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

Enter either the ID of an entry, or one or more words to find. The first match in each paragraph is shown; click on the line of text to see the full paragraph.

Currently only Chalmers’ Biographical Dictionary is indexed, terms are not stemmed, and diacritical marks are retained.

or a bold and free style of etching; which, in general, he drew upon the plate at once, without any, or with very little previous sketch. He worked with such rapidity

, a very celebrated architect and engraver, was a native of Venice, but resident for the greater part of his life at Rome. The time of his hirth is not known here, but it must have been about1711. He was remarkable for a bold and free style of etching; which, in general, he drew upon the plate at once, without any, or with very little previous sketch. He worked with such rapidity and diligence, that the magnitude and number of his plates almost exceed belief; and they are executed with a spirit and genius which are altogether peculiar to hi Ib. The earliest of his works appear to have been published in 1743, and consist of designs invented by himself, in a very grand style; with views of ruins, chiefly the work of imagination, and strongly characterizing the magnificence of his ideas. These are sometimes found in a volume, collected by Bourchard, in 1750: with views of Roman antiquities, not in Rome, among which are several of Pola, in Istria. The dedication to these views is dated 1748. Considering these as forming his first work, we may enumerate the rest from a catalogue print, published by himself many years after. 2. “Antichita Romane,or Roman Antiquities, comprised in 218 plates of atlas paper, commencing by a topographical view of ancient Rome, made out from the fragments of a most curious antique plan of that city, found in the pavement of the temple of Romulus, and now preserved in the Museum at the Capitol. These, with the descriptions in Italian, form four volumes in folio. 3. “Fasti consulares triumphalesque Romanorum, ab urbe condita, usque ad Tiherium Csesarem.” 4. “Del Castello dell' acqua Giulia, e della maniera in cui anticamente si concedevano e distribuivano le acque,” 21 folio plates. 5. “Antichita d'Albano, e di Castel Gandolfo,” 55 plates. 6. “Campus Martins Antique urbis,” with descriptions in Italian and Latin, 54 plates. 7. “Arcbi trionfali antichi, Tempi, ed Anfiteatri, esistenti in Roma, ed in altre parti d'ltalia,” 31. plates. 8. “Tro.fei d'Ottaviano Augusto,” &c. 10 plates. 0. “Delia Magnificenza ed Architettura de' Romani,” 44 plates, with above 200 pages of letter- press, in Italian and Latin. This great work appears to have been occasioned, in great measure, by some dialogues published in London in 1755, but now forgotten here, and entitled, “The Investigator.” These, containing many foolish calumnies against the ancient Romans, had been interpreted to Piranesi, and inflamed his ardent spirit to this mode of vindication. 10. “Architetture diverse,” 27 plates. 11.“Carceri d'inventione,” 16 plates, full of the most wild, but picturesque conceptions. 12. About 130 separate views of Rome, in its present state; in the grandest style of design, and the boldest manner of etching. Besides these, there is also extant, in very few hands (as it was not published, but only given to particular friends), a small work of this author, containing letters of justification to lord Charlemont; in which he assigns the reasons why he did not dedicate his Roman antiquities to that nobleman, as had been intended. Piranesi here appears extremely irritated against his lordship, and his agents, for neglect and ill-treatment; but the most curious part of the work is, that he has taken the pains to etch, in a small quarto size, and with the utmost neatness, yet with all his accustomed freedom, exact copies of the four original frontispieces, in which the name of his intended patron was to hare been immortalized: with views of the inscriptions reengraved as they now stand; as if the first inscriptions had been cut out of the stones, and the new ones inserted on small pieces let into them, as the ancients sometimes practised. In this form they still remain in his frontispieces; a peculiarity which would not be understood without this key. There are also head-pieces and tail-pieces, all full of imagination, and alluding to the matters and persons involved in the dispute. This work is dated in 1757. Piranesi was well known to most of the English artists who Studied at Rome; among others, to Mr. Mylne, the architect of Blackfriars-bridge, with whom he corresponded for several years, and for whom he engraved a fine view of that structure, in its unfinished state; representing, with precision, the parts subservient to its construction; such as the centres of the arches, &c. for the sake of preserving a memorial of them. Some of his works are dedicated to another British architect, Robert Adam; and as Piranesi was an honorary member of the Society of Antiquaries in, London, he always carefully subjoined that title to his name. He was also a member of the academy of the Arcadi, by the name of Salcindio Tiseio. as he has given it in one of his frontispieces, according to the fantastic custom of that society, of giving new names to the persons admitted. All who knew him agree that he was of a fiery and impetuous temper, but full of genius. He left a son, who has been employed in a diplomatic line. The exact time of his death we have not been able to learn; but it is supposed to have happened in or near the year 1780. Pijanesi has been accused, and not without reason, of suffering his imagination to embellish even the designs that were given as real views. He was employed, as an architect, to ornament a part of the priory of Malta, in Rome; in which place his son has erected a statue of him. It is thus mentioned by baron Stolberg, in his Travels: “Here is a fine statue of the architect Piranesi, as large as life, placed there by his son. It is the work of the living artist Angolini; and though it certainly cannot be compared with the best antiques, it still possesses real merit.” His portrait, engraved by Polanzani, in 1750, is in the style of a mutilated statue, and is very spirited. It is prefixed to some of his works.

