 6500 words. He dedicated this work, in 1548, to Edward VI. with the title of king. Edward not being acknowledged such by the pope> our author, who was of that religion, fell under the displeasure of the court of Rome for his dedication, and was prosecuted for it a long time after. His works were put into the “Index Expurgatorius,” where he was branded as a Calvinist, and an author “damnatae memories,” of condemned memory; a disgrace which gave him great uneasiness and concern; and, in order to be freed from it, having laid his case before cardinal Granville, he applied, by the advice of Arias Montanus, directly to the pope, and prepared an apology, shewing the indispensable necessity he was under of giving Edward the title of king, and at the same time protesting he had always been a good catholic.

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

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

He was married no less than four times, and by his third wife had a son, who is the subject of the next article. The titles of his works are sixty-four in number, among which are, “Commentaries” on the first three chapters of Genesis, the prophecies of Ezekiel, Daniel, and Jonah “Sacred Parallels” and “Notes” upon the book of Revelation “Hebrew Lexicon” “Grammar of the Hebrew Tongue” “Notes on Cicero’s Epistles to Atticns.” But what he is chiefly, and almost only, known for now, is his Latin version of the Hebrew text of the Bible, jointly "with Tremellius. He was a man of great learning and pious zeal, and his life by Melchior Adam affords many interesting particulars of him in both characters. In the account of his life written by himself, he relates that in his youth he was sed.uced into atheism, from which he represents himself as almost miraculously redeemed, and this appears. have made a lasting impression on him.

After a careful course of these studies and researches, he announced his having discovered that the Gothic was the mother of all the Teutonic tongues; whence sprang the old Cimbrian, transmitted to posterity by the remains of the Runic, as likewise the Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Icelandish, in which the inhabitants of the country expressed their thoughts at that time. From the AngloSaxon, which itself is either a branch of the Gothic or its sister, and daughter of the same mother, sprang the English, Scotch, Belgtc, and the old language of Friesland. From the Gothic and Saxon languages sprang that of the Francs, which is the mother-tongue of Upper-Germany. He was so passionately fond of this study, that, after thirty years chiefly spent upon it in England, being informed there were some villages in Friesland where the ancient language of the Saxons was preserved, he went thither and lived two years among them. Then, returning into Holland, he met with the old Gothic ms. called the Silver One, because the four gospels are written there in silver Gothic letters. He devoted his whole study in the explication of it, which he completed in a little time, and published it, with notes of Dr. Marshall, in 1665, under the title “Glossarium Gothicum in quatuor evangelia Gothica,” Dordrac, 1665, 4-to. Dr. Marshall’s performance is entitled <e Observationes in evangeliorum versiones per antiquas duas, Gothicam sc. & Anglo-Saxonicam," &c. ibid. Junius returned into England in 1674, in order to peruse such English-Saxon books as had hitherto escaped his diligence, especially those in the Cottonian library. In Oct. 1676, he retired to Oxford. He was now 87, and intended not to leave that beloved university any more. At first he had lodgings opposite to Lincoln college, for the sake of Dr. Marshall, rector of that society, who had been his pupil in the study of the Northern languages, and was then a great critic, as well as Junius, in them. Afterwards, he intended to put some of his notes and collections into order; and, to avoid the interruption of frequent visits, he removed to an obscure house in St. Ebbe’s parish, where he digested some things for the press^ and made a deed of gift of all his Mss. and collections to the public library.

In Aug. 1677, upon the invitation of his nephew, Dr. Isaac Vossius, canon of Windsor, he went to his house, and there died of a fever, Nov. 19 following. His corpse was interred in St. George’s chapel, within the castle, and the following year a table of white marble was fixed to the wall, near his grave, with an inscription in Latin. He was not only very learned, but a man of irreproachable character. As a laborious student, perhaps few have excelled him. He used to rise at four in the morning, both winter and summer, and study till dinner-time, which was at one; after dinner he used some bodily exercise, walking or running, but returned to his studies at three, and did not leave them till eight, when he went to supper, and then to bed. He very seldom stirred abroad, and never but when some business obliged him. Notwithstanding this, he enjoyed a perfect state of health, and was never once sick. Though he spent so long a series of years in this solitary manner, he was a man of a pleasant and social temper, even in his extreme old age. He was free from peevishness, and affable to those who visited him, though he did not like to be interrupted. Besides the “Glossarium Gothicum,” the chief of his printed works are, 1. that intituled “De pictura veterum,” 1637, 4to. and printed again, with large additions, 1694, at Rotterdam, in folio. He printed likewise an English translation, entitled, “The Painting of the Ancients;” in three books, with additions and alterations, Lond. 1638. To the folio edition was prefixed his life, written by Groevius. 2. “Observationes in Willerami Francicam paraphrasin Cantici canticorum,” Amst. 1655, 8vo. 3. Several letters in “Ger. Job. Vossii & clarorum virorum ad eum epistolae,” Lond. 1690, fol. where Vossius styles our author “vir omnifaria doctrina & generis splendore ornatissimus.”

, a French protestant divine, sometimes called by the catholics the Goliah of the protestants, was born Dec. 24, 1637. His father, Daniel Jurieu, was minister of the reformed religion at Mer his mother, the daughter of Peter du Moulin, minister and professor at Sedan. He was sent, after the first rudiments of his education under Rivet in Holland, to his maternal uncle Peter du Moulin, then in England where, having finished his theological studies, he took orders in that church but, upon the death of his father, being called home to succeed him at Mer, and finding what he had done in England disliked by the reformed in his own country, he submitted to a re-ordination by presbyters, according to the form of the foreign protestant churches. After some time, he officiated in the French church of Vitri, where the people were so much pleased with him, that they endeavoured to procure his settlement among them; and here he composed his “Treatise, of Devotion.” Before this, in 1670, he had attracted public attention by refuting a project for reuniting all the sects of Christianity, wrote by d'Huisseau, minister of Saumur. He was afterwards invited to Sedan, where he discharged the office of professor in divinity and Hebrew with great reputation. In 1673 he wrote his “Preservative against Popery,” which he opposed to the exposition of the doctrine of the catholic church by M. de Meaux, bishop of Condom. This treatise did great credit to the author, who endeavoured to prove that the prelate had disguised the doctrine of his church. In 1675, Jurieu. published the first part of his work (the whole of which appeared in 1685), entitled “La Justification de la Morale,” &c. or, “A Vindication of the Morality of the Protestants against the Accusations of Mr. Arnauld,” &c. la 1681, the university of Sedan being taken from the protestants, our professor resolved to accept an invitation sent to him from that of Rouen; but discovering, in the mean time, that the French court knew him to be the author of a work he had published anonymously, under the title of “La Politique du Clerge,” which was a severe satire on the Roman catholics, he was apprehensive of being prosecuted, and therefore retired hastily into Holland, where be almost immediately received an offer of the divinitychair in the university of Groningen; but his friends having founded the same professorship for him at Rotterdam, he preferred this residence to the other; and he was also appointed minister of the Walloon church in the same town. He had not been long in this happy situation, when he produced to the public “Les derniers Efforts de PInnocence afflige'e,” or “The last Efforts of afflicted Innocence.”

At Rotterdam, having nothing to fear, he gave full scope to his imagination, which was naturally too warm and sanguine. Jn this temper he applied himself to study the book of “the Revelations,” and thought he had certainly discovered the true meaning of it by a kind of inspiration, which shewed him, that France was the place of the great city, where the witnesses mentioned in the apocalypse lay dead, but not buried; and that they were to rise to life again in three yeafs and a half, namely, in 1689. He was unalterably fixed and confirmed in this persuasion by the revolution which happened in England in 16SS; and even addressed a letter upon the subject to king William, whom he considered as the instrument intended by God to carry his designs into execution. At home, however, all this was charged upon him as an artifice, only to prepare the people for a much greater revolution; and he was suspected to harbour no other design than that of exciting people to take up arms, and setting all Europe in a flame. The foundation of this belief was his not shewing any signs of confusion after the event had given the lye to his prophecies: they built likewise on this, that, after the example of Comenius, he had attempted to re-unite the Lutherans and Calvinists, in hopes of increasing the number of troops to attack Antichrist. But these accusations were brought only by the Romanists, his constant enemies, while his more indulgent friends attributed his prophecies to enthusiasm, and it is certain, that, under this period of mental delusion, he affected to believe a great number of prodigies, which he maintained were so many presages or forerunners of the accomplishment of the prophecies. Nor is it true that he was indifferent to the ill success of what he had predicted in his “L'accomplissement des Propheties,” Rotterdam, 1686 on the contrary, his chagrin was great; and it was not a little heightened when he thought himself insulted by some of his best friends, who opposed his sen-, timents. This drew him into violent disputes, and particularly with Bayle , who wrote against him. The opposition of Bayle was the more resented by him, as he had been a friend to him, and was instrumental in procuring him the philosophical chair at Sedan in 1675. They seem to have been very intimately connected; for, after the suppression of that university, they were preferred together to different professorships at Rotterdam in 1681; and they both wrote against Maimbourg’s “History of Calvinism” in 1682. But here, it is said, the first seeds of the quarrel between them were sown. Both the pieces excelled in different ways. Jurieu’s was more complete and full than Bayle' s, and he answered Maimbourg with a great deal of strength; but then the reader did not meet there with that easy and natural style, those lively and agreeable reflections which distinguished the latter. The preference given to Bayle was observed by Jurieu with disdain: he began to look upon Bayle as his competitor, conceived a jealousy and hatred for him; and to what length it was carried afterwards may be seen in our article of Bayle. In short, it must not be dissembled, that our author’s conduct was far from being commendable in regard to Bavle, or any of his antagonists. Even those synods, where his authority was the greatest, engaged in the contest, and justified Mr. Saurin, pastor of Utrecht, and other persons of merit, whom Jurieu had not spared to accuse of heterodoxy: nay, the matter was carried so far, that, in some of these church parliaments there passed decrees, in which, though his name was not mentioned, yet the opinions he had advanced upon baptism, justification, and the new system of the church, were absolutely condemned. These troubles continued while he lived, and at length threw him into a lowness of spirits, under which he languished for several years before his death; yet he continued to employ his pen, and revised and printed his history of opinions, and forms of religious worship, “Histoire des dogmes et des cultes,” which he had composed in his youth, a work of very considerable merit. In the two or three last years of his life he wrote only some devotional pieces. At length he sunk under a load of infirmities, at Rotterdam, Jan, 11, 1713. He was unquestionably a man of considerable learning, but peculiar in some of his own notions, and intolerant to those of others. Among his works, not mentioned above, are “Histoire du Calvinisme et du Papisrne mise en parallele,” &c. 1683, 3 vols. “Lettres Pastorales.” These letters are upon the subject of the accomplishment of the prophecies. In one of them, for Jan. 1695, having quoted, as proof of the favourable intentions of the allies, a proposal for peace, drawn up by the diet of Ratisbon, which had been forged by a speculative politician in Amsterdam, he was so ashamed of his having been imposed upon by this fictitious piece, that he instantly printed another edition of his letter, in which he omitted that article, 3. “Parallele de trois Lettres pastorales de Mr. Jurieu, c.” 1696, quoted in a “Dissertation concerning defamatory Libels,” at the end of Bayle’s Diet. 4. “Traite de TumlS del'eglise,” &c. 1688. 5> “Le vray systeme.de l'église et la veritable analyse de la foi,” &c. 1686. 6. “L'Esprit de Mr. Arnauld,” 1684. 7. “Abrege de i'Histoire du Concile de Trente,” &c. 1683. 8. “Les prejugez legitimos centre le papisme,” 1685. 9. “Le Janseniste convaincu de vaine sophistiquerie.” 10. “Le Philosophe de Rotterdam accuse, atteint, et convaincu.” 11. “Traite historique, contenant le jugement d'un Protestant sur la Theologie Mystique,” &c. 1700. 12. “Jugement sur les me*­thodes rigides et relache'es,” &c. 1686. 13. “Traite* de la Nature et la Grace.” 14. “Apologie pour Paccomplissement de Propbe'ties,” 1687. 15. “Quelque Sermons,” &C.

, brother of the preceding, was also a native of Lyons, and born in 1699. Like his brother he was a practitioner of physic, and eminent for his botanical skill and researches, and was one of the first botanists who aimed at a natural system of arrangement. He was member of various learned academies in Europe; curator of the plants of the royal garden at Paris, and was invited by the king himself to superintend the arrangement of a botanical garden at Trianon. He was highly esteemed by his royal master, and enjoyed, what was no less honourable, the friendship and confidence of Linnæus. He had numerous pupils, by whom he was much beloved, and died in possession of universal esteem in 1777, in the seventy-ninth year of his age. His only publications were, an edition of Tournefort on the plants which grow near Paris, 1725, 2 vols. 12mo; and “L'ami de Fhumanite, ou, Conseils cTun bon citoyen a sa nation,” octavo, printed after his death. Although a first-rate botanist, he was deterred by excess of modesty from giving his ideas to the world. His nephew, the present A. L. de Jussieu, has given us a plan of the method, according to which he arranged the garden of Trianon in 1759, and which, in fact, laid the foundation of his own celebrated work, published in 1789. The Jussixa, of Linnreus, was so named by that eminent botanist in honour of these two brothers. There was a third brother, however, the youngest, who was born in 1704, and in 1735 went to Peru, in the capacity of a botanist, with the academicians sent there to measure a degree. After continuing in that country thirty-six years, he returned to EVance in very bad health, and almost in a state of childhood, and died in 1779. Some account of his travels and discoveries may be seen in Memoirs of the French Academy; and it was at one time thought that his nephew was preparing an account for publication, but we know not that it has yet appeared.

, was horn at Paris in 1620, and succeeded his father as secretary and counsellor to the king. He was a man of distinguished learning himself, and an encourager of it in others, employing his interest at court in their favour. His house was the usual resort of men of letters, among whom we find Mr. Locke and Dr. Hickes; which shews that it was open to men of all complexions and principles. Mr. Justel had always professed a particular respect for the English nation, and cultivated are acquaintance with many great men there. He foresaw the revocation of the edict of Nantz, several years before it happened, as we are informed by Dr. Hickes. This divine, who, upon his travels abroad, made a considerable stay at Paris, set apart one day in the week for visiting Mr. Justel. In one of these visits, after some discourse about the protestant churches, observed by Dr. Hickes to be in many places demolished, notwithstanding the edict of Nantz, “Alas, sir,” says Mr. Justel, “as I am wont to talk in confidence with you, so I will tell you a secret, that almost none of us knows besides myself our extirpation is decreed we must all be banished our country, or turn papists. I tell it you because I intend to come into England, where I have many friends; and that, when I come to see you among the rest, you may remember that I told it you.” “Upon this,” says Dr. Hickes, “I asked him how long it would be before this sad persecution would be put into execution He answered, within four or five years at most; and remember, says he again, that I foretold the time. After he had been some time in London he made a visit to the doctor at his house on Tower-hill; where, presentlyafter the common forms of congratulating one another (it was about the time that the bill of exclusion was thrown out of the House of Lords), he said, Sir, don't you remember what I told you of the persecution we have since suffered, and of the time when it would begin and you now see all has accordingly come to pass.”

, an ancient Latin historian, is known by his abridgment of the large work of Trogus Pompeius, which some think has occasioned the loss of the original; but it is much more probable that the neglect of the original occasioned the abridgment, as commonly happens in the decline of letters. Who Justin was, and when he lived, is altogether uncertain; but he is generally referred to the year 150, in the reign of Antoninus Pius. The abridgment comprises a history of the world from Ninus to Augustus Caesar; and is written with great purity and elegance, excepting here and there a word which savours of encroaching barbarism. It has long been employed as a school book, and is held in great estimation by foreign critics. La Mothe le Vayer thinks “his manner of writing so excellent as to be worthy the age of Augustus rather than that of the Antonines.” Justin has been illustrated by the best annotators, particularly Graevius; and there are numerous editions, of which the preference is given to those of Grsevius; of Hearne, 1705, 8vo of Gronovius, 1719, and 1760; of Fischer, 1757, &c.

, one of the earliest writers of the Christian church, was born at Neapolis, the ancient Sichem of Palestine, in the province of Samaria. His father Priscius, being a Gentile Greek, brought him up in his own religion, and had him educated in all the Grecian learning and philosophy. To complete his studies he travelled to Egypt, the usual tour on this occasion, as being the seat of the more mysterious and recondite literature at this time he was shewn, as he tells you, at Alexandria, the remains of those cells where the seventy translators of the Bible performed what is called the Septuagint version. He had, from his first application to philosophy, disliked the stoic and peripatetic; and chose the sect of Plato, with whose ideas he was enamoured, and of which he resolved to make himself master. He was prosecuting this design in contemplation and solitary walks by the sea-side, as he informs us in his “Dialogue with Trypho,” when there met him one day a grave and ancient person of a venerable aspect, who, falling into discourse upon the subject of his thoughts, turned the conversation, by degrees, from the fancied excellence of Platonism to the superior perfection of Christianity; and performed his part so well, as to raise an ardent curiosity in our Platonist to inquire into the merits of that religion, the result of which was his conversion, which happened about the 16th year of Trajan’s reign, A. C. 132.

Not long afterwards, Justin made a visit into the East; and, among other parts, went to Ephesus. Here he fell into the company and acquaintance of Trypho, a Jew of great note, with whom he engaged in a dispute that held for two days: the substance of which he afterwards wrote in a piece ^entitled his “Dialogue with Trypho.” By the conclusion we learn he was then ready to set sail to Ephesus. He returned at last to Rome, where he had frequent conferences with one Crescens, a philosopher of some repute in that city; a man who had endeavoured to traduce the Christians, and represent their religion under the most infamous character. Justin now presented his second Apology to Marcus Antoninus Philosophus, the successor of Pius, and a determined enemy to the Christians. The immediate occasion of this second Apology, as he himself Infoniis the emperor, was this: A woman at Rome had, together with her husband, lived in all manner of wantonness, and, from a vicious course of life, had been converted to Christianity; and being reclaimed herself, very naturally sought also to reclaim her husband, but at length, finding him quite obstinate, she procured a bill of divorce. The man, enraged at this, accused her to the emperor of being a Christian. She, however, putting in a petition for leave to answer it, he relinquished that prosecution; and, falling upon her converter, one Ptolomeus, procured his imprisonment and condemnation. On that occasion, Lucius, a Christian, being present, presumed to represent how hard it was that an innocent and virtuous man, charged with no crime, should be adjudged to die merely for bearing the name of a Christian: a proceeding that must certainly be a reflection upon the government. These words were no sooner spoken than he, together with a third person, were sentenced to the same fate. The severity of these proceedings awakened Justin’s solicitude and care for the rest of his brethren; and he immediately drew up his second apology, in which, among other things, he made heavy complaints of the malice and envy of his antagonist Crcscens. The philosopher, irritated at this charge, procured him to be apprehended, with six of his companions, and brought before the praefect of the city. After their ex amination, this sentence was pronounced, that “TheJ who refuse to sacrifice to the gods, and to obey the imperial edicts, be first scourged, and then beheaded, according to the laws:” which was put in execution upon Justin and the rest. This happened, according to Baronius, A. C. 165, not long after Justin had presented his second Apology; which is said, therefore, in the language of those times, to have procured him the crown of martyrdom.

He was the first Christian, after the days of the apostles, who added to an unquestionable zeal and love of the gospel, the character of a man of learning and philosophy, both which were employed in propagating and defending his principles. He stands at the head of the Christian Platonists, or those who endeavoured to reconcile the Platonic principles with the dictates of Christianity; and the consequence of this attempt was his holding some opinions not altogether agreeable to the genius of the gospel. There are several valuable editions of his works, the first of which was that of Rob. Stephens, Paris, 1551, fol. and the best are those of Maran, printed at Paris, 1742, fol. and of Oberthur, at Wurtzburg, 1777, 3 vols. 8vo. There is an edition of his second Apology by Hutchinson, Oxon. 1703, 8vo; of his Dialogue with Trypho, by Jebb, London, 1719, 8vo; of his Apologies, by Ashton, Cambridge, 1768, 8vo; of his ftrst Apology, by Grabe, Oxon, 1700; and of both Apologies, and his Dialogue, by Thirl by, London, 1722, fol.

, the first Roman emperor of his name, and more celebrated for his code of laws, was nephew of Justin I. and succeeded his uncle in the Imperial throne Aug. 1, 527. He began his reign with the character of a most religious prince, publishing very severe laws against heretics, and repairing ruined churches; in this spirit,- he actually declared himself protector of the church. While he was thus re-establishing Christianity at home, he carried his arms against the enemies of the empire abroad, with so much success, that he reinstated it in its ancient glory. He was very happy in having the best general of the age, Belisarius, who conquered the Persians for him in 528, 542, and 543; and in 533 exterminated the Vandals, and took their king Gillimer prisoner. He also recovered Africa to the empire by a new conquest vanquished the Goths in Italy and, lastly, defeated the Moors and the Samaritans. But, in the midst of these glorious successes the emperor was endangered by a potent faction at home. Hypalius, Pompeius, and Probus, three nephews of the emperor Anastasius, the immediate predecessor of Justin, combining together, raised a powerful insurrection, in order to dethrone Justinian. The conspirators formed two parties, one called the Varti, and the other Veneti, and at length became so strong, that the emperor, in despair of being able to resist them, began to think of quitting the palace; and had certainly submitted to that disgrace had not the empress Theodosia, his consort, vexed at his betraying so much tameness, reproached him with his pusillanimity, and induced him to fortify himself against the rebels, while Belisarius and Mundus defended him so well, that the conspiracy was broken, and the ringleaders capitally punished.

The empire being now in the full enjoyment of profound peace and tranquillity, Justinian made the best use of it, by collecting the immense variety and number of the Roman laws into one body. To this end, he selected ten of the most able lawyers in the empire; who, revising the Gregorian, Theodosian, and Hermogenian codes, compiled out of them one body, called “The Code,” to which the emperorgave his own name. This may be called the statute law, as consisting of the rescripts of the emperors: but the compilation of the other part was a much more difficult task. It was made up of the decisions of the judges and other magistrates, together with the authoritative opinions of the most eminent lawyers; all which lay scattered, without any order, in above 2000 volumes. These, however, after the labour of ten years, chiefly by Tribonian, an eminent lawyer, were reduced to the number of 50; and the whole design was completed in the year 533, and the name of “Digests,” or “Pandects,” given to it. Besides these, for the use chiefly of young students in the law, Justinian ordered four books of “Institutes” to be drawn up, by Tribonian, Dorotheus, and Theophilus, containing an abstract or abridgement of the text of all the laws: and, lastly, the laws of modern date, posterior to that of the former, were thrown into one volume in the year 541, called the “Noveilx,” or “New Code.” This most important transaction in the state has rendered Justinian’s name immortal. His conduct in ecclesiastical affairs was rash and inconsiderate. On one occasion, when Theodotus, king of Italy, had obliged pope Agapetus to go to Constantinople, in order to submit and make peace with the emperor, Justinian received him very graciously, but enjoined him to communicate with Anthenius, patriarch of Constantinople. That patriarch being deemed a heretic at Rome, the pontiff refused to obey the command; and, when the emperor threatened to punish his disobedience with banishment, he answered, without any emotion, “I thought I was come before a Christian prince, but I find a Diocletian.” The result was, that the hardiness and resolution of the pope brought the emperor to a submission. Accordingly Anthenius was deprived, and an orthodox prelate put into his place.

After this, Justinian, resolving to take cognizance of the difference between the three chapters, published a rescript for that purpose, in form of a constitution, which created great disturbances in the empire. He also exerted his authority against the attempts of the popes Sylverius and Vigilius, both before and after the celebration of the fifth general council held in the year 553. Towards the latter end of his life, he fell into an erroneous opinion concerning Christ’s body; which he maintained had never been corruptible, nor subject to the natural infirmities of a human body. He carried it so far as to prepare an edict against those who maintained the contrary opinion, and intended to publish it; but was prevented by his death, which happened suddenly, in 565, at the age of 83, and after a reign of 39 years. It was this emperor who abolished the consulate. He built a great number of churches, and particularly the famous Sancta Sophia, at Constantinople, esteemed a master-piece of architecture. But the increasing jealousies, and the heavy burdens which Justinian imposed upon his subjects, had, some time before his death, destroyed all attachment to his person; and he who, in many respects, deserved the title of the last Roman emperor, left the stage unlamented and tinhonoured. The editions of his “Code,” “Institutions,” &c. are too many to be enumerated, but the best of them occur in almost every catalogue.

, nephew of the above, was born at Venice in 1408. He pursued his first studies under Guarini of Verona, and continued them at Padua, where he took his doctor’s degree. Notwithstanding he put on the senator’s robe at the age of nineteen, yet he still prosecuted his studies under Francis Philelphi and George de Trebisonde, whom he took into his house, and retained there, till pope Calixtus III. sent for him to Rome, and employed him in several commissions. Upon his return to Venice, he was sent ambassador to Lewis XI. of France, who made him a knight in 1461. He went afterwards several times ambassador to Rome from the republic; and, in 1467, was made commandant of Padua. He afterwards became a member of the council of ten, and bore the dignity of Sage Grand no hers than twenty times. In 1474, he was elected procurator of St. Mark, a post next to that of doge. He died in 1489.

His speeches on different occasions have been printed, with his letters, and “History of Venice,” Venice, 1492, folio. This history, which has been admired as the first regular attempt of the kind, and which comes down to 809, may be frequently found without the other pieces, which have been suppressed. He also left “Vita B. Laurentii Justiniarii,” 1475, 4to. His life in Latin by Antonio Stella was printed at Venice, 1533, 8vo. Of the same famrly, which is still honourably distinguished in Italy, was the marquis Vincent Justiniani, who employed Blomuiaert, Alillan, and others, to engrave his gallery, Rome, 1642, 2 vols. fol. Of this splendid work some impressions, much inferior to the old ones, were taken since 1750. Another branch of the same family was the abb Bernardo Justiniani, who wrote the “Origin of the Military Orders,” Venice, 1692, 2 vols. fol. in Italian, from whence the “History of the Military Orders,” Amsterdam, 1721, 4 vols. 8vo, has been extracted; to which is added, “The History of the Religious Orders,” Amsterdam, 1716, 4 vols. 8vo.

, bishop of Nebo or Nebbio, one of the most learned men of his time, was descended from a branch of the same noble family with the former; and born at Genoa, in 1470. After having resided some time at Valencia, in Spain, he entered into the order of St. Dominic, at Paris, in 1488; when he took the name of Augustin in the room of Pantaleon, which he received at his baptism. Soon after he distinguished himself by his learning, and knowledge in the languages, which he acquired in a very short time; so that Leo X. named him to the bishopric of Nebo, in the island of Corsica, in which capacity he assisted in the fifth council of Lateran, where he opposed some articles of the concordat between France and the court of Rome. The revenue of his diocese being small, he petitioned the pope for a better; but Francis I. who was a patron of learned men, drew him to France, by making him his almoner, with a good pension; and he was also regius professor of Hebrew for five years at Paris. Returning to Genoa in 1522, he found every thing in confusion, by the sedition of the Adornes; on which he went to visit his diocese, and discharged all the duties of a good prelate, till 1531. In a voyage from Genoa to Nebc, he perished, together with the vessel in which he was embarked, 1536. By his last will, he left his library to the republic of Genoa.

, the Roman satirist, was born about the beginning of the emperor Claudius’s reign, at Aquinum, a town in Campania, since famous for the birth-place of Thomas (thence styled) Aquinas. Juvenal’s father was probably a freed man, who, being rich, gave him a liberal education; and, agreeably to the taste of the times, bred him up to eloquence. In this he made a great progress, first under Fronto the grammarian, and then, as is generally conjectured, under Quintilian; after which he attended the bar, where he made a distinguished figure for many years, as we learn from some of Martial’s epigrams. In this profession he had improved his fortune and interest at Rome, before he turned his thoughts to poetry the very style of which, in his satires, speaks a long habit of declamation “subactum redolent declamatorem,” say the critics. He is supposed to have been above forty years of age, when he recited his first essay to a small audience of his friends; but, being encouraged by their applause, he ventured a publication, in which Paris, a player, and Domitian’s favourite, was satirized; this minion complained to the emperor, who sent the poet into banishment, under pretence of giving him the command of a cohort, in the army quartered at Pentapolis, a city upon the frontiers of Egypt and Lybia. After Domitian’s death, he returned to Rome, cured of his propensity to attack the characters of those in power under arbitrary princes, and indulge in personal reflections upon living characters. His 13th satire, addressed to Calvinus, was written U. C. 8T1, in the 3d year of Adrian, when Juvenal was above seventy years old; and as it is agreed that he attained to his eightieth year, he must have died about the 11th year of Adrian.

, a loyal and worthy English prelate, the son of Richard Juxon of Chichester in Sussex, was born in 1582, and educated, upon the foundation, at Merchant Taylors’ school, whence he was elected a fellow of St. John’s college, Oxford, in 1598. Here, as his intentions were for the bar, he studied civil law, and took the degree of bachelor in that faculty, July 5, 1603, having before entered himself a student in Gray’s-inn. But for some reasons not assigned by his biographer, he entirely changed his mind, and after having gone through a course of divinity studies, took orders, and in the latter end of 1609 was presented by his college, which stands in that parish, to the vicarage of St. Giles’s, Oxford. Here he was much admired for his plain, practical style of preaching. In 1614, we are told, he left this living, probably on being presented to the rectory of Somerton in Oxfordshire, in the east window of the chancel of which church are his arms; but it is equally probable that he might hold both. It is certain that his connexion with Oxford continued; and when, in 1621, Dr. Laud resigned the office of president of St. John’s college, Mr. Juxon was chosen in his room, chiefly by his influence. In December of the same year, he proceeded doctor of laws, and in 1626 and 1627 served the office of vice-chancellor of the university. About this time his majesty Charles I. appointed him one of his chaplains in ordinary, and collated him to the deanery of Worcester, along with which he held a prebend of Chichester. In all these promotions, he was chiefly indebted to Dr. Laud, then bishop of London, who had a high regard for him, and, as dean of the king’s chapel, recommended him to be clerk of the closet, into which office Dr. Juxon was sworn July 10, 1632. Laud’s object in this last promotion is said to have been, that “he might have one that he might trust near his majesty, if he himself grew weak or infirm.” By the same interest Dr. Juxon was elected bishop of Hereford in 1633, and was made dean of the king’s chapel, but before consecration was removed to the bishopric of London, in room of Laud, now archbishop of Canterbury, and was also sworn of the privy council. He entered on his bishopric Nov. 5 of the above year, and although his diocese was much displeased with the conduct of his predecessor, bishop Juxon, by his mild temper and urbanity, obtained the respect of all parties.

On his resignation, he retired to his palace at Fulham, where he continued for some time, not only undisturbed, but. sometimes visited by the greatest persons of the opposite party, although he remained firm in his loyalty to the king, who consulted him upon many occasions. Sir Philip Warwick, being employed on one of those occasions, desired he might bring the bishop himself to his majesty, for fear of a mistake in the message, or lest the bishop should not speak freely to him. To which the king replied, “Go as I bid you if he will speak freely to any body, he will speak freely to you. This I will say of him I never got his opinion freely in my life, but, when I had it, I was ever the better for it.” Bishop Juxon also attended upon his majesty at the treaty in the Isle of Wight in 1643, by the consent of the parliament; and by the king’s particular desire, waited upon him at Cotton-house in Westminster on Jan. 21 following, the day after the commencement of his trial. During the whole of this trial, he attended the king, who declared that he was the greatest support and comfort to him on that occasion. He followed his royal master also to the scaffold, and when he was preparing himself for the block, Juxon said to him, “There is, sir, but one stage more, which, though turbulent and troublesome, is yet a very short one. Consider, it will soon carry you a great way; it will carry you from earth to heaven; and there you shall find, to your great joy, the prize to which you hasten, a crown of glory.” “I go,” said the king, “from a corruptible to an incorruptible crown, where no disturbance can be.” “, You are exchanged,” replied the bishop, “from a temporal to an eternal crown; a good exchange.” It was remarked by the regicides, that the king, the moment before he stretched out his neck to the executioner, said to J uxon, with a very earnest accent, the single word Remember. Great mysteries were consequently supposed to be concealed under that expression; and the generals vehemently insisted with the prelate, that he should inform them of the king’s meaning. Juxon told them, that the king having frequently charged him to inculcate on his son the forgiveness of his murderers, had taken this opportunity, in the last moment of his life, when his commands, he supposed, would be regarded, as sacred and inviolable, to reiterate that desire; and that his mild spirit thus terminated its present course, by an act of benevolence towards his greatest enemies. Dr. Uuxon was also one of those who accompanied the king’s body to "Windsor, but was not permitted to read the funeral service.

, one of the apostolical fathers of the church, was born in Syria, educated under the apostle and evangelist St. John, intimately acquainted with some other of the apostles, especially St. Peter and St. Paul; and being fully instructed in the doctrines of Christianity, was, for his eminent parts and piety, ordained by St. John; and confirmed about the year 67, bishop of Antioch by these two apostles, who first planted Christianity in that city, where the disciples were first called Christians. In this important seat he continued to sit upwards of forty years, both an honour and safeguard to the Christian religion; in the midst of very stormy and tempestuous times, undaunted himself, and unmoved with the prospect of suffering a cruel death. So much seems to be certain in general, though we have no account of any particulars of his life till the year 107, when Trajan the emperor, elated with his victory over the Scythians and Daci, came to Antioch to prepare for a war against the Parthians and Armenians. He entered the city with the pomp and solemnities of a triumph; and, as he had already commenced a persecution against the Christians in other parts of the empire, he now resolved to carry it on here. However, as he was naturally mild and humane, though he ordered the laws to be put in force against them, if convicted, yet he forbad any extraordinary means to be used for discovering or informing against them.

In this state of affairs, Ignatius voluntarily presented himself to the emperor; and it is said, there passed a long conversation between them, in which the emperor expressing a surprise how he dared to transgress the laws, the bishop took the opportunity to assert his own innocence, and the power which God had given Christians over evil spirits; declaring that “the gods of the Gentiles were no better than daemons, there being but one supreme Deity, who made the world, and his only begotten son Jesus Christ, who, though crucified under Pilate, had yet destroyed him that had the power of sin, that is, tue devil, and would ruin the whole power and empire of the daemons, and tread it under the feet of those who carried God in their hearts.” For this bold avowal of his principles, combined with a defiance of heathenism, he was cast into prison, and sentence passed upon him, that he should be carried bound by soldiers to Rome, and there thrown as a prey to wild beasts. It may seem strange that they should send an old man by land, at a great expence, attended with soldiers, from Syria to Rome, instead of casting him to the lions at Antioch; but it is said, that Trajan did this on purpose to make an example of him, as of a ringleader of the sect, and to deter the Christians from preaching and spreading their religion; and for the same reason he sent him to be executed at Rome, where there were many Christians, and which, as it was the capital of the world, so was it the head-quarters of all religious sects. After all, this part of his sentence was a particular cruelty, and above what the laws required, and consequently such as might not be expected from Trajan. But, in our martyr’s case, he might not improbably be persuaded to act contrary to his natural disposition by those about him, who began to perceive that Christianity, if it prevailed, would prove the ruin of their religion. Ignatius was so far from being dismayed, that he heartily rejoiced at the fatal decree. “I thank thee, O Lord,” says he, “that thou hast condescended to honour me with thy love, and hast thought me worthy, with thy apostle St. Paul, to be bound in iron chains.” With these words he cheerfully embraced his chains; and having frequently prayed for his church, and recommended it to the divine care and providence, he delivered up himself into the hands of his keepers. These were ten soldiers, by whom he was first conducted to Seleucia, a port of Syria, at about sixteen miles distance, the place where Paul and Barnabas set sail for Cyprus. Arriving at Smyrna, in Ionia, Ignatius went to visit Polycarp, bishop of that place, and was himself visited by the clergy of the Asiatic churches round the country. In return for that kindness, he wrote letters to several churches, as the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, besides the Romans, for their instruction and establishment in the faith; one of these was addressed to the Christians at Rome, to acquaint them with his present state and passionate desire not to be hindered in that course of martyrdom which he was now hastening to accomplish.

His guard, a little impatient at their stay, set sail with him for Troas, a noted city of the lesser Phrygia, not far from the ruins of old Troy; where, at his arrival, he was much refreshed with the news he received of the persecution ceasing in the church of Antioch. Hither atlso several churches sent their messengers to pay their respects to him, and hence too he dispatched two epistles, one to the church of Philadelphia, and the other to that of Smyrna; and together with this last, as Eusebitfs relates, he wrote privately to Polycarp, recommending to him the care and inspection of the church of Antioch. All this while his keepers used him very cruelly and barbarously. He complains of it himself: “From Syria even to Rome,” says he, “both by sea and land, I fight with beasts; night and day I am chained to 1 the leopards, which is my military guard, who, the kinder I am to them, are the more cruel and fierce to me.” And yet it is evident, that they suffered him to be visited by Christians, and to give them instructions; and write epistles in several cities through which he passed. But his own account of the matter explains this apparent difficulty; the words implying, that these ruffians made money of him this way, being handsomely rewarded for this permission by the Christians who resorted to him, although their savage tempers induced them to use him the worse for it. From Trcras they sailed to Neapolis, a maritime town in Macedonia, thence to Philippi, a Roman colony, where they were entertained with all imaginable kindness and courtesy, and conducted forwards on their journey, passing on foot through Macedonia and Epirus, till they came to Epidaurum, a city of Dalmatia, where again taking shipping, they sailed through the Adriatic, and arrived at Rhegium, a port town in Italy; directing their course thence through the Tyrrhenian sea to Pu'teoli, whence Ignatius desired to proceed by land, ambitious to trace the same way by which St. Paul went to Rome; buC this wish was not complied with. In about twenty-four hours, however, a brisk wind conveyed them to Ostia at the mouth of the Tiber, about sixteen miles from Rome.

The Christians at Rome, d'aiiy expecting his arrival, had come out to meet and entertain him, and accordingly received him with an equal mixture of joy and sorrow: but when some of them intimated, that possibly the populace might be dissuaded from desiring his death, he expressed a pious indignation, in treating them to Cast no obstacles in his way, nor do any thing that might hinder him, now he was hastening to his crown. The interval before his martyrdom was spent in prayers for the peace and prosperity of the church. That his punishment might be the more pompous and public, one of their solemn festivals, the Saturnalia, was chosen for his execution; when it was their custom to entertain the people with the conflicts of gladiators, and the hunting and fighting with wild beasts. Accordingly, Dec. 20, in the year 107, or as some think in 116, he was brought out into the amphitheatre; and the lions, being let loose upon lum, quickly dispatched their meal, leaving nothing but a few of the hardest of his bones. These remains were gathered up by two deacons who had been the companions of his journey, transported to Antioch, and interred in the cemetery, without the gate, but afterwards, by command of the emperor Theodosius, were removed to the Tycheon, a temple within the city, now consecrated to the memory of Ignatius. Thus far all historians concur; but the pretended translation of these relics to Rome, and other places, must be classed among the fables of the early Romanists.

His epistles are very interesting remains of ecclesiastical antiquity on many accounts. He stands at the head of those Antenicene fathers, who have occasionally delivered their opinions in defence of the true divinity of Christ, whom he calls the Son of God, and his eternal word. He is also reckoned the great champion of the episcopal order, as distinct and superior to that of priest and deacon. He is constantly produced as an instance of the continuation of supernatural gifts, after the time of the apostles, particularly that of divine revelation, but the miracles imputed to him are of very doubtful authority. The most important use of his writings respects the authenticity of the Holy Scriptures, to which he frequently alludes, in the very expressions which are extant.

, was a printer, and a son of a printer; but he applied himself to letter-cutting in 1730, and carried on a foundery and a printing-house together. He was an expeditious compositor, and was said to know the letters by the touch; but being not perfectly sound in mind, produced some strange works. In 1751 he published a pretended translation of “The Book of Jasher;” said to have been made by one Alcuin of Britain. The account given of the translation is full of glaring absurdities; but the publication, in fact, was secretly written by him, and printed off by night. He published, in 1733, an Oration, intended to prove the plurality of worlds, and asserting that this earth is hell, that the souls of men are apostate angels, and that the fire to punish those confined to this world at the day of judgment will be immaterial. This was written in 1729, and spoken afterwards at Joiners- hall, pursuant to the will of his mother, who had held the same extraordinary opinions. In this strange performance the author unveils his deistical principles, and takes no small liberty with the sacred Scriptures, especially the character of Moses. Emboldened by this first adventure, he determined to become the public teacher of infidelity, or, as he calls it, “The religion of nature.” For this purpose, he hired the use of Carpenters’-hall, where, for some considerable time, he delivered his orations, which consisted chiefly of scraps from Tindal, and other similar writers. In the course of the same year, 1733, appeared a second pamphlet called “A Dialogue between a Doctor of the Church of England and Mr. Jacob Hive, upon the subject of the oration.” This strange oration is highly praised in HolwelPs third part of “Interesting Events relating to Bengal.” For publishing “Modest Remarks on the late bishop Sherlock’s Sermons,” Hive was confined in Clerkenwell- bridewell from June 15, 1756, till June 10, 1758; during which period he published “Reasons offered for the Reformation of the House of Correction in Clerkenwell,” &c. 1757, and projected several other reforming treatises, enumerated in Gough’s “British Topography;” where is alsjo a memorandum, communicated by Mr. Bowyer, of Hive’s attempt to restore the company of Stationers to their primitive constitution. He died in 1763,

, but who Latinized his name into Flaccus Illyricus, because a native of Albona or Albana in Illyria, was born March 3, 1520. He was instructed in grammar and the classics b.y Egnatius at Venice, and gave the preference to divinity as a profession. Not being able, however, to maintain the cxpences of university education, he intended to throw himself into a monastery, but happening to consult with a relation of his mother’s, who was provincial of the Cordeiiers, and who had begun to see through the errors of popery, this person prevailed with Flacius to lay aside all thoughts of the monastic life, and go into Germany, where his knowledge of Greek and Hebrew would procure him a maintenance until he had completed his theological studies. Flacius accordingly took this advice, went to Basil in 1539, and, after a few months stay, went to Tubingen, where he remained until 1541, and theft removed to Wittenberg, to complete his studies under Luther and Melancthon, the latter of whom found him some employment in the university, and was the means of relieving his mind from anxious doubts respecting some of the fundamental principles of the reformed religion, respecting the nature of sin, the wrath of God, and predestination.

Soon after the accession of Alexander VI. he was nominated by that pontiff a canon of St. Peter’s, and dignified with the rank of a prelate. In 1495 he was sent as papal nuncio into the Milanese, to treat with the emperor-elect, Maximilian, on which embassy he obtained not only the approbation of the pope, but also the favour of the emperor, who soon after the return of Inghirami to Rome, transmitted to him from Inspruck an imperial diploma, by which, after enumerating his various accomplishments, and particularly his excellence in poetry and Latin literature, he created him count palatine and poet-laureat, and conceded to him the privilege of adding the Austrian eagle to his family arms. Nor was he less favoured by Julius II. who, besides appointing him librarian of the Vatican, conferred on him the important office of pontifical secretary, which he afterwards quitted for that of secretary to the college of cardinals. Leo X. also enriched him with many ecclesiastical preferments, and continued him in his office of librarian until his death, which was occasioned by an accident in the streets of Rome, Sept. 6, 1516, when he had not yet completed the forty- sixth year of his age. To this unfortunate event it is probably owing, that so few of his writings have reached the present times. From the testimony of his contemporaries, it is well known that he was the author of many books. Among these are enumerated a defence of Cicero a compendium of the history of Rome a commentary on the poetics of Horace and remarks on the comedies of Plautus; but these works were left at his death in an unfinished state, and have since been dispersed or lost. It has been supposed that he was the author of the additions to the “Aulularia” of Plautus, printed at Paris, 1513.