vus,” a tragedy; his “Courses de Tempe,” a pastoral piece; some odes, about twenty epigrams, and one or two tales, there is very little in the whole collection that

Here lies Piron, who was nothing, not even an academician. He died of the effects of a fail, Jan. 21, 1773. His works have been collected in seven vols. 8vo, and nine 12mo. But it is agreed, that out of the seven, five at least might be spared; since, besides his “Metromanie,” his “Gustavus,” a tragedy; his “Courses de Tempe,” a pastoral piece; some odes, about twenty epigrams, and one or two tales, there is very little in the whole collection that is above mediocrity. His comedies are reckoned better than, his tragedies; and the prefaces to his dramas, though not excellent in point of style, are full of new and agreeable thoughts, with natural and happy turns of wit and expression.

subjects, temporary political satire (against the revolution) the commemoration of local incidents, or allusions to private characters, have none of the requisites

In 1701 he republished his “Dissertationes Medicæ,” with some new ones and dedicated them to Bellini, professor at Pisa, in return to the same compliment, which Bellini had made him, when he published his “O'puscula.” They were printed at Rotterdam in one volume 4to, under this title, “Disputationes Medicac,” of which there are eight. The last edition published in his life- time carne out at Edinburgh, a few months before his death, which happened' Oct. 13, 1713. Afterwards were published, in 1717, his lectures to his scholars, under the title of “Klementa Medicine Physico-Mathematica,” although he had taken great pains to prevent the publication of any thing in that way. He even shews some concern about this in his Dissertation “de Circulatione Sanguinis in animaiibns genitis, et non genitis.” There are editions of his whole works at Venice, 1733, and Leyden, 1737, 4to. In 169, being hindered by sickness from attending the calls of his profession, he amused himself with writing remarks upon sir Robert Sibbald’s “Prodromus Historic Tslaturalis Scotiae,” who had published a treatise ridiculing the new method of applying geometry to physic; in return to which Pitcairne wrote, “Dissertatio de Legibus Histories Naturalis,” and published it, but not anonymously, as has been asserted, in the abovementioned year. Pitcairne likewise used to divert himself sometimes with writing Latin verses of considerable merit, which were collected after his death. The occasion of their appearance was a remark of Peter Burman, in his preface to his edition of Buchanan’s history, on the inconsiderable number of Latin writers, especially in poetry, whom Britain had produced. Ruddirnan on this endeavoured to vindicate his native country from its share in this degrading censure; and with that view published, in 1727, a small volume entitled “Selecta Poemata Archibaldi Pitcairnii et aliorum,” &c. But, says lord Woodhouselee, this very attempt affords a demonstration of the truth of the proposition it was meant to disprove, for the poems of Pitcairne comprise almost all that are of any merit in the volume; and even these, from the nature of their subjects, temporary political satire (against the revolution) the commemoration of local incidents, or allusions to private characters, have none of the requisites to found either a. general or a permanent reputation.

w for February 1774; but, as he had no congeniality of opinion with Pitcairne, either as to religion or politics, there would have been a perpetual war betwixt the