, a lady celebrated for her skill in calligraphy, in queen Elizabeth’s and king James’s time, appears to have lived single until the age of forty, when she became the wife of one Bartholomew Keilo, a native of Scotland, by whom she had a son, Samuel Kello, who was educated at Christ-church, Oxford, and was minister of Speckshall in Suffolk. His son was sword-bearer of Norwich, and died in 1709. All we know besides of her is, that she was a correspondent of bishop Hall, when he was dean of Worcester in 1617. Various specimens of her delicate and beautiful writing are in our public repositories, and some in Edinburgh-castle. In the library of Christchurch, Oxford, are the Psalrns of David, written in French by Mrs. Inglis, who presented them in person to queen Elizabeth, by whom they were given to the library. Two manuscripts, written by her, were also preserved with care in the Bodleian library: one of them is entitled “Le six vingt et six Quatrains de Guy de Tour, sieur de Pybrac, escrits par Esther Inglis, pour son dernier adieu, ce 21e jour de Juin, 1617.” The following address is, in the second leaf, written in capital letters: “To the right worshipful my very singular friende, Joseph Hall, doctor of divinity, and dean of Winchester, Esther Inglis wisheth all increase of true happiness. Junii xxi. 1617.” In the third leaf is pasted the head of the writer, painted upon a card. The other manuscript is entitled “Les Proverbes de Salomon; escrites en diverses sortes de lettres, par Esther Anglois, en Francoise. A Lislehourge en Escosse,” 1599. Every chapter of this curious performance is written in a different hand, as is also the dedication. The manuscript contains near forty different characters of writing. The beginnings and endings of the chapters are adorned with beautiful head and tail-pieces, and the margins, in imitation of the old manuscripts, curiously decorated with the pen. The book is dedicated to the earl of Essex. On one of the first pages are his arms neatly drawn, with all their quarterings. In the fifth leaf, drawn with a pen, is the picture of Esther Inglis, in the habit of the times: her right hand holds a pen, the left rests upon an open book, on one of the leaves of which is written, “DC l'Eternel Je biert, de moi le mal, ou rien.” A music-book lies open before her. Under the picture is a Latin epigram by Andrew Melvin, and on the following page a second by the same author, in praise of Mrs. Inglis. In the royal library, D. xvi. are “Esther Inglis’s fifty Emblems,” finely drawn and written: “A Lislebourg en Escosse, Panne 1624.”

, an eminent physician and medical writer, a native of Sicily, was born in 1510. He studied medicine at Padua, where he took the degree of doctor in medicine in the year 1537, with singular reputation; insomuch that he soon received several invitations to professorships from different schools in Italy. He accepted the chair of medicine and anatomy at Naples, which he occupied for a number of years, lecturing to the most crowded audiences drawn by his fame from all parts of the country. He possessed peculiar qualifications for the office, having united a consummate knowledge of the writings of the ancient physicians with great practical skill and a sound judgment, which led him to- estimate justly the merits and defects of those fathers of the art. A singular testimony of his talents and unremitting attention to the improvement of his pupils was given by thektter, who caused his portrait to be placed in the schools of Naples with the following inscription: “Philippo Jngrassias Siculo, qui veram medicinae artem et anatomen, publiee etiarrando, Neapoli restituit, Discipuli memorise causa P. P.” At length he quitted his situation at Naples, in order to return to his native island, where he settled at Palermo. Here also he received many marks of public distinction. The rights of citizenship were conferred upon him; and, in 1563, Philip II. king of Spain, appointed him first physician for Sicily and the adjacent isles. By virtue of the powers attached to this office he restored order in, the medical constitution of the country, by preventing all persons, unqualified by their education and abilities, from practising there. His zeal for the credit of his profession rendered him rigid and severe in his examination of candidates; and he exercised his art himself in the most honourable manner. When the plague raged at Palermo in 1575, he adopted such excellent regulations as to put a stop to the calamity, and restore the city to health, and was hailed by all the citizens, the Sicilian Hippocrates. The magistrates were so grateful for his services, that they voted him a reward of two hundred and fifty gold crowns a month; but he disinterestedly declined to accept any more than what served for the maintenance and decoration of the chapel of St. Barbe, which he had built in the cloister of the Dominican convent of Palermo. He died, greatly regretted, in 1580, at the age of 70 years.

, abbot of Croyland, and author of the history of that abbey, was born in London about 1030. He received the first part of his education at Westminster, and when he visited his father, who belonged to the court of Edward the Confessor, he was so fortunate as to engage the attention of queen Edgitha, who took a pleasure in the progress of his education, and in disputing with him in logic, and seldom dismissed him without some present as a mark of her approbation. From Westminster he went to Oxford, where he applied to the study of the Aristotelian philosophy, in which he made greater proficiency than many of his contemporaries, and, as be says, “clothed himself down to the heel in the first and second rhetoric of Tully.” When he was about twenty-one years of age, ho was iotroduced to> William duke of Normandy (who visited the court of England in 105 l) y and made himself so agreeable to that prince, that be appointed him his secretary, and carried him with him into his. Owt dominions. In a little time he became the prime favourite of his prince, and the dispenser of all preferments; but he himself confesses that he did not behave in this station with sufficient modesty and prudence, and that he incurred the envy and hatred of the courtiers, to avoid which he obtained leave from the duke to go on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. In the course of this journey, his attendant pilgrims at one time amounted to seven thousand, but either from being attacked and killed by the Arabs, or other disasters, twenty only of this goodly company were able to return home, and those half-starved, and almost naked. Ingulph now resolved to forsake the world, and became a monk in the abbey of Fontanelle in Normandy, of which he was in a few years made prior. When his old master William of Normandy was preparing for his memorable expedition into England, in 1066 r lagulphus was sent by hiw abbot with one hundred: marks in money, and twelve young men, nobly mounted and completely armed, as a present their abbey. In consequence of this, William raised him afterwards to the government of the rich abbey of Croyland in Lincolnshire, in 107S. Here Ingulphus spent the last thirty-four years of his life, governing that society with great prudence, and protecting their possessions from the rapacity of the neighbouring barons by the favour of his royal master; and here he died Dec. 1, 1109. He wrote, but in a homely Latin style, a very curious and valuable history of Croyland abbey from its foundation, in the year 664 to 1091. It was printed by sir H. Saville,' London, 1596, and is among Gale’s “Scriptores.” There is also an edition of Francfort in 1601, and one of Oxford, 1684, which last is thought the most complete.

, author of the “Illustrations of Hogarth,” was born at the Trench farm, near Wem, in Shropshire, in a house which had been rendered somewhat remarkable, by having been the birth-place and country residence of Wycherley the poet, and whose widow is said to have adopted Mr. Ireland, when a child; but this lady dying without a will, left him unprovided for. He was descended by the mother’s side from two eminent dissenting clergymen; his mother being the daughter of the rev. Thomas Holland, and great-grand-daughter of the rev. Philip Henry. In his youth he discovered a strong predilection to the arts, and such literature as is immediately connected with them, but as his parents were unable to give him a regular education, and as he had a turn for mechanics, h was brought up to the business of a watchmaker. Although he carried on this for some time with good connexions, it was not upon the whole successful, and during a considerable part of his life, he subsisted by trafficking in pictures, prints, &c. for which he had a correct taste, and in which he was probably assisted by the artists and print-sellers. He amassed a good collection of ^iortimer’s and Hogarth’s works, and lived on intimate terms with many men of eminence in the literary world, and particularly with the artists Mortimer and Gainsborough, and Henderson the actor, whose “Memoirs” he published in 1786. This actor had lived in Mr. Ireland’s house for some time after coming to London, but their intimacy had for some reason abated, and at the period of Henderson’s death was, if we are rightly informed, quite dissolved. His Life of Henderson is said to have been his first publication, and certainly was not very successful, nor very interesting. He was more fortunate afterwards in being employed by the Messrs. Boydell in the “Illustrations of Hogarth,” 3 vols. 8vo, a work in which he displays a correct knowledge of the arts, and a vein of humourous remark and anecdote not ill suited to the subjects he had to illustrate. As Mr. Ireland was a man of integrity, he often felt himself very much hurt as being mistaken for Samuel Ireland, the proprietor of the Shakspeare forged manuscripts, who had also published a volume of scraps and anecdotes relating to Hogarth. Our author, therefore, thought proper to disclaim, in the preface to his third volume, all connexion and relationship with his namesake. For several years Mr. Ireland had been afflicted with a complication of disorders, which had rendered society irksome to him, and occasioned him to remove to the neighbourhood of Birmingham, where he died in November 1808. He was a man of pleasant and inoffensive manners, and full of literary anecdote, which he liberally dispensed around, whether in a coffee-house among strangers, or at the social table among his friends.

, bishop of Lyons in France, was undoubtedly by birth a Greek, and, not improbably, born at or near the city of Smyrna. He was trained in the studies of philosophy and human learning: in the doctrines of Christianity, two disciples of St. John the apostle, Papias and Polycarp, were his masters. The latter he is said to have accompanied in his journey, about the Paschal controversy, to Rome; where, by his and Anicetus’s persuasioiij he was prevailed upon to go to France; great numbers of Greeks residing in some parts of that kingdom, especially about Marseilles, and the church there beginning to be disturbed by several pernicious heresies. In his journey, arriving at Lyons, he continued several years there, in the station of a presbyter, under the care add government of Pothinus, the bishop of that city; and, by his behaviour, distinguished himself so much, that, about the year 177, he was chosen to draw up the judgment and opinion of the churches of Lyons and Vienna, which were sent to those in Asia, in order to compose the differences lately raised by Montanus and his followers, who pretended to the prophetic spirit. In the same letter, they took occasion also to give an account of the persecution, which then raged peculiarly among them, under Marcus Antoninus. The opinions of the confessors in. those times were always received with esteem and veneration. The same churches therefore sent other letters about these controversies to Eleutherius, bishop of Rome, which were probably carried by Irenseus, who undertook that journey at their request. Two years after, in the year 174, upon the martyrdom of Pothinus at Lyons, Irenaeus succeeded to that chair, in a troublesome and tempestuous time, when the church was assaulted by enemies from without, and betrayed by heretics from within. These circumstances required both courage and conduct in the governors, and our new bishop gave conspicuous proofs of his qualifications in both respects. He is said to have held a provincial synod at Lyons, where, by the assistance and suffrage of twelve other bishops, he condemned the heresies of Marcion, Valentinus, and Basilides. He had personally encountered some of these ringleaders among the Gnostics, and read the books of others; when, at the request of many who importuned him, he set about the elaborate work “against Heresies,” part of which is still extant under his name. It was composed in the time of Eleutherius; upon whose decease, Victor, succeeding to the see of Rome, headed afresh the dispute abput the time of celebrating Easter, and endeavoured imperiously to oppose the Roman custom upon the Asiatics. To heal the sclmrn, synods were called in several places; and, among the rest, Irenaeus convened one of the churches of France under his jurisdiction;. where, having determined the matter, he wrote a synodical epistle to pope Victor, and told him, that they agreed with him in the main of the controversy, but withal advised him to take heed how he excommunicated whole churches, for observing the custom derived down to them from their ancestors. He observed, that there was as little agreement in the manner of the preparatory fast before Easter, as in the day itself, some thinking they were to fast but one day, others two, others more, and some measuring the time by a continued fast of forty hours; and that this variety was of long standing, and had crept into several places, while the governors of the church took less care about these different customs than about maintaining a sincere and mutual love and peace towards one another; putting him in mind too of Anicetus and Polycarp, who, though they could not agree about their different usages, did yet mutually embrace, orderly receive the communion together, and peaceably part from one another. Irenaeus wrote also, to the same effect, to several other bishops, for allaying this unhappy difr fere nee.

, called also Wernerus, or Guarnerus, a celebrated German lawyer, was born at Bologna, about the middle of the eleventh century. After studying the law at Constantinople, he taught it at Ravenna, where a dispute arising between him and his colleagues about the word “al,” he sought for the meaning of it in the Roman law; and thence took a liking to it, applied to the study of it, and at last taught it publicly at Bologna in 1128. He had a great number of disciples, became the father of the Glossators, and had the title of “Lucerna Juris.” Thus he was the restorer of the Roman law, which had been destroyed by the invasion of the barbarians. He had great credit in Italy with the princess Matilda; and, having engaged the emperor Lotharius to order, by an edict, that Justinian’s law should resume its ancient authority at the bar, and that the code and digest should be read in the schools, he was the first who exercised that profession in Italy: his method was to reconcile the “responsa jurisprudentum” with the “leges,” when they seemed to clash.

It is also said, that he prevailed with Lotharius, whose chancellor he was, to introduce into the universities the creation of doctors, and that he drew up the form of that ceremony; which had its commencement at Bologna, and extended soon to all other universities, and passed from the faculty of law to that of divinity. The university of Paris having adopted these degrees, they were used for the first time, in the person of Peter Lombard, master of the sentences, who was created, in this form, D. D. Irnerius died some time before 1150, and was interred at Bologna, the law school of which was afterwards rendered very famous by his disciples, and the Roman law was thenceforth taught by Italian professors, not only in Italy, but in England and France. One Vacarius, a native of Lombardy, was invited to England for that purpose about the middle of the twelfth century.

, a rabbi, was one of those Jews who left Spain on an edict of Ferdinand and Isabella, in 1492, which obliged the Jews to quit their dominions within four months, or else embrace Christianity. Karo went first to Portugal; and, travelling thence to Jerusalem, he lost his children and his books on the road. He lived in great solitude and, to console himself, composed a book, entitled “Toledot Jiskach, the Generations of Isaac.” It is a commentary upon the Pentateuch, partly literal and partly cabbalistical, in which he examines the sentiments of other commentators. It has gone through several editions: the first was printed at Constantinople in 1518; afterwards at Mantua, and Amsterdam in 1708. Buxtorf ascribes to our rabbi a ritual entitled “Eben Haheser, the Rock of Support.”

, a celebrated Grecian orator, of Chalcis, in Syria, the d isciple of Lysias, and master of Demosthenes, was born probably about 418 B.C. He taught rhetoric with reputation at Athens; and sixty-four orations are attributed to him, but he composed only fifty, and we have but ten of them remaining in the “Greek Orators” of Stephens, 1575, fol. of which we have an excellent translation by sir William Jones, in 1779, 4to. Isaeus took Lysias for his model, and has so well imitated his style and elegance, that he might be easily confounded with the other but for the figures of speech, which Isaeus is the first orator who makes frequent use of. He was also the first who applied eloquence to political subjects, in which his pupil Demosthenes followed him. He must be distinguished from another celebrated orator named Is^us, who lived at Rome in the time of the younger Pliny, about the year 97, by whom he is highly extolled. A sketch of his life is drawn by Philostratus, but he had nothing in common with the Athenian orator, except the volubility of his language, and his name, which last sir William Jones thinks might be assumed, as that of Isocrates also was taken by one of the later sophists, who wrote the instructions to Demonicus. The best of the recent editions of Isseus is that of Reiske, in the “Orat. Graec.” Leipsic, 1770 75, 8vo.

of Seville, was born at Carthagena, in Spain, the son of Severian, governor of that city, and was educated by his brother Leander, bishop of Seville, whom he succeeded in the year 601. St. Isidore was the oracle of Spain during thirty-five years, and died April 4, 636, leaving the following works: Twenty books of “Origines,” or Etymologies, Paris, 1601, fol., or Cologn, 1617, fol.; a “Chronicle” ending at the year 626, useful for the history of the Goths, Vandals, and Suevi “Commentaries” on the historical books of the Old Testament a treatise “on Ecclesiastical Writers” “a Rule for the Monastery of Honori;” a “Treatise on Ecclesiastical Offices,” containing many very important passages relating to Ecclesiastical Discipline, and in which he mentions seven prayers of the sacrifice. These prayers may still be found in the Mosarabic.mass, which is the ancient Spanish liturgy, and of which this saint is known to have been the principal author. The edition of the Missal, 1500, fol. and of the Breviary, 1502, fol. printed by cardinal Ximenes’ order, are very scarce; a Treatise on this Liturgy was printed at Rome, 1740, fol. The “Collection of Canons” attributed to St. Isidore, was not made by him. In the Rule above mentioned, he speaks of the monks as follows: “The monks shall every year at Pentecost make a declaration that they keep nothing as their own. A monk ought to work with his hands, according to the precept of St. Paul, and the example of the patriarchs. Every one ought to work, not only for his own maintenance, but for that of the poor. Those who are in health, and do not work, sin doubly, by idleness, and setting a bad example. Those who chuse to read without working, show that they receive no benefit from what they read, which commands them to work.” This Rule of St. Isidore prescribes about six hours work every day, and three hours reading. This Isidore is frequently ranked among musical writers. In his treatise on the divine offices, much curious information occurs concerning canto fermo, and music in general; but particularly its introduction into the church, the institution of the four tones by St. Ambrose, and the extension of that number to eight by St. Gregory. In treating of secular music, he has a short chapter on each of the following subjects of music, and its name of its invention its definition of its three constituent parts, harmonics, rhythm, and metre; of musical numbers; of the three-fold divisions of music; 1st, Of the harmonical division of music; 2dly, Of the organic or instrumental division; 3dly, Of the rhythmical division. These chapters are very short, and contain little more than compressed definitions of musical terms. In enumerating the seven liberal arts, cap. II. he ranks them in the following manner: grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, music, geometry, astronomy.

, was a Spanish Jesuit who on the suppression of his order, went to Italy, and settled at Bologna, where he died in 1783. He is known chiefly as the author of “The History of the famous preacher friar Gerund de Campazas; otherwise Gerund Zotes.” This work was written with a view to correct the abuses of the Spanish pulpit, by turning bad preachers into ridicule. The first volume of the original Spanish was published at Madrid, in 1758, under the assumed name of Francisco Lobon de Salazar, minister of the parish of St. Peter in Villagarcia. It was not only highly applauded by many of the learned in Spain, to whom it had been communicated in manuscript; but even the inquisitors encouraged the publication, and bore testimony in writing to its laudable design, believing that it would in a great measure produce a reformation. One of the revisers for the inquisition says, “It is one of those lucky expedients which indignation and hard necessity suggest, when the best means have proved ineffectual, and we are not to find fault if the dose of caustic and corrosive salts be somewhat too strong, as cancers are not to be cured with rose water.” Notwithstanding this approbation of the inquisition, some orders, particularly the Dominican and Mendicant, represented to the king that such a piece of merciless criticism would too much diminish the respect due to the clergy, and would render all religious orders ridiculous in the eyes of the common people, &c. These arguments, repeatedly urged by the friars, and supported by several of the bishops, obliged the council of Castile to take the book into their serious consideration, which produced a suppression of it. The author had a second volume ready; but, finding it impossible to print it in Spain, presented the copy to Mr. Baretti, by whose means both volumes were printed in English in 1771, with the omission of some tedious and irrelevant parts. In Spain this work was so highly approved, that the author was hailed as a second Cervantes, whom he certainly endeavours to copy; but it would be too liberal to allow him the merit of successful rivalship. Friar Gerund, however, is certainly a work of great humour, and must have appeared to much advantage in Spain, where the subjects of the satirQ are more common and obvious than in this country. Here it cannot be supposed to yield more than mere amusement, unless where it presents us with the customs of the common and middle ranks of Spain, and those are said to be faithfully depicted.

, or Yves, in Latin Ivo, the celebrated bishop of Chartres, was born in the territory of Beauvais, in 1035. He was raised to the see of Chartres in 1092 or 1093, under the pontificate of Urban XI. who had deposed Geofroy, our author’s predecessor in the see, for various crimes of which he was accused. Ives particularly signalized his zeal against Philip I. who had put away his wife Bertha, of Holland, and taken Bertrade of Montford, the wife of Fouques de Requin, count of Anjou. This divorce was contrary to the ecclesiastical law; and the affair would have been attended with bad consequences had not the prince’s friends interposed. After this, the bishop employed himself wholly in the functions of his ministry, made several religious foundations, and died 1115. His corpse was interred in the church of St, John in the Vale, which he had founded. Pope Pius V. by a bull, dated Dec. l&, 1570, permitted the monks of the congregation of Lateran to celebrate the festival of St. Ives. We have, of his compiling, “A collection of Decrees;” “Exceptiones ecclesiasticarum regularum;” besides “22 Sermons,” and a “Chronicon;” all which were collected in 1647 by John Baptist Souciet, a canon of Chartres, in one vol. folio, divided into parts. The “Decrees” were printed in 1561, and there has been another edition since. A collection of canons called the “Pannomia,” or “Panormia,” and some other pieces printed in the “Bibliotheca patrum,” are also ascribed to our bishop.

, was the only son of one of the most eminent merchants at Yarmouth, where he was born in 1751. He was entered of Caius college, Cambridge, where he did not long reside; but, returning to Yarmouth, became acquainted -with that celebrated antiquary Thomas Martin of Palgrave, and caught from him that taste for antiquities which he pursued during the short period of his life. He was elected F. S. A. 1771, and F. R. S. 1772; and, by favour of the earl of Suffolk, in him the honour of Suffolk herald extraordinary was revived; an office attended with no profit, but valuable to him by the access it gave to the Mss. muniments, &c. of the heralds college, of which he thereby became an honorary member. His first attempt at antiquarian publication was by proposals (without his name) in 1771, for printing an account of Lothingland hundred in Suffolk; for which he had engraved several small plates of arms and monuments in the churches of Friston, Gorleston, Loud, Lowestoffe, and Somerliton, from his own drawings. His next essay was the short preface to Mr. Swinden’s “History and Antiquities of Great Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, 1772,” 4to. Mr. Svvinden, who was a schoolmaster in Great Yarmouth, was a most intimate friend of Mr. Ives, who not only assisted him with his purse, and warmly patronized him while living, but superintended the book for the emolument of the author’s widow, and delivered it to the subscribers . In 1772 he caused to be cut nine wooden plates of old Norfolk seals, entitled “Sigilla antiqua Norfolciensia. Impressit Johannes Ives, S. A. S.” and a copper-plate portrait of Mr. Martin holding an urn, since prefixed to Martin’s “History of Thetford.” On Aug. 16, 1773, by a special licence from the archbishop of Canterbury, he was married at Lambeth church to Miss Kett (of an ancient family in Norfolk), and afterwards resided at Yarmouth.

, a very celebrated naturalist, was a native of Finland, and was born in 1715. Having imbibed a taste for the study of natural history, it appears that he pursued his inclination with much zeal and industry. His first researches were rewarded by the discovery of many new plants in Sweden, of which he gave some account to the botanical world between the years 1742 and 1746. He was particularly anxious to explore the virtues of plants, both with respect to their uses in medicine, and in the useful arts, so that planting and agriculture occupied some portion of his attention. His reputation as a naturalist caused him to be appointed professor at Abo; and in October 1747, he set out upon his travels, sailing from Gottenburg for America; but, on account of a violent hurricane, was obliged to take shelter in a port of Norway, whence he could not depart till the ensuing February, when he proceeded immediately for London. From hence he went to North America; and having spent two or three years in exploring whatever was worthy of observation in that country, he returned to his professorship at Abo in 1751. The expences of this undertaking appear to have exceeded what was allowed him by the Academy of Sciences, so that our author was obliged to live rather penuriously upon his return; yet he found means to cultivate, in a small garden of his own, several hundred plants, for the use of the university, as there was no public botanical garden at Abo His discoveries in botany very materially enriched the “Species Plantarum” of his great master, and the LinntEan Herbarium abounds with specimens brought home by him, distinguished by the letter K. Haller enumerates a long list of tracts published by Kalm; and his inaugural dissertation appeared in the “Amcenitates Academicae” of Linnæus. He was originally intended for the ecclesiastical profession, but was drawn aside from this pursuit by attending the lectures of Linnæus on natural history, given in the university of Upsal. Indeed, it was through the recommendation of Linnæus that professor Kalm was fixed upon to undertake the voyage to North America, and the account of his voyage was published in English by Forster in 1771. He afterwards made, at his own expence, a very extensive tour into Russia, the history of which never appeared in print, but which is supposed to have furnished considerable matter for the work of a Swedish writer, who published a book of travels in that kingdom. Kalm was a member of the royal Swedish academy of sciences, and died in 1779. His collection of dried plants, made in his various journeys, and doubtless valuable for the purposes of botanical information, is said to remain in the hands of his family in a state of neglect.