These poems, says the same critic, which have the merit of excellent Latinity, and easy and spirited numbers, must have had a poignant relish in his own age, from the very circumstances which render them little interesting in ours. Lord Hailes once intended to have redeemed them from oblivion by a commentary, a specimen of which he gave in the Edinburgh Magazine and Review for February 1774; but, as he had no congeniality of opinion with Pitcairne, either as to religion or politics, there would have been a perpetual war betwixt the author and his commentator. With respect to his religion, although Dr. Webster tells us he “died a worthy and religious man,” there is reason to think he had not always lived with much religious impression on his mind. He wrote a comedy, called “The Assembly,” printed at London in 1722, which Mr. George Chalmers says is “personal and political, sarcastic and prophane, and never could have been acted on any stage.” He was also the author of an attack on revealed religion, entitled “Epistola Archimedis ad regem Gelonem Albre Graccae reperta, anno aeree Christianas 1685.” This was made the subject of the inaugural oration of the Rev. Thomas Halyburton, professor of divinity in the uniTersity of St. Andrew’s in 1710, and published at Edinburgh in 1714, 4to. The kte Dr. William and Dr. David Pitcairne were related to our author, but not his immediate descendants.

or Pithceus, a French gentleman of eminence in the republic of

, or Pithceus, a French gentleman of eminence in the republic of letters, was descended from an ancient and noble family in Normandy, and born at Troy es Nov. 1, 1539. His taste for literature discovered itself early, and it was cultivated to the utmost by the care of his father. He entered upon his studies at Troyes, and was afterwards sent to Paris, where he became tirst the scholar, and then the friend, of Turnebus. When he had finished his pursuits in languages and the belles letters, he was removed to Bourges, and placed under Cujacius, in order to study the civil law. His father was learned in the law, and has left no inconsiderable specimen of his judgment, in the advice he gave his son, for acquiring this branch of knowledge, which was, not to spend his time and pains upon voluminous and barren commentators, but to confine his reading chiefly to original writers. He made so wonderful a progress, that at seventeen he was able to discuss without preparation the most difficult questions; and his master was not ashamed to own, that he was indebted to him for some useful suggestions. Cujacius removing to Valence, Pithou followed him thither, and continued to profit by his lectures, to 1560. He then returned to Paris, and frequented the bar of the parliament there, for the sake of joining practical forms and usages to theoretic knowledge.

e whole, and in the same lodgings with several protestants, who were all murdered. Whether from fear or conviction, he soon afterwards openly embraced the Catholic

In 1563, being then twenty-four, he gave the first fruits of his studies to the public, in a work entitled “Adversaria Snbseciva;” which was highly applauded by Turnebus, Lipsius, and other learned men, and laid the foundation of that great and extensive fame which he afterwards acquired. A little time after, he was advanced by Henry III. to some considerable post; in which, as well as at the bar, he acquitted himself with high honour. Pithou was a Protestant, and was almost involved in the terrible massacre of Saint Bartholomew in 1572. His escape indeed was very narrow, for he was at Paris during the whole, and in the same lodgings with several protestants, who were all murdered. Whether from fear or conviction, he soon afterwards openly embraced the Catholic faith. Afterwards he attended the duke of Montmoiency into England; and in 1572 was honoured with the degree of LL. D. at Oxford, where he resided for some time; and upon his return, by reason of his great wisdom, amiable manners, and profound knowledge, became a kind of oracle to his countrymen, who consulted him on all important occasions. Nor was his fame less in other parts of the continent; Ferdinand the Great duke of Tuscany not only consulted him, but even submitted to his determination, in a point contrary to his interests. Henry III. and IV. were greatly obliged to him for combating the league in the most intrepid manner, and for many other services, in which he had recourse to his pen, as well as to other means.

ments relative to Fre: ch history. 3. Notes on many classical authors. 4. A volume of smaller works, or “Opuscula,” printed collectively at Paris in 1609, besides many