, a German writer, who has lately attained extraordinary fame in his own country as the inventor of a new system of philosophical opinions, which, however, are not very likely to reach posterity, was born April 22, 1724, in the suburbs of Konigsberg, in Prussia. His father, John George Kant, was a sadler, born at Memel, but originally descended from a Scotch family, who spelt their name with a C; but the philosopher, the subject of this article, in early life converted the C into a K, as being more conformable to German orthography. Immanuel, the second of six children, was indebted to his father for an example of the strictest integrity and the greatest industry; but he had neither time nor talent to be his instructor. From his mother, a woman of sound sense and ardent piety, he imbibed sentiments of warm and animated devotion, which left to the latest 'periods of his life the strongest and most reverential impressions of her memory on his mind. He received his first instructions in reading and writing at the charity-school in his parish; but soon gave such indications of ability and inclination to learn, as induced his uncle, a wealthy shoe- maker, to defray the expence of his farther education and studies. From school he proceeded to the college of Fridericianum. This was in 1740; and his first teacher was Martin Kautzen, to whom Kant was strongly attached, and who devoted himself with no less zeal to the instruction of his pupil, and contributed very greatly to the unfolding of his talents. His favourite study at the university was that of mathematics, and the branches of natural philosophy connected with them. On the completion of his studies, he accepted a situation as tutor in a clergyman’s family. In this, and in two other similar situations, he was not able to satisfy his mind that he did his duty so well as he ought; he was, according to his own account, too much occupied with acquiring knowledge to be able to communicate the rudiments of it to others. Having, however, acted as a tutor for nine years, he returned to Konigsberg, and maintained himself by private instruction. In 1746, when twenty-two years of age, he began his literary career with a small work, entitled “Thoughts on the estimation of the animal powers, with strictures on the proofs advanced by Leibnitz and other mathematicians on this point,” &c. In 1754 he acquired great reputation by a prize essay on the revolution of the earth round its axis; and the following year was admitted.to his degree of master of arts, and entered immediately upon the task of lecturing, which he performed for many years to crowded audiences, and published several works, the titles of which are now of little importance, compared to his new metaphysical system, the first traces of which are to be found in his inaugural dissertation, written in 1770, when he was appointed to a professor’s chair in the university of Konigsberg; the subject was, “De mundi sensibilis atque intelligibilis forma et principiis.” Seated now in the chair of metaphysics, his subsequent publications were almost entirely of this nature. He pursued this study with unremitting ardour, and entered into all the depths of metaphysical subtlety, in order, as we are told, “to unfold the rational powers of man, and deduce from thence his moral duties.” It was not till 178 J, that the full principles of his system appeared in his “Review of pure reason;” and the system it contains is commonly known under the name of the “Critical Philosophy.” As this work had been variously misrepresented, he published a second part in 1783, entitled “Prolegomena for future Metaphysics, which are to be considered as a science.” In 1786 he was appointed rector of the university, and was a second time called to the same office, in 1788; and in a few months he was advanced to be senior of the philosophical faculty. About 1798, he took leave of the public as an author, and soon after gave up all his official situations. During his latter years, his faculties were visibly decayed, in which state he died Feb. 12, 1804. The character of Kant is said to have been contemplated with universal respect and admiration, and during his life he received from the learned throughout Germany, marks of esteem bordering upon adoration. How far he deserved all this, is very questionable. His language is equally obscure, and his reasonings equally subtle with those of the commentators of Aristotle in the fifteenth century. The truth of this assertion will be denied by none who have endeavoured to make themselves masters of the works of Willich and Nitsch, two of his pupils; and the source of this obscurity seems to be sufficiently obvious. Besides employing a vast number of words of his own invention, derived from the Greek language, Kant uses expressions which have long been familiar to metaphysicians, in a sense different from that in which they are generally received; and we have no doubt that the difficulty of comprehending his philosophy has contributed, far more than any thing really valuaBle in it, to bring it into vogue, and raise the fame of the author. For the following analysis of his system we are indebted to one of our authorities, and we might perhaps deserve blame for the length of the article, if it did not appear necessary that some record should remain of a set of opinions that once threatened to usurp the place of all true philosophy as well as religion. The reader who studies for the practical improvement of his mind, will perceive at once, that it is the object of all such metaphysical projectors to render the world independent of revealed religion.

Pure reason is the faculty of tracing our knowledge “a priori,” to subject it to principles, to trace it from its necessary conditions, till it be entirely without condition, and in complete unity. The great work of Kant is divided into several parts, under the titles, “Of Esthetic transcendental” “Of transcendental Logic” “Of the pure Ideas of the Understanding” “Of the transcendental Judgment” “Of the Paralogism of pure Reason,” &c. We cannot, from the nature of our work, discuss all the parts of the system; but may observe, that the author contends that we know objects only by the manner in which they affect us; and as the impressions which they make upon us are only certain apparitions or phenomena, it is impossible for us to know what an object is in itself. Hence the system of Kant has been compared with that of Berkeley, which maintains that sensations are only appearances, and that there is no truth, only in our reason. But Kant does not go to this length. According to his theory, the understanding, when it considers the apparitions or phenomena, acknowledges the existence of the objects themselves, inasmuch as they serve for the bases of those apparitions; though we know nothing of their reality, and though we can have no certainty but in experience. Truth, according to our author, consists in the agreement of our notions with the objects, in such a manner as that all men are obliged to form the same judgment: belief consists in holding a thing to be true, in consequence of a persuasion which is entirely personal, and has not its basis in an object submitted to experience. There is a belief of doctrine, as, that “there are inhabitants in the planets,” which is not the same as moral belief; because in moral belief there is something necessary. The ordinary mode of teaching the existence of God belongs to the belief of doctrine and it is the same with regard to the immortality of the soul nevertheless, the author was a firm believer in the existence of God, and a future state because, said he, “this persuasion renders immovable my moral principles principles which I cannot reject, without rendering myself contemptible in my own eyes. I wish for happiness, but I do not wish for it without morality; and as it depends on nature, I cannot wish it with this condition, except by believing that nature depends on a Being who causes this connection between morality and happiness. This supposition is founded on the want or necessity of my reason, and not on my duty. We have, however,” says Kant, “no certainty in our knowledge of God; because certainty cannot exist, except when it is founded on an object of experience. The philosopher acknowledges that pure reason is too weak to prove the existence of a being beyond the reach of our senses. The necessity of believing in God is, therefore, only subjective, although necessary and general for all those beings who conform to their duty. The proofs of natural theology, taken from the order and beauty of the universe, are proofs only in appearance. They resolve themselves into a bias of our reason to suppose an infinite Intelligence, the author of all that is possible; but from this bias it does not follow that there really is such an author. To say, that whatever exists must have a cause, is a maxim” a priori;“but it is a maxim applicable only to experience: for we know not how to subject to the laws of our perceptions that which is absolutely independent of them. It is impossible to know that God exists; but we can comprehend how it is possible to act morally on the supposition of the existence of an intelligent Creator, an existence which practical reason forces theoretical reason to adopt. This proof not only persuades, but even acts on the conviction, in proportion as the motives of our actions are conformable to the law of morality. Religion ought to be the means of virtue, and not its object. Man has not in himself the idea of religion, as he has that of virtue. The latter has its principle in the mind it exists in itself, and not as the means of happiness and it may be taught without the idea of God, for the pure law of morality is” a priori.“He who does good by inclination, does not act morally. There are compassionate minds, which feel an internal pleasure in communicating joy around them, and who thus enjoy the satisfaction of others; but their actions, however just, however good, have no moral merit, and may be compared to other inclinations; to that of honour, for example, which, while it meets with that which is just and useful, is worthy of praise and encouragement, but not of any high degree of esteem. According to Kant, we ought not even to do good, either for the pleasure which we feel in doing it, or in order to be happy, or to render others happy; for any one of these motives would be empiric, and injure the purity of our morals. We ought to act after the maxims derived” a priori;" from the faculty of knowledge, which carry with them the idea of necessity, and are independent of all experience; after the maxims which, it is to be wished, could be erected into general laws for all beings endowed with reason.

, an eminent mathematician, and professor of mathematics at Gottingen, was born at Leipsic, Sept. 27, 1719. He had part of his education at home, under his father and uncle, both of whom were lecturers on jurisprudence, and men of general literature. In 1731 he attended the philosophical lectures of the celebrated Winkler, and next year studied mathematics under G. F. Richter, and afterwards under Hausen; but practical astronomy being at that period very little encouraged at Leipsic, he laboured for some years under great difficulties for want of instruments, and does not appear to have made any great progress until, in 1742, he formed an acquaintance with J. C. Baumann, and by degrees acquired such helps as enabled him to make several observations. Heinsius was his first preceptor in algebra; and, in 1756, he was invited to Gottingen, to be professor of mathematics and moral philosophy, and afterwards became secretary of the royal society, and had the care of the observatory on the resignation of Lowitz in 1763; but, notwithstanding his talents in astronomy and geography, the services he rendered to the mathematical sciences in general are more likely to convey his name to posterity. He exerted himself with the most celebrated geometers of Germany, Segner, and Karsten, to restore to geometry its ancient rights, and to introduce more precision and accuracy of demonstration into the whole of mathematical analysis. The doctrine of binomials that of the higher equations the laws of the equilibrium of two forces on the lever, and their composition are some of the most important points in the doctrine of mathematical analysis and mathematics, which Kastner illustrated and explained in such a manner as to excel all his predecessors. Germany is in particular indebted to him for his classical works on every part of the pure and practical mathematics. They unite that solidity peculiar to the old Grecian geometry with great brevity and clearness, and a fund of erudition, by which Kastner has greatly contributed to promote the study and knowledge of the mathematics. Kiistner’s talents, however, were not confined to mathematics: his poetical and humorous works, as well as his epigrams, are a proof of the extent of his genius; especially as these talents seldom fall to the lot of a mathematician. How Kastner acquired a taste for these pursuits, we are told by himself in one of his letters. In the early part of his life he resided at Leipsic, among friends who were neither mathematicians nor acquainted with the sciences; he then, as he tells us, contracted “the bad habit of laughing at others;”' but he used always to say, Hanc veniam damns petimusque vicissim.

, a female artist, well known in this country, was born in 1740, at Coire, the capital of the Grisons, and received the elements of art from her father, who, on some surprising proofs of her early capacity, at the age of fourteen, conducted her to Milan, and, after some years’ practice there and elsewhere, to Rome, where her talents, charms, accomplishments, and graces, soon rendered her an object of general admiration: in 1764 she removed to Venice, and in the following year accompanied lady Wentworth, the wife of the British resident, to England. Here, enjoying royal favour, the arbitress of public taste, loved, esteemed, perhaps envied by artists, decorated with academic honours, opulent and happy, she sunk her own name in that of sir A. Zucchi, a Venetian artist, whom she married, and, after a residence of seventeen years, returned, through her native place, to Italy, and settled at Rome; where, after a new career of success, courted, employed, and rewarded, by rnonarchs, princes, and the most distinguished travellers, she died in 1807, of gradual decay, resigned, regretted, and honoured by splendid obsequies.

Mr. Fuseli, who was honoured by the friendship of Angelica, and cherishes her memory, says, that he “has no wish to contradict those who make success the standard of genius, and as their heroine equalled the greatest names in the first, suppose that she was on a level with them in powers. Angelica pleased, and deserved to please, the age in which she lived, and the race for which she wrought. The Germans, with as much patriotism at least as judgment, have styled her the Paintress of Minds (Seelen Mahlerin): nor can this be wondered at from a nation, who, in A. R. Mengs, flatter themselves to possess an artist equal to Raffaello. The male and female characters of Angelica never vary in form, features, and expression, from the favourite ideal she had composed in her mind. Her heroes are all, the man to whom she thought she could have submitted, though him perhaps she never found; and to his fancied manner of acting and feeling, she, of course, submitted the passions of the subject. Her heroines are herself; and whilst suavity of countenance and alluring graces shall be able to divert the general eye from the sterner demands of character and expression, can never fail to please.”

Angelica painted the lighter scenes of poetry with a grace and taste entirely her own; and happily formed to meet that of an engraver whose labours highly contributed to the growth and perpetuity of her fame. Bartolozzi was the man, who, enjoying at the same time, youth, health, and ingenuity, almost entirely devoted his talents between Angelica and Cipriani. The three were endowed with congenial feelings in arts; which, if not of the highest class, were certainly entitled to rank among the most agreeable.

, a very agreeable English writer, was descended from sir George Hungerford, his great grandfather, by lady Frances Ducie, only daughter of Francis lord Seymour, baron of Trowbridge. He was born, as may be conjectured, about 1729 or 1730, and received his education at Kingston school, under the rev. Mr. Woodeson. From thence he went to Geneva, where he resided some years; and during his stay there, became acquainted with Voltaire, with whom he continued to correspond many years after he returned to England. After finishing the tour of Europe, he settled as a student in the Inner Temple, was called to the bar, and sometimes attended Westminster-hall; though he did not meet with encouragement enough to induce his perseverance in his profession, nor indeed does it seem probable that he had sufficient application for it. His first performance was “Ancient and Modern Rome,” a poem, written at Rome in 1755, and published in 1760, with merited applause. Soon after, he printed “A short Account of the Ancient History, present Government, and Laws of the Republic of Geneva.” This work he dedicated to his friend Voltaire. In 1762 he produced an “Epistle from lady Jane Gray to lord Guildford Dudley;” and in 1763 “The Alps,” a poem, which, for truth of description, elegance of versification, and vigour of imagination, greatly surpasses all his other poetical productions. In 1764 he produced “Netley Abbey;” and in 1765, the “Temple Student, an Epistle to a Friend,” in which he agreeably rallies his own want of application in the study of the law, and intimates his irresistible penchant for the belles lettres. In 1769 he married miss Hudson, of Wanlip, Leicestershire. Some months before which, he had published “Ferney,” an epistle to Mons. de Voltaire, in which he introduced a fine eulogium on Shakspeare, which procured him, soon after, the compliment, from the mayor and burgesses of Stratford, of a standish, mounted with silver, made out of the mulberry-tree planted by that illustrious bard. In 1773 he published “The Monument -in Arcadia,” a dramatic poem, founded on a well-known picture of Poussin; and in 1779, “Sketches from Nature, taken and coloured in a Journey to Margate,” 2 vols. 12 mo, an imitation of Sterne’s “Sentimental Journey” In 1781 he collected his poetical works in two volumes, with a dedication to Dr. Heberden, including a number of new pieces never before printed, and an excellent portrait of himself. Of these pieces, one was “The Helvetiad,” a fragment, written at Geneva, in 1756, He had intended to compose a poem of some length, on the subject of the emancipation of Switzerland from the oppression of the house of Austria, and had even settled the plan of his work, when he acquainted M. Voltaire with his intention, who advised him rather to employ his time on subjects more likely to interest the public attention “For,” said be, “should you devote yourself to the completion of your present design, the Swiss would be much obliged to you, without being able to read you, and the rest of the world would care little about the matter.” Whatever justice there was in this remark, Mr. K. relinquished his plan, and never resumed it afterwards. In 1781, he published an “Epistle to Angelica Kauffman.”

A few years after he became engaged in a long and vexatious lawsuit, in consequence of the neglect (to say the least of it) of an architect who professed himself to be his friend; the particulars of which it is of no importance to detail. At the conclusion of the business he shewed that his good humour had not forsaken him: and in 1787 he gave to the public the principal circumstances of his case in a performance entitled “The Distressed Poet, a seriocomic Poem, in three cantos,” 4to, with some pleasantry, and without any acrimony.

In the next year, 1788, the last of his productions appeared; and the composition was very honourable to his talents and his liberality. In 1782, the Antelope packet was shipwrecked on the Pelew Islands, where the commander, captain Wilson, and his crew lived some time before they could get off. The circumstances attending this extraordinary deliverance having been communicated 10 Mr. Keate, he offered to draw up the narrative of them for the advantage of his friend captain Wilson. This he executed in “An Account of the Pelew Islands, situated in the western part of the Pacific ocean; composed from the journals and communications of captain Henry Wilson and some of his officers, who in August 1783 were there shipwrecked, in the Antelope, a packet belonging to the honourable East India Company,” 4to, a work written with great elegance, compiled with much care, and which, if embellished (as it certainly appears to be) with facts better calculated to have found a place in a novel than a genuine narrative, must be ascribed to the mis-information of those who were actors in the scene, and must first have deceived before they obtained credit. Mr. Keate (whoundertook the task on the most disinterested principle, and derived no advantage whatever from the work) was too sturdy a moralist to have had any hand in the imposition.

, an English prelate, born in 1713, was the younger son of Charles Keene, of Lynn, in Norfolk, esq. sometime mayor of that town, whose eldest son was sir Benjamin Keene, many years ambassador at Madrid, and K. B. who died Dec. 15, 1757, leaving his fortune to the subject of this article. Mr. Edmund Keene was first educated at the Charter-house, and afterwards at Caius college, Cambridge, where he was admitted in 1730. In 1738 he was appointed one of his majesty’s preachers at Whitehall chapel, and made fellow of Peterhouse in 1739. In 1740 he was made chaplain to a regiment of marines; and, in the same year, by the interest of his brother with $ir Robert Walpole, he succeeded bishop Butler in the valuable rectory of Stanhope, in the bishopric of Durham. In 1748, he preached and published a sermon at Newcastle, at the anniversary meeting of the society for the relief of the widows and orphans of clergymen; and, in December following, on the death of Dr. Whalley, he was chosen master of Peterhouse. In 1750, being vice-chancellor, under the auspices of the late duke of Newcastle, he verified the concluding paragraph in his speech on being elected, “Nee tardum nee timidum habebitis procancellarium,” by promoting, with great zeal and success, the regulations for improving the discipline of the university. This exposed him to much obloquy from the younger part of it, particularly in the famous “Fragment,” and “The Key to the Fragment,” by Dr. King, in which Dr. Keene was ridiculed (in prose) under the name of Mun, and in that of the “Capitade” (in verse), under that of Acutus, but at the same time his care and attention to the interests and character of the university justly endeared him to his great patron, so that in Jan. 1752, soon after the expirW tion of his office, which he held for two years, he was nominated to the see of Chester, vacant by the death of bishop Peploe, and was consecrated in Ely-house chapel on Palm Sunday, March 22. With this he held in commendam his rectory, and, for- two years, his headship, when he was succeeded, much to his satisfaction, by Dr. Law. In May following his lordship married the only daughter of Lancelot Andrews, esq. of Edmonton, formerly an eminent linen-draper in Cheapside, a lady of considerable fortune, and a descendant of the family of bishop Andrews. She died March 24, 1776. In 1770, on the death of bishop Mawson, he was translated to the valuable see of Ely. Receiving large dilapidations, his lordship procured an act of parliament for alienating the old palace in Holborn, and building a new one, by which the see has been freed from a great incumbrance, and obtained some increase also of annual revenue. “The bishopric,” it has been humorously observed, “though stripped of the strawberries which Shakspeare commemorates to have been so noted in Holborn, has, in lieu of -them, what may very well console a man not over-scrupulous in his appetites, viz. a new mansion of Portland stone in Dover-street, and a revenue of 5000l. a year, to keep it warm and in good repute.” Bishop Keene soon followed his friend Dr. Caryl, “whom,” he said, “he had long known and regarded, and who, though he had a few more years over him, he did not think would have gone before him.” He died July 6, 1781, in the sixty-eighth year of his age, and was buried at his own desire in bishop West’s chapel, Ely cathedral, where is a short epitaph drawn up by himself. “Bishop Keene,” it is observed by bishop Newton, “succeeded to Ely, to his heart’s desire, and happy it was that he did so; for, few could have borne the expence, or have displayed the taste and magnificence, which he has done, having a liberal fortune as well as a liberal mind, and really meriting the appellation of a builder of palaces. For, he built a new palace at Chester; he built a new Fly-house in London and, in a great measure, a new palace at Ely leaving onjy the outer walls standing, he formed a new inside, and thereby converted it into one of the best episcopal houses, if not the very best, in the kingdom. He had indeed received the money which arose from the sale of old Elyhouse, and also what was paid by the executors of his predecessor for dilapidations, which, all together, amounted to about 11,000l. but yet he expended some thousands more of his own upon the buildings, and new houses require new furniture.” It is chiefly on account of this taste and munificence that he deserves notice, as he is not known in the literary world, unless by five occasional sermons of no distinguished merit.

, an eminent mathematician and philosopher, was born Dec. 1, 1671, at Edinburgh, where he received the first rudiments of learning; and, being educated in that university, continued there till he took the degree of M. A. His genius leading him to the mathematics, he studied that science very successfully under David Gregory the professor there, who was one of the first that had embraced the Newtonian philosophy; and, in 1694, he followed his tutor to Oxford, where, being admitted of Baliol, he obtained one of the Scotch exhibitions in that college. He is said to have been the first who taught Newton’s principles by the experiments on which they are grounded, -which he was enabled to do by an apparatus of instruments of his own providing; and the lectures he delivered in his chambers upon natural and experimental philosophy, procured him very great reputation. The first public specimen he gave of his skill in mathematical and philosophical knowledge, was his “Examination of Burnet’s Theory of the Earth,” which appeared in 1698, and was universally applauded by the men of science, and allowed to be decisive against the doctor’s “Theory.” To this piece he subjoined “Remarks upon Whiston’s New Theory of the Earth;” and these theories, being defended by their respective inventors, drew from Keill, in 1699, another performance entitled “An Examination of the Reflections of the Theory of the Earth, together with ‘ a Defence of the Remarks on Mr. Whiston’s New Theory’.” Dr. Burnet was a man of grea.t humanity, moderation, and candour; and it was therefore supposed that Keill had treated him too roughly, considering the great disparity of years between them. Keill, however, left the doctor in possession of that which has since been thought the great characteristic and excellence of his work: and, though he disclaimed him as a philosopher, yet allowed him to be a man of a fine imagination. “Perhaps,” says he, “many of his readers will be sorry to be undeceived about his Theory; for, as I believe never any book was fuller of mistakes and errors in philosophy, so none ever abounded *vith more beautiful scenes and surprizing images of nature. But I write only to those who might expect to find a true philosophy in it: the*y who read it as an ingenious romance will still be pleased with their entertainment.”

The following year Dr. Millington, Sedleian professor of natural philosophy in Oxford, who had been appointed physician in ordinary to king William, substituted Keill as his deputy, to read lectures in the public schools. This office he discharged with great reputation; and the term of enjoying the Scotch exhibition at Baliol-college, without taking orders, now expiring, he accepted an invitation from Dr. Aldrich, dean of Christ-church, to reside there. In 1701 he published his celebrated treatise, the substance of several lectures on the new philosophy, entitled “Introductio ad veram physicam,” which is supposed to be the best and most useful of all his performances. In the preface he insinuates the little progress that Sir Isaac Newton’s “Principia” had made in the world and says, that “though the mechanical philosophy was then in repute, yet, in most of the writings upon this subject, scarce any thing was to be found but the name.” The first edition of this book contained only fourteen lectures; but to the second, in 1705, he added two more. About 50 years ago, when the Newtonian philosophy began to be established in France, this piece was in great esteem there, being considered as the best introduction to the “Principia;” and a new edition in English was printed at London in 1736, at the instance of M. Maupertuis, who was then in England, and subjoined to it a new hypothesis of his own, concerning the ring of the planet Saturn.

In Feb. 1701 he was admitted a fellow of the royal society; and, in 1708, published, in the “Philosophical Transactions,” a paper “Of the Laws of Attraction, and its Physical Principles.” At the same time, being offended at a passage in the “Acta Eruditorum” at Leipsic, in which Sir Jsaac Newton’s claim to the first invention of the method of fluxions was called in question, he communicated to the royal society another paper, in which he asserted the justice of that claim. In 1709 he was appointed treasurer to the Palatines, and in that station attended them in their passage to New England; and, soon after his return in 1710, was chosen Savilian professor of astronomy at Oxford. In 1711, being attacked by Leibnitz, he entered the lists against that mathematician, in the dispute about the invention of fluxions. Leibnitz wrote a letter to Dr. Hans Sloane, then secretary to the royal society, dated March 4, 1711, in which he required Keill, in effect, to give him satisfaction for the injury he had done him in his paper relating to the passage in the “Acta Eruditorum” at Leipsic. He protested, that he was far from assuming to himself Sir Isaac Newton’s method of fluxions; and desired, therefore, that Keill might be obliged to retract his false assertion. Keill desired, on the other hand, that he might be permitted to justify what he had asserted which he performed to the approbation of Sir Isaac, and other members of the society and a copy of his defence was sent to Leibnitz, who, in a second letter, remonstrated still more loudly against Keill’s want of candour and sincerity; adding, that it was not fit for one of his age and experience to enter into a dispute with an upstart, who acted without any authority from Sir Isaac Newton and desiring that the royal society would enjoin him silence. Upon this, a special committee was appointed who, after examining the facts, concluded their report with “reckoning Mr. Newton the inventor of fluxions; and that Mr. Keill, in asserting the same, had been no ways injurious to Mr. Leibnitz.” In the mean time, Keill behaved himself with great firmness and spirit; which he also shewed afterwards in a Latin epistle, written in 172O, to Bernoulli, mathematical professor at Basil, on account of the same usage shewn to Sir Isaac Newton; in the title-page of which he put the arms of Scotland, viz. a thistle, with this motto, “Nemo me impune lacessit.” The particulars of the contest are recorded in Collins’s “Commercium Epistolicum.”

About 1711, several objections were urged against Sir Isaac Newton’s philosophy, in support of Des Cartes’s notions of a plenum; which occasioned Keill to draw up a paper, which was published in the “Philosophical Transactions,” “On the Rarity of Matter, and the Tenuity of its Compo sition,” in which he points out various phenomena, which cannot be explained upon the supposition of a plenum. But, while he was engaged in this controversy, queen Anne was pleased to appoint him her decipherer; a post for which he was, it seems, very fit. His sagacity was such, that, though a decipherer is always supposed to be moderately skilled in the language in which the paper given him to decipher is written; yet he is said once to have deciphered a paper written in Swedish, without knowing a word of the language. In 1713, the university conferred on him the degree of M. D. at the public act; and, two years after, he published an edition of Commandinus’s “Euclid,” with additions of his own, of two tracts on Trigonometry and the nature of Logarithms. In 1717 he was married to some lady, who recommended herself to him, it is said, purely by her personal accomplishments. The facetious Mr. Alsop wrote some lines on this occasion (Gent. Mag. vol. XXXVIII. 238), which intimate that Keill had been a man of gallantry in his youth; and this appears, indeed, to be confirmed by the writer of his life in the Biographia Britannica. In 1718 he published his “Introductio ad veram Astronomiam:” which treatise was afterwards, at the request of the duchess of Chandos, translated by himself into English; and, with several emendations, published in 1721, under the title of “An Introduction to the true Astronomy, or, Astronomical Lectures read in the Astronomical Schools of the University of Oxford.” This was his last gift to the public; for he was seized this summer with a violent fever, which put an end to his life Sept. 1, 1721, when he was not quite fifty years old.

, an eminent physician of the mathematical sect, and brother to the preceding, was born in Scotland March 27, 1673. Having received the early part of his education in his native country, he went abroad with the view of completing it in the schools of celebrity on the continent; and obtained such a degree of knowledge as distinguished him soon after his return to England. He had early applied to dissections, and pursued th study of anatomy, under Duverney, at Paris; whence he was enabled to give anatomical lectures, with great reputation, in both the English universities. He was honoured with the degree of M. D. by the university of Cambridge. In 1703 he settled at Northampton, and began the practice of his profession, in which he attained considerable fame and success. In 1706 he published a paper in the Philosophical Transactions, No. 306, containing “an account of the death and dissection of John Bayles, of that town, reputed to have been 130 years old.” The circumstances which he detailed very much resembled those that were observed by the celebrated Harvey in the dissection of old Parr. Dr. Keill, like his brother John, was well skilled in mathematical learning, which he applied to the explanation of die laws of the animal economy. His first publication was a compendium of anatomy, for the use of the pupils who attended his lectures, and was entitled “The Anatomy of the Human Body abridged,” Lond. 1698, 12mo, and was taken chiefly from Cowper it went through many editions. In the year 1708, he gave the world a proof of his mathematical skill, in “An Account of Animal Secretion, the quantity of blood in the human body, and muscular motion,” London, 8vi. This work was reprinted in 1717, with the addition of an essay, “concerning the force of the heart in driving the blood through the whole body,” and under the title of “Essays on several parts of the Animal Œconomy.” He likewise published the same treatise in Latin, with the addition of a “Medicina Statica Britannica.” The essay concerning the force of the heart drew him into a controversy with Dr. Jurin, which was carried on in several papers, printed in the Philosophical Transactions of the royal society, of which Dr. Keill had been elected a member; and was continued to the time of the death of the latter, which took place at Northampton, July 16, 1619, in the vigour of his age. He had for some time laboured under a very painful disorder, viz. a cancer in the roof of his mouth, to which he had applied the cautery with his own hands, in order, if possible, to procure some relief, but in vain. He was buried at St. Giles’s church at Northampton. An handsome monument and inscription were placed over him by his brother, John Keill, to whom he left his estate, being never married; but who survived him, as we have seen, little more than two years.

, field-marshal in the king of Prussia’s service, was born in 1696, and was the younger son of William Keith, earl marshal of Scotland. He had his grammar-learning under Thomas Ruddiman, author of the “Rudiments;” his academical, under bishop Keith and William IMeston, in the college of Aberdeen. He was designed by his friends for the profession of the law; but the bent of his genius inclined him to arms, with which they wisely complied. His first military services were employed while a youth of eighteen, in the rebellion of 1715. In this unhappy contest, through the instigation of the counless his mother, who was a Roman catholic, he joined the Pretender’s party, and was at the battle of Sheriffmuir, in which he was wounded, yet able to make his escape to France. Here he applied to those branches of education, which are necessary to accomplish a soldier. He studied mathematics under M. de Maupertuis; and made such proficiency, that he was, by his recommendation, admitted a fellow of the royal academy of sciences at Paris. He afterwards travelled through Italy, Switzerland, and Portugal; with uncommon curiosity examined the several productions in architecture, painting, and sculpture; and surveyed the different fields where famous battles had been fought. In 1717, he had an opportunity of forming an acquaintance with Peter, czar of Muscovy, at Paris, who invited him to enter into the Russian service. This offer he declined, because the emperor was at that time at war with the king of Sweden, whose character Keith held in great veneration. He then left Paris, and went to Madrid; where, by the interest of the duke of Lyria, he obtained a commission in the Irish brigades, then commanded by the duke of Ormond. He afterwards accompanied the duke of Lyria, when he was sent ambassador extraordinary to Russia, and was recommended by him to the service of the czarina, who promoted him to the rank of lieutenant-general, and invested him with the order of the black eagle.

This brave and experienced general, after having greatly distinguished himself in the later memorable wars of that illustrious monarch, was killed in the unfortunate affair of Hohkerchen, Oct. 14, 1758, and was buried in the church of that place, the enemy joining in paying respect to his virtues. His character may be given in the few but comprehensive words of his brother, the late lord marshal of Scotland, who on being applied to by M. Formey, who wished to write his eloge, answered, “Probus vixit, fortis obiit.”

, alias Talbot (Edward), a famous English alchymist, or, as some have called him, a necromancer, was born at Worcester in 1555, and educated at Gloucesterhall, Oxford. Wood says, that when his nativity was calculated, it appeared that he was to be a man of most acute wit, and great propensity to philosophical studies and mysteries of nature. He belied this prophecy, however, both in the progress and termination of his life; for, leaving Oxford abruptly, and rambling about the kingdom, he was guilty of some crime in Lancashire, for which his ears were cut off at Lancaster; but what crime this was we are not informed. He became afterwards an associate with the famous Dr. Dee, travelled into foreign countries with him, and was his reporter of what passed between him and the spirits with whom the doctor held intelligence, and who wrote down the nonsense Kelley pretended to have heard. Of their journey with Laski, a Polish nobleman, we have already given an account in the life of Dr. Dee. We farther learn from Ashmole, if such information can be called learning, that Kelley and Dee had the good fortune to find a large quantity of the elixir, or philosopher’s stone, in the ruins of Glastonbury abbey; which elixir was so surprisingly rich, that they lost a great deal in making projections, before they discovered the force of its virtue. This author adds, that, -at Trebona in Bohemia, Kelley tried a grain of this elixir upon an ounce and a quarter of common mercury, which was presently transmuted into almost an ounce of fine gold. At another time he tried his art upon a piece of metal, cut out of a warming-pan; which, without handling it, or melting the metal, was turned into very good silver, only by warming it at a fire. Cervantes has given us nothing more absurd in the phrenzy of Don Quixote. This warming-pan, however, and the piece taken out of it, were sent to queen Elizabeth by her ambassador, then residing at Prague. Kelley, afterwards behaving indiscreetly, was imprisoned by the emperor Rodolphus II. by whom he had been knighted; and, endeavouring to make his escape out of the window, fell down and bruised himself so severely that he died soon after, in 1595. His works are, “A Poem of Chemistry,” and “A Poem of the Philosopher’s Stone;” both inserted in the “Theatrum Chymicum Britannicum,” 1652 “De Lapide Philosophorurn,” Hamb. 1676, 8vi; but it is questioned whether he was the author of this. He was, however, certainly the author of several discourses in “A true and faithful Relation of what passed for many Years between Dr. John Dee and some Spirits,” &c. Lond. 1659, folio, published by Dr. Meric Casaubon. There are “Fragmentæ aliquot, edita a Combacio,” Geismar, 1647, 12mo; also “Ed. Kelleii epistola ad Edvardum Dyer,” and other little things of Kelley, in ms. in Biblioth. Ashmol. Oxon.

, an English Roman catholic of considerable eminence as a controversial writer, was born in Northamptonshire, about 1560, and brought up in lord Vaux’s family, whence he was sent for education to the English colleges at Doway and Rheims, and afterwards, in 1582, to Rome, where he remained about seven years, and acquired the reputation of a very able divine. In 1589, he was invited to Rheims to lecture on divinity, and, proceeding in his academical degrees, was created D. D. and, in 1606, had the dignity of rector magnificus, or chancellor of the university, conferred upon him. After being public professor at Rheims for twelve years, he returned to Doway in 1613, and a few months after was declared president of the college, by a patent from Rome. In this office he conducted himself with great reputation, and ably promoted the interests of the college. He died Jan. 21, 1641. Among his works are, 1. “Survey of the new religion/' Doway, 1603, 8vi. 2.” A reply to Sutcliffe’s answer to the Survey of the new religion,“Rheims, 1608, 8vi. 3.” Oratio coram Henrico IV. rege Chris4. “The Gagg of the reformed gospel.” This, the catholics tell us, was the cause of the conversion of many protestants. It was answered, however, by Montague, afterwards bishop of Chichester, in a tract called “The new Gagger, or Gagger gagged/ 7 1624. Montague and he happened to coincide in so many points that the former was involved with some of his brethren in a controversy, they thinking him too favourable to the popish cause. 5.” Examen reformations, prajsertim Calvinisticae,“8vo, Doway, 1616. 6.” The right and jurisdiction of the prince and prelate,“1617, 1621, 8vo. This he is said to have written in his own defence, having been represented at Rome as a favourer of the oath of allegiance. In the mean time the work was represented to king James I. as allowing of the deposing power, and of murdering excommunicated princes, and his majesty thought proper to inquire more narrowly into the matter; the result of which was, that Dr. Kellison held no such opinions, and had explained his ideas of the oath of allegiance with as much caution as could have been expected. 7.” A treatise of the hierarchy of the church: against the anarchy of Calvin,“1629, 8vo. In this treatise, he had the misfortune to differ from the opinion of his own church in some respect. His object was, to prove the necessity of episcopal government in national churches; and he particularly pointed at the state of the catholics in England, who were without such a government. Some imagined that the book would be censured at Rome, because it seemed indirectly to reflect upon the pope, who had not provided England with bishops to govern the papists there, although frequently applied to for that favour; and because it seemed to represent the regulars as no part of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, and consequently not over-zealous in supporting the dignity of the episcopal order. The court of Rome, however, took no cognizance of the matter; but others attacked Dr. Kellison’s work with great fury. The controversy increasing, the bishops and clergy of France espoused his cause, and condemned several of the productions of his antagonists, in, which they had attacked the hierarchy of the church. Dr. Kellison’s other works were, 8.” A brief and necessary Instruction for the Catholics of England, touching their pastor,“1631. 9.” Comment, in tertiam partem Summse Sancti Thomas,“1632, fol. 10.” A Letter to king James I." in ms. Sutcliife and Montague were his principal antagonists among the protestants.

, a dramatic and miscellaneous writer, a native of Ireland, was born on the banks of the lake of Killarney, in 1739. His father was a gentleman of good family in that country, whose fortune being reduced by a series of misfortunes, he was obliged to repair to Dublin, in order to endeavour to support himself by his personal industry. He gave our author, however, some school education; but the narrowness of his finances would not permit him to indulge his son’s natural propensity to study, by placing him in the higher schools of Dublin. He was therefore bound apprentice to 3j stay-maker, an employment but ill suited to his inclination; yet continued with his master till the expiration of his apprenticeship, and then set out for London, in 1760, in order to procure a livelihood by his business. This, however, he found very difficult, and was soon reduced to the utmost distress for the means of subsistence. In this forlorn situation, a stranger, and friendless, he used sometimes to endeavour to forget his misfortunes, and passed some of his heavy hours at a public-house in Russel-street, Covent-garden, much resorted to by the younger players. Having an uncommon share of good-humour, and being lively, cheerful, and engaging in his behaviour, he soon attracted the notice, not only of these minor wits, but of a set of honest tradesmen who frequented that house every evening, and who were much entertained with his conversation. In a little time Mr. Kelly became so well acquainted with the characters of the club, that he was enabled to give a humorous description of them in one of the daily papers; and the likenesses were so well executed as to draw their attention, and excite their curiosity to discover the author. Their suspicions soon fixed on Mr. Kelly, and from that time he became distinguished among them as a man of parts and consideration.

The success of this play induced Mr. Kelly to continue to write for the stage; and he soon produced another comedy, entitled “A Word to the Wise,” which, on a report then current, that he was employed to write in defence of the measures of administration, met with a very illiberal reception; for, by a party who had previously determined on its fate, after an uncommon uproar, it was most undeservedly driven from the theatre. Of this treatment he severely complains in an “Address to the Public,” prefixed to an edition of that play, soon after published by subscription, before which above a thousand names appear as his encouragers; and though the pride of the poet was hurt, his fortune was improved, and his friends were considerably increased.

The ill fate of the “Word to the Wise” cast no damp on the ardour of our poet in the prosecution of theatric fame; and as his friends were strongly of opinion, that his genius excelled in the sentimental and pathetic, he was persuaded to make a trial of it in tragedy, and soon after presented the public with “Clementina.” In 1774, uqder the patronage of justice Addington, who kindly helped to conceal the name of the real author, by lending his own to that performance, he produced his “School for Wives.” By this manoeuvre he completely deceived the critics, who had not yet forgot their resentment; for the play was prepared for the stage, and represented, without the least discovery of his relation to it; though they pretended to be perfectly well acquainted with Mr. Kelly’s style and manner of writing. However, after the character of the play was fully established, and any farther concealment became unnecessary, Mr. Addington very genteelly, in a public advertisement, resigned his borrowed plumes, and the real author was invested with that share of reputation to which he was entitled.

, a learned English clergyman, was born Nov. 1, 1750, at Douglas, in the Isle of Man. Descended from a line of forefathers who had from time immemorial possessed a small freehold near that town, called Aalcaer, which devolved on the doctor, he was placed under the tuiton of the rev. Philip Moore, master of the free grammar-school of Douglas, where he became speedily distinguished by quickness of intellect, and the rapidity of his classical progress. From the pupil he became the favourite and the companion of his instructor, whose regard he appears to have particularly conciliated by his skill in the vernacular dialect of the Celtic tongue, spoken in that island. When not seventeen, young Kelly attempted the difficult task of reducing to writing the grammatical rules, and proceeded to compile a dictionary of the tongue. The obvious difficulties of such an undertaking to a school- boy may be estimated by the reflection that this was the very first attempt to embody, to arrange, or to grammaticize, this language: that it was made without any aid whatever from books, Mss or from oral communications; but merely by dint of observation on the conversation of his unlettered countrymen. It happened at this moment that Dr. Hildesley, the then bishop of Sodor and Man, had brought to maturity his benevolent plan of bestowing on the natives of the island a translation of the Holy Scriptures, of the Common Prayer book, and of some religious tracts, in their own idiom. His lordship most gladly availed himself of the talents and attainments of this young man, and prevailed on him to dedicate several years of his life to his lordship’s favourite object. The Scriptures had been distributed in portions amongst the insular clergy, for each, to translate his part: on Mr. K. the serious charge was. imposed of revising, correcting, and giving uniformity to these several translations of the Old Testament; and also that of conducting through the press the whole of these publications. In June 1768 he entered on his duties: in April 1770 he transmitted the first portion to Whitehaven, where the work was printed; but when conveying the second, he was shipwrecked, and narrowly escaped perishing. The ms. with which he was charged was held five hours above water; and was nearly the only article on board preserved. In the course of “his labours in the vineyard,” he transcribed, with his own hand, all the books of the Old Testament three several times. The whole impression was completed, under his guidance, in December 1772, speedily after the worthy bishop died.

, a pious and learned regular canon, and one of the most eminent men in the fifteenth century, was born 1380, at Kemp, a village in the diocese oi Cologn, from whence he took his name. He studied at Deventer, in the community of poor scholars established by Gerard Groot, made great progress both in learning and piety, and in 1399 entered the monastery of regular canons of Mount St. Agnes, near Zwol, where his brother was prior. Thomas a Kempis distinguished himself in this situation by his eminent piety, his respect for his superiors, and his charity towards his brethren; and died in great reputation for sanctity, July 25, 1471, aged ninetyone. He left a great number of religious works, which breathe a spirit of tender, solid, and enlightened piety, of which a collection was printed at Antwerp, 1615, 3 torn. 8vo. The abbe de Bellegarde translated part of his works into French, under the title of “Suite du Livre de I'lmitation,” 24mo, and Pere Valette, under that of “Elevation a J. C. sur sa vie et ses mysteries,” 12mo. The learned Joducus Badius Ascensius was the first who attributed the celebrated book on the Imitation of Jesus Christ to Thomas a Kempis, in which he has been followed by Francis de Tob, a regular canon, who in favour of this opinion quotes the Mss. which may still be seen in Thomas a Kempis’s own hand. On the other hand, Pere Possevin, a Jesuit, was the first who attributed this work to the abbot John Gersen or Gessen, in his “Apparatus sacer,” which opinion has been adopted by the Benedictines of the congregations de St. Maur. M. Vallart, in his edition of the “Imitation,” supposes it to be more ancient than Thomas a Kempis, and that it was written by Gersen. Those who wish to be acquainted with the disputes which arose on this subject between the Benedictines, who are for Gersen, and the regular canons of the congregation of St. Genevieve, who are for Thomas a Kempis, may consult the curious account of them which Dom. Vincent Thuilier nas prefixed to torn. 1. of Mabillon’s and Ruinart’s Posthumous Works, or Dupin’s History, who has also entered deeply into the controversy. The first Latin edition is 1492, 12mo, Gothic. There was at that time an old French translation under the title of ‘L’lnternelle Consolation,“the language of which appears as old as Thomas a Kempis, which has raised a doubt whether the book was originally written in Latin or French. The abbe” Langlet has taken a chapter from this ancient translation, which is not in the Latin versions. Dr. Stanhope translated it into English, and there are numerous editions of it in every known language.