Pithou died upon his birth-day, November 1, 1596, leaving behind him a wife, whom he had married in 1579, and some children. Thuanus has represented him as the most excellent and accomplished man of the age in which he lived; an opinion in which his learned contemporaries seem agreed. He collected a most valuable library, which was rich in manuscripts, as well as printed books; and he took many precautions to hinder its being dispersed after his death, but in vain. He published a great number of works on various subjects of law, history, and classical literature; and he gave several new and correct editions of ancient writers. He was the first who made the world acquainted with the “Fables of Ptuedrus:” they, together with the name of their author, being utterly unknown, till published from a manuscript, which had been discovered by his brother, Francis Pithou. The principal works of Peter Prthou are, 1. “A Treatise on the Liberties of the Gallican Church,” four volumes folio; the foundation of all that has been written on that subject since. The best edition is Paris, 1731. 2. Editions of many importan' monuments relative to Fre: ch history. 3. Notes on many classical authors. 4. A volume of smaller works, orOpuscula,” printed collectively at Paris in 1609, besides many publications on civil and canon law, some issued separately, and some in conjunction with his brother. It was his intention to hare published a complete body of French historians, but he published only two volumes on the subject, one in octavo, and the other in quarto.

as the truth is, as Wood and others have observed, he never saw them, being but twenty years of age, or little more, when he left the nation: neither was it in his

During the leisure he enjoyed, while confessor to the duchess of Cleves, he employed himself in that work which alone has made him known to posterity, in compiling “The Lives of the Kings, Bishops, Apostolical Men, and Writers of England.” They were comprised in four large volumes; the first containing the lives of the kings; the second, of the bishops; the third, of the apostolical men; and the fourth, of'the writers. The three first are preserved in the archives of the collegiate church of Verdun: the fourth only was published, and that after his decease, at Paris, 1619, and 1623, in 4to, under the title of “J. Pitsei Angli, &c. Relationum Historicarum de Rebus Anglicis tomus primus;” but the running title, and by which it is oftenest quoted, is, “De Illustribus Angliae. Scriptoribus.” It is divided into four parts; the first of which is preliminary matter, “De laudibus Historiae, de Antiquitate Ecclesise Britannicae, de Academiis tarn antiquis Britonum quam recentioribus Anglorum.” The second part contains the lives and characters of three hundred English writers; the third is an “Appendix of some Writers, in alphabetical order, and divided into four Centuries,”- together with “An Index of English Books, written by unknown Authors.” The last part consists of “Fifteen Alphabetical Indexes,” forming a kind of epitome of the whole work. Pits appears to have acted in a very disingenuous manner, especially in the second part of this work; the greater part of which he has taken without any acknowledgment from Bale’s book “De Scriptoribus majoris Britanniae,” while he takes every opportunity to shew his abhorrence both of Bale and his work. He pretends also to follow, and familiarly quotes, Leland’s “Collectanea de Scriptoribus Anglise;” whereas the truth is, as Wood and others have observed, he never saw them, being but twenty years of age, or little more, when he left the nation: neither was it in his power afterwards, if he had been in England, because they were kept in such private hands, that few protestant antiquaries, and none of those of the church of Rome, could see or peruse them. What therefore he pretends to have from Leland, he takes at second-hand from Bale. His work is also full of partiality: for he entirely leaves out Wickliflfe and his followers, together with the Scots and Irish writers, who are for the most part commemorated by Bale; and in their room gives an account of the Roman catholic writers, such especially as had left the kingdom, after the Reformation in queen Elizabeth’s reign, and sheltered themselves at Rome, Douay, Louvain, &c. This, however, is the best and most valuable part of Pits’s work. Pits was a man of abilities and learning. His style is clear, easy, and elegant; but he wants accuracy, and has fallen into many mistakes in his accounts of the British writers. His work, however, will always be thought of use, if it be only that “Historia quoquo modo scripta delectat.

first book of the Jfeneid. This being commended by his friends, he some time afterwards added three or four more; with an advertisement in which he represents himself