, the deprived bishop of Bath and Wells, was descended from an ancient family seated at Kenplace, in Somersetshire, and born at Berkhamstead, in Hertfordshire, July 1637. At the age of thirteen he was sent to Winchester-school; and thence removed to Newcollege, in Oxford, of which he became a probationerfellow in 1657. He took his degrees regularly, and pursued his studies closely for many years; and in 1666 he removed to Winchester-college, being chosen fellow of that society. Not long after this, he was appointed domestic chaplain to Morley, bishop of that see, who presented him first to the rectory of Brixton, in the Isle of Wight, and afterwards to a prebend in the church of Westminster, 1669. In 1674 he made a tour to Rome, with his nephew Mr. Isaac Walton, then B. A. in Christchurch, in Oxford; and after his return, took his degrees in divinity, 1679. Not long after, being appointed chaplain to the princess of Orange, he went to Holland. Here his prudence and piety gained him the esteem and confidence of his mistress; but in the course of his office, he happened to incur the displeasure of her consort, by obliging one of his favourites to perform a promise of marriage with a young lady of the princess’s train, whom he had seduced by that contract. This zeal in Ken so offended the prince, afterwards king William, that he very warmly threatened to turn him away from the service; which Ken as warmly resenting, requested leave of the princess to return home, and would* not consent to stay till intreated by the prince in person. About a year after, however, he returned to England, and was appointed in quality of chaplain, to attend lord Dartmouth with the royal commission to demolish the fortifications of Tangier. The doctor returned with this nobleman April 1684; and was immediately advanced to be chaplain to the king, by an order from his majesty himself. Not only the nature of the post, but the gracious manner of conferring it, evidently shewed that it was intended as a step to future favours; and this was so well understood, that, upon the removal of the court to pass the summer at Winchester, the doctor’s prebendal house was pitched upon for the use of Mrs. Eleanor Gwyn. But Ken was too pious even to countenance vice in his royal benefactor; and therefore positively refused admittance to the royal mistress, which the king, however, did not take amiss, as he knew the sincerity of the man; and, previous to any application, nominated him soon after to the bishopric of Bath and Wells. A few days after this, the king was seized with the illness of which he died; during which, the doctor thought it his duty to attend him very constantly, and did his utmost to awaken his conscience. Bishop Burnet tells us that he spoke on that occasion “with great elevation of thought and expression, and like a man inspired.” This pious duty was the cause of delaying his admission to the temporalities of the see of Wells; so that when king James came to the crown, new instruments were prepared for that purpose.

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

Bishop Ken did not mix in any of the disputes or attempts of his party, though it is very probable he was earnestly solicited to it; since we find the deprived bishop of Ely, Dr. Turner, his particular friend, with whom fee had begun an intimacy at Winchester school, so deeply engaged in it. He never concurred in opinion with those nonjurors who were for continuing a separation from the established church by private consecrations among themselves, yet he looked on the spiritual relation to his diocese to be still in full force, during the life of his first successor, Dr. Kidder; but, after his decease in 1703, upon the nomination of Dr. Hooper to the diocese, he requested that gentleman to accept it, and afterwards subscribed himself “late bishop of Bath and Wells.” The queen, who highly respected him, settled upon him a pension of 200l. per annum, which was punctually paid out of the treasury as long as he lived. He had been afflicted from 1696 with severe cholicky pains, and at length symptoms being apparent of an ulcer in his kidneys, he went to Bristol in 1710 for the benefit of the hot wells, and there continued till November, when he removed to Leweston, near Sherborne, in Dorsetshire, a seat belonging to the hon. Mrs. Thynne. There a paralytic attack, which deprived him of the use of one side, confined him to his chamber till about the middle of March; when being, as he thought, able to go to Bath, he set out, but died at Longleate, in his way thither, March 19, 1710-11. It is said that he had travelled for many years with his shroud in his portmanteau; and that he put it on as soon as he came to Longleate, giving notice of it the day before his death, to prevent his body from being stripped.

, a native of Scotland, who resided some time in Smyrna, and died at an advanced age, Jan. 26, 1760, is recorded as an antiquary of some abilities, although we know very little of his history. He had a collection of about 200 pictures, amongst which were two heads of himself by Keysing; he had also a very valuable collection of Greek and Latin coins, which, with the pictures, were sold by auction in 1760. Amongst the Roman coins were 256 of Carausius, 9 of them silver, and 89 of Alectus; these coins of Carausius and Alectus were purchased by P. C. Webb, esq. the 256 for 70l. and thp 8$ for 16l. 10s. They were afterwards bought by Dr. Hunter, who added to the number very considerably. Dr. Kennedy, in his “Dissertation on the Coins of Carausius,” as-, serted, that Oriuna was that emperor’s guardian goddess. Dr. Stukeley, in his “Palæographia Britannica, No. III, 1752,” 4to, affirmed she was his wife; to which Dr. Kennedy replied in “Farther Observations,” &c. 1756, 4to and, upon his antagonist’s supporting his opinion in his “History of Carausius,” 1757 59, he abused him in a sixpenny 4to letter.

, an English writer, and bishop of Peterborough, was the son of the rev. Basil Kennet, rector of Dunchurch, and vicar of Postling, near Hythe, in Kent, and was born at Dover, Aug. 10, 1660. He was called White, from his mother’s father, one Mr. Thomas White, a wealthy magistrate at Dover, who had formerly been a master shipwright there. When he was a little grown up, he was sent to Westminster-school, with a view of getting upon the foundation; but, being seized with the srnall-pox at the time of the election, it was thought advisable to take him away. In June 1678 he was entered of St. Edmund-hall in Oxford, where he was pupil to Mr. Allam, a very celebrated tutor, who took a particular pleasure in imposing exercises on him, which he would often read in the common room with great approbation. It was by Mr. Allam’s advice that he translated Erasmus on Folly, and some other pieces for the Oxford booksellers. Under this tutor he applied hard to study, and commenced an author in politics, even while he was an under-graduate; for, in 1680, he published “A Letter from a student at Oxford to a friend in the country, concerning the approaching parliament, in vindication of his majesty, the church of England, and tfye university:” with which the whig party, as it then began to be called, in the House of Commons, were so much offended, that inquiries were made after the author, in order to have him punished. In March 1681 he published, in the same spirit of party, “a Poem,” that is, “a Ballad,” addressed “to Mr. E. L. on his majesty’s dissolving the late parliament at Oxford,” which was printed on one side of a sheet of paper, and began, “An atheist now must a monster be,” &c. He took his bachelor’s degree in May 1683; and published, in 1684, a translation of Erasmus’s “Morise encomium,” which he entitled “Wit against Wisdom, or a Panegyric upon Folly,” which, as we have already noticed, his tutor had advised him to undertake. He proceeded M. A. Jan. 22, 1684; and, the same year, was presented by sir William Glynne, bart. to the vicarage of Amersden, or Ambroseden, in Oxfordshire; which favour was procured him by his patron’s eldest son, who was his contemporary in the halh To this patron he dedicated “Pliny’s Panegyric,” which he translated in 1686, and published with this title, “An address of thanks to a good prince, presented in the Panegyric of Pliny upon Trajan, the best of the Roman emperors.” It was reprinted in 1717; before which time several reflections having been made on him for this performance, he gave the following account of it in a “Postscript” to the translation of his “Convocation Sermon,” in 1710. “The remarker says, the doctor dedicated Pliny’s Panegyric to the late king James: and, what if he did? Only it appears he did not. This is an idle tale among the party, who, perhaps, have told it till they believe it: when the truth is, there was no such dedication, and the translation itself of Pliny was not designed for any court address. The young translator’s tutor, Mr. Allam, directed his pupil, by way of exercise, to turn some Latin tracts into English. The first was a little book of Erasmus, entitled,” Moriae Encomiumu;“which the tutor was pleased to give to a bookseller in Oxford, who put it in the press while the translator was but an under-graduate. Another sort of task required by his tutor was this ‘ Panegyric of Pliny upon Trajan,’ which he likewise gave to a bookseller in Oxford, before the translator was M. A. designing to have it published in the reign, of king Charles; and a small cut of that prince at full length was prepared, and afterwards put before several of the books, though the impression happened to be retarded till the death of king Charles; and then the same tutor, not long before his own death, advised a new preface, adapted to the then received opinion of king James’s being a just and good prince. However, there was no dedication to king James, but to a private patron, a worthy baronet, who came in heartily to the beginning of the late happy revolution. This is the whole truth of that story, that hath been so often cast at the doctor not that he thinks himself obliged to defend every thought and expression of his juvenile studies, when he had possibly been trained up to some notions, which he afterwards found reason to put away as childish things.”

In 1689, as he was exercising himself in shooting, he had the misfortune to be dangerously wounded in the forehead by the bursting of the gun. Both the tables of his skull were broken, which occasioned him constantly to wear a black velvet patch on that part. He lay a considerable time under this accident; and it is said, that while he was in great disorder both of body and brain, just after he had undergone the severe operation of trepanning, he made a copy of Latin verses, and dictated them to a friend at his bed-side. The copy was transmitted to his patron, sir William Glynne, in whose study it was found, after the author had forgot every thing but the sad occasion: and the writer of his life tells us, that “it was then in his possession, and thought, by good judges, to be no reproach to the author.” He was too young a divine to engage in the famous popish controversy; but he distinguished himself by preaching against popery. He likewise refused to read the declaration for liberty of conscience in 1688, and went with the body of the clergy in the diocese of Oxford, when they rejected an address to king James, recommended by bishop Parker in the same year. While he continued at Amersden, he contracted an acquaintance with Dr. George Hickes, whom he entertained in his house, and was instructed by him in the Saxon and Northern tongues; though their different principles in church and state afterwards dissolved the friendship between them. In September 1691, he was chosen lecturer of St. Martin’s in Oxford, having some time before been invited back to Edmund-hall, to be tutor and vice-principal there; where he lived in friendship with the learned Dr. Mill, the editor of the New Testament, who was then principal of that house. In February 1692, he addressed a letter from Edmund-hall to Brome, the editor of Somner’s “Treatise of the Roman Ports and Forts in Kent,” containing an account of the life of that famous antiquary; which gave him an opportunity of displaying his knowledge in the history of the Saxon language in England. In February 1693, he was presented to the rectory of Shottesbrook, in Berkshire, by William Cherry, esq. the father of one of his fellow-students at college, but he still resided at Oxford, where he diligently pursued and encouraged the study of antiquities. We have a strong attestation to this part of his character from Gibson, afterwards bishop of London, who publishing, in 1694, a translation of Somner’s treatise, written in answer to Chifflet, concerning the situation of the Portus Iccius on the coast of France, opposite to Kent, where Caesar embarked for the invasion of this island, introduced it to the world with a dedication to Mr. Kennet.

On May 5, 1694, he took the degree of B. D. that of D. D. July 19, 1699 and in 1700, was appointed minister of St. Botolph Aldgate in London, without any solicitation of his own. In 1701, he engaged against Dr. Atterbury, in the disputes about the rights of convocation, of which he became a member about this time, as archdeacon of Huntingdon; to which dignity he was advanced the same year by Dr. Gardiner, bishop of Lincoln. He now grew into great esteem by those who were deemed the lowchurch party, and particularly with Tenison the archbishop of Canterbury. He preached a sermon at Aldgate, January 30, 1703, which exposed him to great clamour, and occasioned many pamphlets to be written against it; and in 1705, when Dr. Wake was advanced to the see of Lincoln, was appointed to preach his consecration sermon; which was so much admired by lord chief-justice Holt, that he declared, “it had more in it to the purpose of the legal and Christian constitution of this church than any volume of discourses.” About the same time, some booksellers, having undertaken to print a collection of the best writers of the English history, as far as to the reign of Charles I. in two folio volumes, prevailed with Dr. Kennet to prepare a third volume, which should carry the history down to the then present reign of queen Anne. This, being finished with a particular preface, was published with the other two, tinder the title of “A complete History of England, &c.” in 1706. The two volumes were collected by Mr. Hughes, who wrote also the general preface, without any participation of Dr. Kennet: and, in 1719, appeared the second edition with notes, said to be inserted by Mr. Strype, and several alterations and additions. Not long after this, he was appointed chaplain to her majesty; and by the management of bishop Burnet, preached the funeral sermon on the death of the first duke of Devonshire, Sept. 5, 1707. This sermon gave great offence, and made some say, that “the preacher had built a bridge to heaven for men of wit and parts, but excluded the duller part of mankind from any chance of passing it.” This charge was grounded on the following passage; where, speaking of a late repentance, he says, that “this rarely happens but in men of distinguished sense and judgment. Ordinary abilities may Jt>e altogether sunk by a long vicious course of life: the duller flame is easily extinguished. The meaner sinful wretches are commonly given up to a reprobate mind, and die as stupidly as they lived; while the nobler and brighter parts have an advantage of understanding the worth of their souls before they resign them. If they are allowed the benefit of sickness, they commonly awake out of their dream of sin, and reflect, and look upward. They acknowledge an infinite being they feel their own immortal part they recollect and relish the holy Scriptures they call for the elders of the church they think what to answer at a judgment-seat. Not that God is a respecter of persons, but the difference is in men; and, the more intelligent nature is, the more susceptible of the divine grace.” Of this sermon a new edition, with “Memoirs of the Family of Cavendish,” and notes and illustrations, was published in 1797, which is now as scarce as the original edition, the greater part of the impression having been burnt at Mr. Nichols’s (the editor’s) fire in 1808.

Whatever offence this sermon might give to others, it did not offend the succeeding duke of Devonshire, to whom it was dedicated, who, on the contrary, recommended the doctor to the queen for the deanery of Peterborough, which he obtained in 1707. In 1709, he published “A Vindication of the Church and Clergy of England from some ]ate Reproaches rudely and unjustly cast upon them” and, “A true Answer to Dr. SacheverelPs Sermon before the Lord-Mayor, November 5 of that year.” In 1710, he was greatly reproached, for not joining in the London clergy’s address to the queen. When the great point in SacheverelPs trial, the change of the ministry, was gained, and addresses succeeded, an address was prepared from the bishop and clergy of London, so worded that they, who would not subscribe it, might be represented as enemies to the queen and her ministry. Dr. Kennet, however, refused to sign it, which was announced in one of the newspapers, Dyer’s Letter of Aug. 4, 1710. This zealous conduct in Kennet, in favour of his own party, raised so great an odium against him, and made him so very obnoxious to the other, that very uncommon methods were taken to expose him; and one, in particular, by Dr. Weiton, rector of WhitechapeL In an altar-piece of that church, which was intended to represent Christ and his twelve apostles eating the passover and the last supper, Judas, the traitor, was drawn sitting in an elbow-chair, dressed in a black garment, between a gown and a cloak, with a black scarf and a white band, a short wig, and a mark in his forehead between a lock and a patch, and with so much of the countenance of Dr. Kennet, that under it, in effect, was written “the dean the traitor.” It was generally said, that the original sketch was designed for a bishop under Dr. Welton’s displeasure, which occasioned the elbow-chair, and that this bishop was Burnet: but the painter being apprehensive of an action of Scandalum Magnatum, leave was given him to drop the bishop, and make the dean. Multitudes of people came daily to the church to admire the sight; but it was esteemed so insolent a contempt of all that is sacred, that, upon the complaint of others, (for the dean never saw or seemed to regard it, the bishop of London obliged those who set the picture up to take it down again. But these arts and contrivances to expose him, instead of discouraging, served only to animate him; and he continued to write and act as usual in the defence of that cause which he had espoused and pushed so vigorously hitherto. In the mean time, he employed his leisure-hours in things of a different nature; but which, he thought, would be no less serviceable to the public good. In 1713, he made a large collection of books, charts, maps, and papers, at his own expence, with a design of writing “A full History of the Propagation of Christianity in the English American Colonies;” and published a catalogue of all the distinct treatises and papers, in the order of time as they were first printed or written, under this title, “Bibliothecae Americanae primordia.” About the same time he founded “an antiquarian and historical library” at Peterborough; for which purpose he had long been gathering up pieces, from the very beginning of printing in England to the latter end of queen Elizabeth’s reign. In the rebellion of 1715, he published a sermon upon “the witchcraft of the present Rebellion;” and, the two following years, was very zealous for repealing the acts against occasional conformity and the growth of schism. He also warmly opposed the proceedings in the convocation against Hoadly, then bishop of Bangor which was thought to hurt him so as to prove an effectual bar to his farther advancement in the church nevertheless, he was afterwards promoted to the see of Peterborough, November 1718. He continued to print several things after his last promotion, which he lived to enjoy something above ten years; and then died in his house in James’s-street, December 19, 1728. His numerous and valuable ms collections, which were once in the collection of Mr. West, were purchased by the earl of Shelburne, afterwards marquis of Lansdowne, and sold with the rest of his lordship’s Mss. to the British Museum, where they are now deposited. Among these are two volumes in a large Atlas folio, which were intended for publication under the following comprehensive title “Diptycha Ecclesise Anglicanae sive Tabulae Sacrse in quibus facili ordine recensentur Archiepiscopi, Episcopi, eorumque Suffraganei, Vicarii Generales, et Cancellarii; Ecclesiarum insuper Cathedralium Priores, Decani, Thesaurarii, Praecentores, Cancellarii, Archidiaconi, & melioris notae Canonici, continua serie deducti a Gulielmi I. Conquestu, ad auspicata Gul. III. tempora.”

"Dr. Swift came into the coffee-house, and had a bow from every body but me, who, I confess, could not but despise him. When I came to the an ti- chamber to wait before prayers, Dr. Swift was the principal man of talk and business, and acted as a master of requests. He was soliciting the earl of Arran to speak to his brother the duke of Ormond, to get a chaplain’s place established in the garrison of Hull for Mr. Fiddes, a clergyman in that neighbourhood, who had lately been in gaol, and published sermons to pay fees. He was promising Mr. Thorold to undertake with my lord treasurer, that, according to his petition, he should obtain a salary of 200l. per annum, as minister of the English church at Rotterdam. Then he stopt F. Gwynne, esq. going in with his red bag to the queen, and told him aloud he had somewhat to say to him from my lord treasurer. He talked with the son of Dr. Davenant to be sent abroad, and took out his pocket-book and wrote down several things, as memoranda, to do for him. He turned to the fire, and took out his gold watch, and, telling the time of the day, complained it was very late. A gentleman said, ‘ he was too fast.’ * How can I help it,‘ says the doctor, ’ if the courtiers give me a watch that won‘t go right’ Then he instructed a young nobleman, that the best poet in England was Mr. Pope (a papist), who had begun a translation of Homer into English verse for which ‘ he must have ’em all subscribe' for, says he, the author shall not begin to print till I have a thousand guineas for him. Lord Treasurer, after leaving the queen, came through the room beckoning Dr. Swift to follow him: both went off just before prayers. 11 Nov. 3. I see and hear a great deal to confirm a doubt, that the pretender’s interest is much at the bottom of some

, younger brother of the preceding, was born Oct. 21, 1674, at Postling in Kent, the vicarage of his father, who bred this son also to the church. He was sent to Corpus Christ! college, Oxford, in 1690, where he soon distinguished himself by his uncommon abilities, and extraordinary advances in classical literature. He took the degree of M. A. in 1696, and commenced author the same year, by the publication of his “Romas Antiquae Notitia, or, The Antiquities of Rome; in two parts; 1. A short History of the Rise, Progress, and Decay of the Commonwealth. 2. A Description of the City an Account of the Religion, Civil Government, and Art of War with the remarkable Customs and Ceremonies, public and private with Copper Cuts of the principal Buildings, &c. To which are prefixed, Two Essays, concerning the Roman Learning, and the Roman Education,” in 8vo. The dedication is addressed to his royal highness William duke of Gloucester; and the work must have been written for his use particularly, if any credit may be given to a report, then at Oxford, that Mr. Ken net was to be appointed subpreceptor to that darling of the nation. This book being very well received by the public, he was encouraged to go on with his design of facilitating the study of classical learning; and with this view published, in 1697, “The Lives and Characters of the ancient Grecian Poets,” in 8vo, which he also dedicated to the duke of Gloucester. This, however, did not succeed so well as the “Roman Antiquities,” which is scarcely yet superseded in common use. The same year he was admitted fellow of his college, and became a tutor. About this time he entered into orders; and, some years after, gave proofs of the progress he had made in the study of divinity. In 1705 he published “An Exposition of the Apostles Creed, according to bishop Pearson, in a new Method, by way of Paraphrase and Annotations,” in 8vo, which was followed by “An Essay towards a Paraphrase on the Psalms, in Verse; with a Paraphrase on the third Chapter of the Revelations,” 1706, 8vo.

The same year he was, by the interest of his brother, appointed chaplain to the English factory at Leghorn; where he no sooner arrived than he met with great opposition from the papists, and was in great danger of the inquisition. This establishment of a church-of-England chaplain was a new thing; and the Italians were so jealous of the Northern heresy, that, to give as little offence as possible, he performed the duties of his office with the utmost privacy and caution. But, notwithstanding this, great offence was taken at it; and complaints were immediately sent to Florence and Rome. Upon this, the pope, and the court of inquisition at Home, declared their resolution to expel heresy, and the public teacher of it, from the confines of the holy see; and therefore secret orders were given to apprehend Mr. Kennet at Leghorn, and to hurry him away to Pisa, and thence to some other religious prison, to bury him alive, or otherwise dispose of him in the severest manner. Upon notice of this design, Dr. Newton, the English envoy at Florence, interposed his offices at that court; where he could obtain no other answer, but that “he might send for the English preacher, and keep him in his own family as his domestic chaplain; otherwise, if he presumed to continue at Leghorn, he must take the consequences of it; for, in those matters of religion, the court of inquisition was superior to all civil powers.” The envoy communicated this answer of the great duke to the earl of Sunderland, then secretary of state, who sent a menacing letter by her majesty’s order; and then the chaplain continued to officiate in safety, though he was with much difficulty preserved from their intended fury till that letter arrived.

by the following contrast: "But on the charitable towards those who are not

At length, in 1769, the important work was concluded within the period of ten years, originally promised. On this occasion he published the ten annual accounts of the progress of this laborious undertaking, by which it appeared that the whole money received from the subscribers amounted to the sum of 9117l. 7s. 6cl. on the recital of which Dr. Kennicott exclaims, “Reader! What a sum is here! Let foreign nations rea,d with astonishment this story of Britons and their king, joined by one foreign prince and one foreign academy, voluntarily contributing for ten years their several bounties, with a degree of public spirit beyond all example, for the accomplishment of a work purely subservient to the honour of revelation; a work sacred to the glory of God, and the good of mankind! And, under the powerful influence of this view of my work, it js impossible for me to be sufficiently thankful, either to those xvho have honoured with their patronage me, as the humble instrument in beginning and completing it, or to Divine Providence for granting me life to finish it, as well as resolution to undertake it.” He then states, that after deducting his income to live on during these ten years, the money spent in collations abroad, and assistants at home, there remained only 500l. all which was likely to be swallowed up in further expences, which he had engaged to pay. His industry had been unremitted; his general rule being to devote to it ten or twelve hours in a day, and frequently fourteen; at least, he says, “This was my practice, till such severe application became no longer possible, through the injuries done to my constitution.” In this final statement, he also, with proper indignation, notices some insinuations which had been thrown on him during the progress of the work. He had declared at the outset of his undertaking, that he had no doubt of receiving from the public the reward of his labours. Accordingly, on the death of Dr. Ballard, in June 1770, he was appointed a prebendary of Westminster, which in October he exchanged for a canonry of Christ-church Oxford. His circumstances being thus rendered easy, he entered into the marriage state Jan. 3, 1771, with Miss Ann Chamberlayne, sister to Mr. Chamberlayne, one of the solicitors of the treasury, a lady of learned accomplishments, who still survives him.

, lord chief justice of the King’s Bench, was born at Gredington, in Flintshire, 1733 and was the eldest surviving son of Lloyd Kenyon, esq. originally of Bryno in the same county, and one of the younger sons of the ancient family of Kenyon of Peele in Lancashire. He received the elementary part of his education at Ruthen in Denbighshire, whence he was taken, at an early age, and articled to Mr. W. J. Tomlinson, an eminent attorney at Nantwich, in Cheshire. On the expiration of his articles, Mr. Kenyon determined to enter into a line which afforded a more ample scope to his industry and talents, and, accordingly, became a member of the Society of Lincoln’s Inn, in Trinity Term 1754, and after a sedulous application to the requisite studies, was called to the bar in Hilary Term 1761. In the early part of his professional career, his advancement was but slow; he was unassisted by those means which powerful connexion and interest afford. The branch of his profession to which he chiefly applied himself, that of conveyancing, was not calculated to bring him forward into public notice; but the sterling merit of genuine abilities and persevering industry were not to be overlooked. He rose gradually into practice; few opinions at the bar, at the time, carried more weight and authority, and he was frequently recurred to as an advocate. In 1773, he formed a matrimonial connexion with his relative, Mary, the third daughter of George Kenyon, of Peele and, not long after, contracted an intimacy with Mr. afterwards lord Thurlow and chancellor. About this period too, and for some years after, his practice in the Courtof Chancery was very extensive and of the most lucrative kind, by which, as well as in the other branches of his profession, he acquired a very considerable property. In 1780, a circumstance occurred which not a little contributed to establish his reputation as an advocate and a public speaker, his being employed as leading counsel for the defence of the late lord George Gordon, on a charge of high treason; on this interesting occasion his second was Mr. now lord Erskine, who on that day distinguished himself in such a manner as in a great degree laid the foundation of his future fame. In April 1782, soon after the accession of the Rockingham party to ministerial power, Mr. Kenyon was, without serving the intermediate office of solfcitor, appointed to the important situation of attorney-general, and, at the same time, chief justice of Chester; in the former office he succeeded the late James Wallis, esq. The circumstance of his direct promotion to the office of attorney-general was regarded as a singular instance; this however is erroneous, similar promotions have before occurred, and the case of sir Edward Law (the late attorney-general, now lord Ellenborough, his successor as lord chief justice), is a recent instance. In parliament Mr. Kenyon took a decided part in politics, warmly attaching himself to the party of Mr. Pitt; and distinguishing himself not a little by his speeches on the noted affair of the coalition, Mr. Fox’s India-bill, &c. In March 1784 he was appointed master of the rolls, an office of high judicial dignity, and generally leading to still higher legal honours; yet its emoluments fell very short of those which he necessarily relinquished by discontinuing his professional pursuits as a counsel. About this time he was created a baronet. In this situation sir Lloyd Kenyon continued till the latter end of May 1788, when, on the resignation of the venerable earl of Mansfield, who, for the long interval of thirty-two years, had held the honourable and very important office of chief justice of the court of KingVbench, he was appointed to succeed him, and at the same time was elevated to the peerage, by the title of lord Kenyon, baron of Gredington in the county of Flint. He was now fixed in a situation, which, though not nominally the highest, is perhaps the most important office in the administration of the law of this country; and lord Kenyon furnished an instance nearly as striking as that of the illustrious Hardwicke, that the profession of the law is that which, of all others, affords the fairest opportunies for the exertion of genuine talents and persevering industry; whether the object be the gratification of ambition in the attainment of the highest honours in the state, or the possession of abundant wealth. His conduct in those arduous and important situations attracted and fixed the applauses and gratitude of his countrymen. He was distinguished for his laudable, firm, and persevering exertions to keep the channels of the law clear and unpolluted by low and sordid practices, which were particularly exemplified in the vigilant and salutary exercise of his authority over the attorneys of his own court, the utility of which has been experienced in a very considerable degree. Nor was he less distinguished for his zeal in the cause of morality and virtue, which most conspicuously appeared in his conduct with respect to cases of adultery and seduction. On these occasions neither rank, wealth, nor station, could shield deliquency from the well-merited censure and rebuke of offended justice and morality. Though much, unhappily, remains to be done, yet his lordship’s exertions, combined with those of some of the most virtuous and exalted characters of the upper House of Parliament, have contributed greatly, notwithstanding the acknowledged inadequacy and imperfection of the law in these respects, to restrain the fashionable and prevailing vices alluded to. What likewise redounded to the honour of his lordship’s magisterial character, was the strictness, not to say severity, with which he administered the justice of the law against the pernicious tribe of gamblers of every description, who have for some years infested the metropolis. On these occasions, as well as in those above mentioned, the conduct of this truly virtuous judge was such as incontrovertibly shewed that “the law is no respecter of persons;” and his persevering exertions to restrain the destructive vice of gaming have been attended with no inconsiderable degree of success. Nor should we omit to mention the very laudable spirit and firmness, which on all occasions he evinced in maintaining due order and decorum in his court. It was justly said of him, that though he might not equal in talents or eloquence the pre-eminent character whom he succeeded on the bench of justice; nevertheless, he possessed qualities mor*e appropriate to, and knowledge more connected with, the important office which he held. Profound in legal erudition, patient in judicial discrimination, and of the most determined integrity, he added no common lustre to his exalted station. He did not sacrifice his official to his parliamentary character; the sphere of his particular duty was the great scene of his activity, as of his honour; and though, as a lord of parliament, he never lessened his character, it was as a judge that he aggrandized it. In private life, the character of lord Kenyon was amiable and praise- worthy in the highest degree no man could excel him in the relations of husband and father in the former he may be considered as a pattern of conjugal virtue. In his mode of living he was remarkably temperate and regular; while the gratuitous assistance in his professional capacity, which it was well known he had often afforded to necessitous and injured individuals, is a proof that a fondness for money was not a prevailing trait in his character. He died at Bath, April 2, 1802, supposed to be worth 300,000l. all acquired by his own professional exertions, and a rigid spirit of economy. Lord Kenyon had issue by his lady, three sons; Lloyd, born in 1775, whom his father appointed to the office of filazer of the Court of King’s-bench; but who died in 1800. The manner in which his lordship was affected by this melancholy event, is supposed, in some degree, to have accelerated his own dissolution. Secondly, George, the present lord Kenyon, born in 1776. His lordship was appointed by his late father to the very lucrative situation of joint chief clerk of the Court of King’s-bench, on the demise of the late earl of Mansfield, better known as lord viscount Stormont, and joined in the patent with the late John Waye, esq. And, thirdly, the hon. Thomas Kenyon, born in 1780,

, the greatest astronomer perhaps that any age has produced, was born at Wiel in the dutchy of Wirtemberg, Dec. 27, 1571. His father, Henry Kepler, was descended from a family which had raised themselves under the emperors by their military services, and was himself an officer of rank in the army; but afterwards, experiencing ill fortune, was obliged to sell all he had, and support himself and his family by keeping a public-house. He died in 1590, and' left his son John without provision. His education had be^n therefore neglected, but, by the favour of his prince, he was enabled to enter upon his studies in philosophy at Tubingen, immediately upon his father’s death, and, two years after, pursued the mathematics in the same university, under the famous Michael Maestlinus, an astronomer of eminence, and of the Copernican school, but at this time Kepler informs us he had. no particular predilection for astronomy. His passion was rather for studies more fluttering to the ambition of a youthful mind; and when his prince selected him, in 1591, to fill the vacant astronomical chair, it was purely from deference to his authority, and the persuasions of Masstlinu, who had high expectations from his talents, that he reluctantly accepted of the office. He appears to have thought it unsuitable to his pretensions; and the state of astronomy was besides so low, uncertain, and in many respects visionary, that he had no hope of attaining to eminence in it. But what he undertook with reluctance, and as a temporary provision conferred on a dependant by his prince, soon engaged his ardour, and engrossed almost his whole attention. The first fruit? of his application to astronomical studies appeared in his “Mysterium Cosmographicum,” published about two years after his settlement in Gratz; and hasty and juvenile as this production was, it displayed so many marks of genius, and such indefatigable patience in the toil of calculation, that on presenting it to Tycho Brahe, it procured him the esteem of that illustrious astronomer, and even excited his anxiety for the proper direction of talents go uncommon. Accordingly, not contented with exhorting Kepler to prefer the road of observation to the more uncertain one of theory, Tycho added an invitation to live with him at Uraniburg, where his whole observations should be open to Kepler’s perusal, and those advantages provided for making others, which his situation at Gratz denied. This after some time was accepted. In 1597, Kepler entered into the married state, which at first created him great uneasiness, from a dispute which arose about his wife’s fortune; and, the year after, he was banished from Gratz on account of his religion, but afterwards recalled, and restored to his former dignity. However, the growing troubles and confusions of that place inclined him to think of a residence elsewhere; and he now determined to accept T. Brahe’s invitation, and accordingly left the university of Gratz, and removed into Bohemia with his family in 1600. In his journey he was seized with a quartan ague, which continued seven or eight months; and prevented his profiting by Tycho’s kindness, and, what was worse, some petty differences interrupted their connection. Kepler was offended at Tycho, for refusing some services to his family, which he had occasion for: he was also dissatisfied with his reserved ness; for, Tycho did not communicate to him all that he knew; and, as he died in 1601, he did not give Kepler time to be very useful to him, or to receive any considerable advantages from him. Before his death, however, he introduced him to the emperor Rodolphus at Prague (for, it was upon this condition that Kepler had consented to leave Gratz), who received him very kindly, and made him his mathematician, upon condition that he should serve Tycho as an arithmetician. From that time Kepler enjoyed the title of mathematician to the emperor all his life, and gained more and more reputation every year by his works. Rodolphus ordered him to finish the tables begun by Tycho, which were to be called the “Rodolphine Tables” and he applied himself very vigorously to this work but such difficulties arose in a short time, partly from the nature of it, and partly from the delay of the treasurers, that the tables were not finished and published till 1627. He complained, that, from 1602 and 1603, he. was looked upon by the treasurers with a very invidious eye; and when, in 1609, he had published a noble specimen o/ the work, and the emperor had given orders that, besides the expence of the edition, he should immediately be paid the arrears of his pension, which, he said, amounted to 2000 crowns, and likewise 2000 more; yet, that it was not till two years after, that the generous orders of Rodolphus, in his favour, were put in execution. He met with no less discouragement from the financiers under the emperoc Matthias, than under Rodolphus; and therefore, after struggling with poverty for ten years at Prague, began to think of quitting his quarters again. He was then fixed at Lints by the emperor Matthias, who appointed him a salary from the states of Upper Austria, which was paid for sixteen years. In 1613 he went to the assembly at Ratisbon, to assist in the reformation of the calendar; but returned to Lints, where he continued to 1626. In November of that year, he went to Ulm, in order to publish the “Rodolphine Tables;” and afterwards, in 1629, with the emperor’s leave, settled at Sagan in Silesia, where he published the second part of his “Ephemerides;” fot the first had been published at Lints in 1617. In 1630, he went to Ratisbon, to solicit the payment of the arrears of his pension; but, being seized with a fever, which, it is said, was brought upon him by too hard riding, he died there in November, in his 59th year.

, a celebrated English admiral, the second son of William earl of Albemarle, was born April 2, 1725. He entered the sea-service while he was young, accompanied commodore Anson round the world, and by the zeal which he manifested in his profession, was raised to the first honours which it had to bestow. The most important occurrence in his life took place in 1778, when he had the command of the channel fleet, to which he had been appointed at the personal and urgent solicitation of the king, and which he readily accepted, though he could not help observing, that “his forty years’ services were not marked by any favour from the crown, except that of its confidence in the time of danger.” On the 12th of July he fell in with the French fleet, under count d'Orvilliers, off Ushant: an engagement ensued, which, though partial, was very warm while it lasted. It was necessary to take a short time to repair the damages: which being done, the admiral made proper signals for the van and rear division to take their respective stations. This order was obeyed with great alacrity by sir Robert Harland of the van, but admiral sir Hugh Palliser of the rear took no notice of the signal, and refused to join his commander, till night prevented a renewal of the battle. The French, taking advantage of the darkness, escaped to their own. coast. Admiral Keppel, willing to excuse sir Hugh Palliser, at least to screen him from public resentment, wrote home such a letter as seemed even to imply great impropriety of behaviour in the commander himself. The conduct, however, of the rear-admiral was attacked in the public papers: he demanded of his commander a formal disavowal of the charges brought against him, which Keppel indignantly refused. He immediately exhibited articles of accusation against the commander-in-chief, for misconduct and neglect of duty, although he had a second time sailed with him, and had never uttered a syllable to his prejudice. The lords of the admiralty instantly fixed a day for the trial of admiral Keppel, who was most honourfcbly acquitted, and received the thanks of both houses of parliament for his services. Palliser was next tried, and escaped with a censure only, but the resentment of the public was so great, that he was obliged to resign several offices which he held under government, and to vacate his seat in parliament. The acquittal of Keppel was celebrated with the most magnificent illuminations, and other marks of rejoicing which had never been known at that time in this country; and the houses of lord Sandwich, first lord of the admiralty, and sir Hugh Palliser, were with difficulty saved from destruction; the windows and much of the furniture being demolished by the fury of the populace. In 1782, admiral Keppel was raised to a peerage, with the titles of viscount Keppel baron Elden: he was afterwards, at two different periods, appointed first lord of the admiralty. He died Oct. 3, 1786, unmarried, and of course his titles became extinct He was a thorough seaman, and a man of great integrity and humanity.

, an English divine, remarkable for piety and learning, was born at North-Allerton in Yorkshire, March 10, 1653. He was grounded in classical learning in the free-school of that town, and sent to St. Edmund Hall, Oxford, in 1670. Five years after, he was chosen fellow of Lincoln college, through the interest of Mr. George Hickes, who was fellow of the same, where he became eminent as a tutor. He entered into orders as soon as he was of sufficient age, and distinguished himself early by an uncommon knowledge in divinity. He was very young when he wrote his celebrated book, entitled “Measures of Christian Obedience:” he composed it in 1678, though it was not published till 1681. Dr. Hickes, to whom he submitted it for correction, advised him to dedicate it to bishop Compton, intending, by that means, to have him settled in London and, accordingly, it came out at first with a dedication to his lordship but when that prelate appeared in arms against James II. Kettlewell gave orders to have the dedication razed out of the copies unsold, and also to have it omitted in the subsequent editions. In the mean time, this book occasioned him to be so much taken notice of, that the old countess of Bedford, mother of the unfortunate William lord Russel, appointed him, on that account, to be one of her domestic chaplains; and a greater favour he received, upon the same consideration, from Simon lord Digby, who presented him, July 1682, to the vicarage of Coleshill in Warwickshire. After he had continued above seven years at this place, a great alteration happened in his condition and circumstances; for, at the Revolution, being one of those conscientious men who refused to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy to king William and queen Mary, he was deprived of his living in 1690, However, he did not spend the remainder of his days in indolence; but, retiring to London with his wife, whom he had married in 1685, he continued to write and publish books, as he had done during his residence in the country. There, amongst other learned men, he was particularly happy in the friendship of Mr. Nelson, with whom he concerted the “Model of a fund of charity for the needy suffering, that is, the nonjuring, clergy:” but being naturally of a tender and delicate frame of body, and inclined to a consumption, he fell into that distemper in his 42d year, and died April 12, 1695, at his lodgings in Gray’s-inn Jane. He was buried, three days after, in the same grave where archbishop Laud was before interred, in the parish church of Allhallows- Barking, where a neat marble monument is erected to his memory. Mr. Nelson, who must needs have known him very well, has given this great and noble character of him, in a preface to his “Five Discourses/' &c. a piece printed after his decease” He was learned without pride wise and judicious without cunning; he served at the altar without either covetousness or ambition he was devout without affectation sincerely religious without moroseness courteous and affable without flattery or mean compliances just without rigour charitable without vanity and heartily zealous for the interest of religion without faction.“His works were collected and printed in 1718, in two volumes, folio they are all upon religious subjects, unless his” Measures of Christian Obedience,“and some tracts upon” New Oaths,“and the” Duty of Allegiance," &c. should be rather considered as of a political nature.

, a learned antiquary of Germany, and fellow of the royal society in London, was born in 1689, at Thournau, a town belonging to the counts of Giech. His father, who was of the count’s council, took an extraordinary care of his education; and, after a suitable preparation, sent him to the university of Halle, where he applied himself chiefly to the civil law; not neglecting, in the mean time, the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, history, antiquity, and the sciences. Soon after he left Halle, he was invited to be preceptor to Charles Maximilian and Christian Charles, counts of Giech-Buchau, with whom, in 1713, he returned thither, and afterwards attended them in their travels. The first place of note they visited was Utrecht, where he became acquainted with the learned Reland, who, discerning his uncommon capacity and particular turn, advised him to undertake an accurate history of the antiquities of his country. Keysler visited the chief cities of Germany, France, and the Netherlands, with his two young counts; and gained great reputation among the learned, by illustrating, as he went along, several monuments of antiquity, particularly some fragments of Celtic idols, then lately discovered in the cathedral of Paris.

After the two young barons Bernstorf had been ten years under his care, he went with them to Tubingen, at which university they remained a year and a half. Then they set out on a grand tour, visiting the upper part of Germany, Switzerland, and Italy; and then returned to Vienna, where they spent three months. Their next progress was in Upper Hungary, Bohemia, and other parts of Germany. In 1731 they passed through Lorrain into France, thence crossed the channel into England, and made Holland the last stage of their travels. From this tour proceeded a large and entertaining work, which has been translated into English, in 4 vols. 4to and 8vo, and published under the following title, “Travels through Germany, Bohemia, Hungary, Switzerland, Italy, and Lorrain; giving a true and just description of the present state of those countries; their natural, literary, and political history, manners, laws, commerce, manufactures, painting, sculpture, architecture, coins, antiquities, curiosities of art and nature, &c. illustrated with copper- plates engraven from drawings taken on the spot. By John George Keysler, F. R. S. Carefully translated from the second edition of the German, Lend. 1756,” Keysler, after his return, spent the remainder of his days under the patronage and protection of his noble pupils, who committed to his care their fine library and museum, and allowed him a very handsome income. He led a happy tranquil life, declining all public employment, keeping himself single that he might not be incumbered with family affairs, and chiefly conversing with the illustrious dead, who were the companions of his retirement. He died in his fifty-fourth year, June 20, 1743, of an asthma, after viewing with intrepidity the gradual approach of death.

, a very learned English bishop, was born, as Wood says, at Brighthelmstone in Sussex, but as others say, in Suffolk. In June 1649, he was admitted sizar in Emanuel -college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of A. B. 1652, was elected fellow in 1655, and took his degree of A. M. in 1656. He was presented by his college to the vicarage of Stanground, in Huntingdonshire; from which he was ejected for nonconformity, in 1662, by virtue of the Bartholomew act; but conforming soon after, he was presented by Arthur earl of Essex to the rectory 01 Raine, in Essex, 1664. Here he continued till 1674, when he was presented to the rectory of St. Martin’s Outwicb, London, by the Merchant-tailors company. In September 1681, he was installed into a prebend of Norwich; and in 1689 made dean of Peterborough, in the room of Simon Patrick, promoted to the see of Chichester. On this occasion he took the degree of D. D. Upon the deprivation of Ken, bishop of Bath and Wells, for not taking the oaths to king William and queen Mary, and Beveridge’s refusal of that see, Kidder was nominated in June 1691, and consecrated the August following. In 1693 he preached the lecture founded by the honourable Robert Boyle, being the second that preached it. His sermons on that occasion are inserted in his “Demonstration of the Messias,” in three parts; the first of which was published in 1694, the second in 1699, and the third in 1700, 8vo. It is levelled against the Jews, whom the author was the better enabled to combat from his great knowledge of the Hebrew and oriental languages, for which he had long been celebrated. He wrote also, “A Commentary on the Five Books of Moses; with a Disser tation concerning the author or writer of the said books, and a general argument to each of them.” This commentary was published in 1694, in two volumes, 8vo; and the reader in the preface is thus acquainted with the occasion of it: “Many years are now passed since a considerable number of the London clergy met together, and agreed to publish some short notes upon the whole Bible, for the use of families, and of all those well-disposed persons that desired to read the Holy Scriptures to their greatest advantage. At that meeting they agreed upon this worthy design, and took their several shares, and assigued some part to them who were absent. I was not present at that meeting; but I was soon informed that they had assigned to me the Pentateuch. The work was begun with common consent; we did frequently meet; and what was done was communicated from time to time to those that met together and were concerned. The methods of proceeding had been adjusted and agreed to; a specimen was printed, and an agreement was made when it should be put to the press. I finished my part in order thereto; but so it fell out, that soon after all this, the clouds began to gather apace, and there was great ground to fear that the popish party were attempting to ruin the church of England. Hence it came to pass that the thoughts of pursuing this design were laid aside; and those that were concerned in it were now obliged to turn their studies and pens against that dangerous enemy. During this time, also, some of the persons concerned in this work were taken away by death; and thus the work was hindered, that might else have been finished long since. I, having drawn up my notes upon this occasion, do now think myself obliged to make them public,” &c. To the first volume is prefixed a dissertation, in which he sets down, and answers all the objections made against Moses being the author of the Pentateuch; and having considered, among the rest, one objection drawn by Le Clerc, from Gen. xxxvi. 31, and spoken in pretty severe terms of him, some letters passed between them, which were printed by Le Clerc in his “Bibliotheque Choisie.” Dr. Kidder had likewise borne a part in the popish controversy, during which he published the following tracts: 1 “A Second Dialogue between a new Catholic Convert and a Protestant; shewing why he cannot believe the doctrine of Transubstantiation, though he do firmly believe the doctrine of the Trinity.” 2. “An Examination of Bellarmine’s Thirtieth note of the Church, of the Confession of Adversaries.” 3. “The Texts which Papists cite out of the Bible for the proof of their Doctrine, `of the Sacrifice of the Mass,' examined.” 4. “Reflections on a French Testament, printed at Bourdeaux, 1686, pretended to be translated out of the Latin by the divines of Louvain.” He published also several sermons and tracts of the devotional kind.

, an English name for many ingenious persons of both sexes, and of the same family too. The first we meet with, is Catharine, the daughter of sir Anthony Cooke, who was born at Giddy-hall, in Essex, about 1530; and married to Henry Killigrew, esq. a Cornish gentleman of good abilities, who, for the service he did his country in the quality of an ambassador, was knighted. This lady having the advantages of an excellent education, joined to an elegant natural genius, became, like many other ladies her contemporaries, very learned. She understood the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin tongues, and was famous for her skill in poetry; a small specimen of which is preserved by sir John Harrington, in his notes to the translation of “Ariosto;” and by Fuller, in his “Worthies.”

, descended from this family, was the eldest son of sir Robert Killigrew, knt. and born at Han worth in Middlesex, 1605. He became a gentlemancommoner of St. John’s college, Oxford, in 1622; where continuing about three years, he travelled abroad, and, after his return, was made governor of Pendennis castle, and of Falmouth haven, in Cornwall. After this he was called to attend Charles I. as one of the gentlemen-ushers of his privy-chamber; in which employment he continued till the breaking out of the civil wnrs, and then had the command given him of one of the two great troops of horse that guarded the king’s person. He was in attendance upon the king when the court resided at Oxford, and was created doctor of civil law in 1642; and, when the king’s affairs were ruined, he suffered as the other cavaliers did, and compounded with the republicans for his estate. Upon the restoration of Charles II. he was made gentleman- usher of the privy chamber again and, on that king’s marriage, was created his first vice-chamberlain, in which station he continued twenty-two years. He died in 1693, and was buried in Westminster-abbey. He was the author of four plays, which were printed at Oxford, 1666, in folio, and have been applauded by men very eminent in poetry; particularly by Waller, who addresses a copy of verses to him upon his altering “Pandora” from a tragedy into a comedy, because not approved on the stage. There is another play ascribed to him, called “The Imperial Tragedy,” 1690, folio. There is also a little poem of his extant, which was set to music by the noted Henry Lawes. Wood says, that after be retired from court, in his declining age, he wrote “The artless midnight Thoughts of a gentleman at court, who for many years built on sand, which every blast of cross fortune has defaced, but now has laid new foundations on the rock of his salvation,” 1684, 8vo, of which the second edition, with additions, was dedicated to Charles II.; and another work entitled “Midnight and daily Thoughts, in prose and verse,” 1694, 8vo.

, brother of the former, was born in 1611, and distinguished also by uncommon natural parts. He was page of honour to Charles I, and groom of the bed-chamber to Charles II, with whom he had suffered many years exile. During his abode beyond sea, he took a view of France, Italy, and Spain; and was honoured by his majesty with the employment of resident at the state of Venice, whither he was sent in Aug. 1651. In this absence from his country he applied his leisure hours to poetry, and the composition of several plays; of which sir John Denham, in a jocular way, takes notice in his poem on our author’s return from his embassy to Venice. Though Deuham mentions but six, our author wrote nine plays in his travels, and two at London; all which were printed, with his picture before them, in one volume folio, at London, 1664. There is, besides these plays of his, “A Letter concerning the possessing and dispossessing of several Nuns in the Nunnery at Tours, in France;” dated Orleans, Dec. the 7th, 1635, and printed in three sheets folio. He died in 1682, and was buried in Westminsterabbey. He had been twice married. He was a man of an uncommon vein of humour, with which he used to divert Charles II.; who, on that account, was fonder of him than of his best ministers, and would give him access to his presence when he denied it to them. It was usually said of him, that, when he attempted to write, he was nothing compared to what he was in conversation; which was just the reverse of Cowley, who shone but little in company, though he excelled so much with his pen. Hence Denbam, who knew them both, has taken occasion thus to characterize their respective excellencies and defects:

, brother of the former, was born in 1612, educated in grammar learning under the celebrated Farnaby, and sent to Christ Church, Oxford, in 1628. In 1638, having taken his degrees in arts, he went into orders, and became a chaplain in the king’s army. In 1642 he was created doctor of divinity; and the same year made chaplain to James duke of York, and prebendary of Westminster. Afterwards he suffered as an adherent in the king’s cause; but, at the restoration, was made almoner to the duke of York, superintendant to the affairs of his chapel, rector of Wheathamstead, in Hertfordshire, and master of the Savoy hospital in Westminster. He wrote, when only seventeen years of age, a tragedy called 41 The Conspiracy,“which was admired by some wits of those times; particularly by Ben Jonson, then living, 4t who gave a testimony of it (says Langbaine) even to be envied,” and by lord Falkland. An imperfect copy of this appearing in 1638, he afterwards caused it to be republished in 1652, with the new title of “Pallantus and Eudora.” He published a volum of sermons, which had been preached at court in 1685, 4to; and also "two or three occasional sermons. The year of his death does not appear.

, a dissenting divine, was born at Wantage in Berkshire, Dec. 1, 1692, and was educated at a private grammar-school in Wantage, under the rev. Mr. Sloper, an excellent scholar, who was also tutor to bishop Butler. At this school, Mr. Kimber made considerable progress in Greek and Latin, after which, turning his thoughts to the ministry, he went to London to complete his knowledge of the languages under professor Ward of Gresham-college, and also to attend the dissenting academy under the rev. John Eames. For some, time after he was admitted into the ministry, he had little encouragement; and having married, he found it necessary to employ his pen for a subsistence. One of his first productions was “The Life of Oliver Cromwell/' 8vo, and soon after he was concerned with Messrs. Bailey, Hodges, and Ridpath, in compiling a” History of England,“4 vols. 8vo, the third and fourth volumes of which were entirely his. A few years afterwards he wrote” The Life of bishop Beveridge,“prefixed to the folio edition of his works, of which he was the editor. In 1724 he was called, in conjunction with Mr. Samuel Acton, to the pastoral charge of Namptwich in Cheshire, but, owing to differences of opinion with his hearers, he was obliged to leave them at the latter end of 1727. On his return to London, he officiated, as morning preacher, or assistant, to Dr. John Kinch, in Old Artillery-lane, and occasionally, at Pinner’s hall, for Dr. Hunt; and was also engaged as a corrector of the press for Mr. John Darby, and others. About the same time he compiled a periodical pamphlet called” The Morning Chronicle,“which subsisted from Jan. 1728 to May 17-32, and was then dropped. In part of this period, he was likewise concerned with Mr. Drew of the Union fire-office, as his assistant, and supported these various labours with a quiet and even temper, and a cheerful mind, though visited with a heavy affliction in his wife’s being deprived of her reason. During the remainder of his life, he was chiefly supported by his firm friend Mr. Charles Akers, an eminent printer in London; In 1740 he wrote an account of the reign of George II. which is added to HowelTs” Medulla Hist. Angl.“and soon afterwards an abridgment of the History of England, in 1 vol. 8vo, 1745. He died in 1758, about which time a volume of his ce Sermons” was printed, with an account of his life, from which the preceding particulars are taken. He had a son Edward, who was a compiler of various works for the booksellers, and died in 1769. Among his compilations, are the Peerages of Scotland and Ireland, the Baronetage of England, in conjunction with R.Johnson, 3 vols; 8vo, a History of England, 10 vols. 8vo, &c.

, a celebrated Spanish rabbi in the twelfth century, son of Joseph, and brother of Moses Kimchi. He lived at Narbonne 1190, was appointed, 1232, arbiter of the dispute between the Spanish and French synagogues respecting the books of Maimonides; acquired great fame by his learning and writings, and died, in a very advanced age, about 1240. His Hebrew works are numerous, and so much valued by the Jews, that they consider no one as learned who has not studied them. The principal are, an excellent Hebrew grammar, entitled “Michlol, i.e. Perfection,” Venice, 1545, 8vo; Leyden, 1631, 12mo. This work has served as a model to all Hebrew grammarians. A book of “Hebrew Roots,” 1555, 8vo. or fol. without date. “Dictionarium Thalmudicum,” Venice, 1506, fol. “Commentaries” on the Psalms, Prophets, and most of the other books in the Old Testament. Kiuichi keeps chiefly to the literal and grammatical sense, and not unfrequently cites Jewish traditions. He discovers much less aversion to the Christians than the other rabbins, and his Commentaries are generally considered as the best which have been written by the Jews. His style is pure, clear, and energetic. Father Janvier translated his Comment on the Psalms into Latin, 1669, 4to, and his arguments against the Christians have been translated by Genebrard, 1566, 8vo.

His first separate publication appeared in 1767, under the title of “An Essay on the English Government;” and his second, after a long interval, in 1780, without his name, “Hymns to the Supreme Being, in imitation of the Eastern Songs.” Of this pleasing publication two editions were printed. In 1784 he circulated, also without his name, “Proposals for establishing, at sea, a Marine School, or seminary for seamen, as a means of improving the plan of the Marine Society,” &c. His object was to fit up a man of war as a marine school. In 1788 he published a large 4to volume, entitled “Morsels of Criticism, tending to illustrate some few passages in the Holy Scriptures upon philosophical principles and an enlarged view of things.” The fate of this work was somewhat singular. The author received sixty copies for presents; and the greater part of the remaining impression, being little called for, was converted into waste paper. Some time after, however, the notice taken of it in that popular poem, “The Pursuits of Literature,” brought it again into notice; a second edition appeared in 8vo, and a second volume of the 4to in 1801. This works abounds in singular opinions: among others, the author attempts to prove that John the Baptist was an angel from heaven, and the same who formerly appeared in the person of Elijah: that there will be a second appearance of Christ upon earth (something like this, however, is held by other writers): that this globe is a kind of comet, which is continually tending towards the sun, and will at length approach so near as to be ignited by the solar rays upon the elementary fluid of fire: and that the place of punishment allotted for wicked men is the centre of the earth, which is the bottomless pit, &c, &c. It is unnecessary to add, that these reveries did not procure Mr. King much reputation as a philosophical commentator on the Scriptures. His next publications indicated the variety of his meditations and pursuits. In 1793 he produced “An Imitation of the Prayer of Abel,” and “Considerations on the Utility of the National Debt.” In 1796 he amused himself and the public with “Remarks concerning Stones said to have fallen from the Clouds, both in these days and in ancient times;” the foundation of which was the surprizing shower of stones said, on the testimony of several persons, to have fallen in Tuscany, June 16, 1796, and investigated in an extraordinary and full detail by the abbate Soldani, professor of mathematics in the university of Sienna. This subject has since employed other pens, but no decisive conclusions have been agreed upon. Mr. King’s next publication, however, belonged to the province in which he was best able to put forth his powers of research “Vestiges of Oxford Castle or, a small fragment of a work intended to be published speedily, on the history of ancient castles, and on the progress of architecture,” 1796, a thin folio. This interesting memoir was accordingly followed by a large history of ancient castles, entitled “Munimenta Antiqua,” of which 3 vols. folio have appeared, and part of a fourth. These volumes, although he maintains some theories which are not much approved, undoubtedly entitle him to the reputation of a learned, able, and industrious antiquary. It was his misfortune, however, to be perpetually deviating into speculations which he was less qualified to establish, yet adhered to them with a pertinacity which involved him in angry controversies. In 1798 he published a pamphlet called “Remarks on the Signs of the Times;” about which other ingenious men were at that time inquiring, and very desirous to trace the history and progress of the French Revolution and war to the records of sacred antiquity; but Mr. King ventured here to assert the genuineness of the second book of Esdras in the Apocrypha. Mr. Gough criticised this work with much freedom and justice in the Gentleman’s Magazine, and Mr. King thought himself insulted. On his adding “A Supplement to his Remarks” in 1799, he met with a more powerful antagonist in bishop Horsley, who published “Critical Disquisitions on Isaiah xviii, in a Letter to Mr. King.” While preparing a fourth volume of his “Mummenta,” Mr. King died, April 16, 1807, and wa buried in the church -yard at Beckenham, where his country-seat was. Mr. King was a man of extensive reading, and considerable learning, and prided himself particularly on intense thinking, which, however, was not always under the regulation of judgment.

, a heraldic and commercial writer, the son of a father of both his names, was born at Lichfield, Dec. 15, 1648, and was educated at the grammarschool of that city, and at the age of fourteen had been taught Greek, Latin* and somewhat of Hebrew. At that age he was recommended by Dr. Hunter, of Lichfield, to sir William Dugdale, then Norroy, who took him into his service, which was very acceptable to his father, who had five other children to provide for; and Dr. Hacket, bishop of Lichfield, had intended to have sent him to the university, had not this opening taken place. He was at this time so small of his age, that when he became clerk to Dugdale, and for two years after, he was unable to mount a horse from the ground. Yet he accompanied that king of arms in his visitations, and tricked the arms of Staffordshire, which though not equal to what he afterwards did$ still remain in the college. He at that time applied himself to the French language, and painting of pedigrees > and within a year or two, painted several for Mr. Dugdale, particularly a large one of Claverin, of Northumberland, and some time after painting and engrossing the grants of arms filled up the greatest part of his time; but Dugdale gave him leave to take with him into the northern counties blank escocheons on vellum, upon which he depicted the arms of those who desired an attestation of them under Dugdale’s hand; and this he was enabled to do* instead of an arms painter, who had usually attended that officer of the college. He shewed uncommon attention to improvement during the time Dugdale visited his whole province, in 1662, and 1666, for he took prospects of the towns, castles, and other remarkable places in the counties through which he passed. In 1667 he passed into the service of lord Hatton, who was a great lover of antiquities, and the particular patron of Dugdale during the civil war; and now employed Mr. King until 1669, when he was dismissed with great promises of future kindness. He then went to Lichfield, where he found his father re-married; and here he supported himself for some time in the humble occupations of teaching writing and arithmetic, painting coaches, signs, and other kinds of work in oil colours, as hatchments, &c. and in instructing the registrar of the dean and chapter, and some other inquisitive persons, to read ancient records. At this time Mr. Chetwynd of Ingestry, invited him to peruse and transcribe his family muniments, which he did in a fair vellum book, tricking the most considerable seals.

At the end of this year, 1669, he became the steward, auditor, and secretary of the lady dowager Gerard, of Gerard’s Bromley, relict of Charles, and mother of Digby, lord Gerard. He resided with her ladyship’s father George Digby of Sandon, in Staffordshire, esq. until August, 1672. This task was somewhat arduous, for his predecessor, Mr. Chaunce, kept all his accounts, and other matters of moment, in characters which he had to decipher; and besides he drew and painted many things for lady Gerard, whilst inher service. From Staffordshire he went to London, where he renewed his acquaintance at the Heralds’ -college, paying a suitable attention to his old master, Dugdale. Here he became known to Hollar, the celebrated engraver. He recommended him to Mr. Ogilvy, to manage his undertakings, who having his majesty’s license to print whatever he composed or translated, kept a press in his house, and at that time was printing sir Peter Leicester’s “Antiquities of Chester.” Mr. King made his first attempt in etching some ancient seals in that work. Giving satisfaction he was employed in etching lome sculpts in Mr. Dugdale’s Esop (not the antiquary), fvhich was reduced from the folio to 8vo size, and several of Ogilvy’s “History of Asia,” vol. I. translated from De Meurs’ impression at Amsterdam. He also assisted in his new “Britannia,” travelling into Essex with the surveyor, Mr. Falgate, a native of that county. They in the middle of the winter, 1672, a very inclement one, took the ichnography of Ipswich, in Suffolk, and Maiden, in Essex, which were afterwards very curiously finished, and sent to those two places. He assisted and superintended the map of London, which Hollar engraved. He contrived and managed a lottery of books, to repay Mr. Ogilvy’s great expences in these concerns, and a lesser one of books for Bristol fair, which turned to good advantage, Mr. King attending there. He then engaged in Ogilvy’s “Book of” Roads," superintending the whole, digesting the notes, directing the engravings, three or four of which he executed with his own hand, which was the first time he attempted handling the graver. Mr. Ogilvy was so sensible of his merit and fidelity, that he treated him with peculiar; attention on all occasions, and allowed him a music-master to teach him to play upon the violin, and offered to renew his place of cosmographer to the king, and put his name in jointly, or in reversion; this he declined, but accepted the offer to undertake, on his own account, the map of Westminster, which he completed in 1675, on the scale of 100 feet to an inch. He employed himself also in engraving the letter-work of various maps. He laid out some of the principal streets of the metropolis, particularly those of Soho; and most of the first building articles, or leases, were drawn up by him. At length his connexions with the heralds procured him to be created Rouge-dragon in 1677, but the fees of this office being small, he found it expedient to continue his employment of engraving and herald-painting. He designed a map of Staffordshire; yet through sir Henry St. George, Norroy, and his old master, Dugdale, Garter, the duties of the office took a good part of his time. Being very useful to these kings at arms, they pressed him to remove to the college, which he did at Lady-day, 1680, Diigdale accommodating him with a chamber, and some other conveniences, and St. George with a kitchen. He assisted St. George in his visitations, as one of his deputies, in 1681 and 1682 and, upon the death of the duke of Norfolk, his successor nominated him registrar in the room of Mr. Devenish, York; although opposed by the college as without a precedent. He was also trusted and consulted about the burial of Charles II. the proclaiming and the coronation of his successor, and took a part in the magnificent publication of the latter ceremony with Mr. Sandford, Lancaster herald. The Revolution soon following, he became extremely useful in the ceremonial of William and Mary’s coronation. Mr. Sandford resigning his tajbard to him^ he became, for three or four months, Lancaster and Rouge-dragon, the patent not passing until-the following July.

, bishop of Chichester in the seventeenth century, was eldest son of the preceding, by Jane, daughter of Mr. Henry Freeman of Staffordshire, and was born at Wornall in Buckinghamshire in January 1591, and educated in grammar learning partly in the free-school at Thame in Oxfordshire, and partly at Westminster-school, from which he was elected a student of Christ church in 1608. On June the 19th, 1611, he took the degree of bachelor of arts and July the 7th, 1614, that of master. He then entered into holy orders, and became an eminent preacher, and chaplain to king James I. He was afterwards made archdeacon of Colchester; residentiary of St. Paul’s, and canon of Christ church. On May the 19th, 1625, he took the degree of doctor of divinity. He was afterwards chaplain to king Charles I. and February the 6th, 1638, was installed in the deanery of Rochester. In 1641 he was advanced to the see of Chichester, to which he was consecrated December 19th of that year. But though he was always esteemed a puritan, and had been promoted to that see in order to please that party; yet upon the breaking out of the civil wars, and the dissolution of episcopacy, he was treated by them with great severity; “nor was he suffered to live quietly at his friend’s house (for some time, at least), when they could discover him.” He lived for the most part with sir Richard Hobart, who had married his sister, at Langley in Buckinghamshire, by whom he was supported. At the restoration he recovered his bishopric. Wood tells us, that “he was esteemed by many persons of his neighbourhood and diocese, the epitome of all honours, virtues, and generous nobleness, and a person never to be forgotten by his tenants and by the poor.” He died October the 1st, 1669, and was interred on the south side of the choir belonging to his cathedral of Chichester, where a monument was erected to him, with an inscription, in which it is said, that he was “antiqua, eaque regia Saxon urn apud Dan monies in Agro Devoniensi prosapia oriundus,” and that he was “natalium splendore illustris, pietate, doctrina & virtutibus illustrior,” &c. He married Anne, daughter of sir William Russel of Strensham in Worcestershire, bart. who after the bishop’s decease married sir Thomas Millington the physician.

He published several works, viz. 1. “Sermons,” printed at different times. 2. “Exposition of the Lord’s Prayer,” 1628, and 1634, 4to. 3. “The Psalms of David, from the new translation of the Bible, turned into Metre, &c.” 165 1, 12mo. 4. “A deep Groan fetched at the Funeral of the incomparable and glorious monarch king Charles J.” 1649, in one sheet. 5. “Poems, Elegies, Paradoxes, Sonnets,” 1657, 8vo. 6. Various Latin and Greek poems, published in several books. 7. There is a letter of his to Mr. Isaac Walton, concerning the three imperfect books of Hooker’s Ecclesiastical Polity; dated Nov. 17, 1664, and prefixed to Walton’s “Life of Hooker.” The merit of his poems, with extracts, has been ably discussed by Headley, Ellis, and Park, as appears by our authorities. He had a brother, John, who became a student of Christ church in 160$, and was afterwards public orator of the university, canon of Christ church in 1624, and the year following doctor of divinity and canon of Windsor, and about that time prebendary of St. Paul’s, and rector of Remenham in Berkshire. He died January 2, 1638-9, and was interred at Christ church in Oxford. He published a single sermon, and one or two Latin orations.

, rector of Chelsea, was born at St. Columb in Cornwall, May 1, 1652. He was educated at Exeter college, Oxford, but took the degree of D. D. at Catherine-hall, Cambridge, where his friend sir William Dawes was master. When first in orders, he had the curacy of Bray, in Berkshire. By his second wife he acquired the patronage of Pertenhall, in Bedfordshire, and was instituted to that rectory in June 1690; but in 1694, exchanged it for Chelsea, the value of which he considerably advanced by letting out the glebe on lives for building. In 1731 he was collated to the prebend of Wighton in York cathedral^ by sir William Dawes, archbishop. He died May 30, 1732, and was buried at Pertenhall. Besides two occasional sermons, he published, 1 “Animadversions on a pamphlet entitled A Letter of advice to the churches of the Nonconformists of the English nation; endeavouring their satisfaction in that point, Who are the true church of England?” 2d edit. 1702, 4to. 2. “The case of John Atherton, bishop of Waterford in Ireland, fairly represented against a partial edition of Dr. Barnard’s relation and sermon at his funeral, &c.” 1716, 8vo. In the appendix are two anonymous letters; but it appears by interlineations in Dr. King’s own hand, that the first was from Dr. Thomas Mill, bishop of Waterford, and the second was to that bishop from the rev. Mr. Alcock, chancellor of Waterford. 3. “Tolando-Pseudologo-mastix, or a currycomb for a lying coxcomb. Being an answer to a late piece of Mr. Toland’s called Hypatia,” Lond. 1721, 8vo. There is also in the British Museum, a small quarto volume in ms. by Dr. King, containing a supplement and remarks on the life of sir Thomas More; a letter on sir Thomas More’s house at Chelsea, and other miscellanies.