, an English poet, was born in 1699 at Blandford, the son of a physician much esteemed. He was, in 1714, received as a scholar into Winchester college, where he was distinguished by exercises of uncommon elegance; and, at his removal to New college in 1719, presented to the electors, as the product of his private and voluntary studies, a complete version of Lucan’s poem, which he did not then know to have been translated by Rowe. This is an instance of early diligence which well deserves to be recorded. The suppression of such a work, recommended by such uncommon circumstances, is to be regretted. It is indeed culpable, to load libraries with superfluous books; but incitements to early excellence are never superfluous, and from this example the danger is not great of many imitations. When he had resided at his college three years, he was presented to the rectory of Pimpern in Dorsetshire, 1722, by his relation, Mr. Pitt of Stratfeildsea in Hampshire; and, resigning his fellowship, continued at Oxford two years longer, till he became M. A. 1724. He probably about this time translated “Vida’s Art of Poetry,” which Tristram’s elegant edition had then made popular. In this translation he distinguished himself, both by the general elegance of his style, and by the skilful adaptation of his numbers to the images expressed; a beauty which Vida has with great ardour enforced and exemplified. He then retired to his living, a place very pleasing by its situation, and therefore likely to excite the imagination of a poet; where he parsed the rest of his life, reverenced for his virtue, and beloved for the softness of his temper, and the easiness of his manners. Before strangers he had something of the scholar’s timidity and diffidence; but, when he became familiar, he was in a very high degree cheerful and entertaining. His general benevolence procured general respect; and he passed a life placid and honourable, neither too great for the kindness of the low, nor too low for the notice of the great. At what time he composed his “Miscellany,” published in 1727, it is not easy nor necessary to know: those poems which have dates appear to have been very early productions. The success of his “Vida” animated him to a higher undertaking; and in his thirtieth year he published a version of the first book of the Jfeneid. This being commended by his friends, he some time afterwards added three or four more; with an advertisement in which he represents himself as translating with great indifference, and with a progress of which himself was hardly conscious. At last, without any further contention with his modesty, or any awe of the name of Dryden, he gave a complete English “Æneid,” which we advise our readers to peruse with that of Dryden. It will be pleasing to have an opportunity of comparing the two best translations that perhaps were ever produced by one nation of the same author. Pitt, engaging as a rival with Dryden, naturally observed his failures and avoided them; and, as he Wrote after Pope’s Iliad, he had an example of an exact, equable, and splendid versification. With these advantages, seconded by great diligence, he might successfully labour particular passages, and escape many errors. If the two versions are compared, perhaps the result will be, that Dryden leads the reader forward by his general vigour and sprightliness, and Pitt often stops him to contemplate the excellence of a single couplet; that Dryden’s faults are forgotten in the hurry of delight, and that Pitt’s beauties are neglected in the languor of a cold and listless perusal; that Pitt pleases the critics, and Dryden the people; that Pitt is quoted, and Dryden read. He did not long enjoy the reputation which this great work deservedly conferred; for he died April 15, 174S, and lies buried under a stone at Blandford, with an inscription, which celebrates his candour, and primitive si nplicity of manners; and says that he lived innocent, and died beloved; an encomium neither slight nor common, though modestly expressed.

nder, and whose age has only added obstinacy to stupidity, is surely the object of either abhorrence or contempt, and deserves not that his grey head should secure

, earl of Chatham, one of the most illustrious statesmen whom this country has produced, was the son of Robert Pitt, esq. of Boconnock in Cornwall, and grandson of Thomas Pitt, governor of Madras, who was purchaser of the celebrated diamond, afterwards called the Regent. The family was originally of Dorsetshire, where it had been long and respectably established. William Pitt was born Nov. 15, 1708, and educated at Eton; whence, in January 1726, he went as a gentleman-commoner to Trinity-college, Oxford. It has been said, that he was not devoid of poetical talents, of which a few specimens have been produced; but they do not amount to much, and of his Latin verses on the death of George the First, it is natural to suspect that the whole merit was not his own. When he quitted the university, Pitt was for a time in the army, and served as a cornet; but his talents leading him more decisively to another field of action, he quitted the life of a soldier for that of a statesman, and became a member of parliament for the borough of Old Sarum, in February 1735. In this situation his abilities were soon distinguished, and he spoke with great eloquence against the Spanish convention in 1738. It was on the occasion of the bill for registring seamen in 1740, which he opposed as arbitrary and unjustifiable, that he is said to have made his celebrated reply to Mr. Horatio Walpole, who had attacked him on account of his youth (though then thirty-two), adding, that the discovery of truth is little promoted by pompous diction and theatrical emotion. Mr. Pitt retorted, with great severity, “I will not undertake to determine whether youth can justly be imputed to any man as a reproach; but I will affirm, that the wretch who, after having seen the consequences of repeated errors, continues still to blunder, and whose age has only added obstinacy to stupidity, is surely the object of either abhorrence or contempt, and deserves not that his grey head should secure him from insults. Much more is he to be abhorred, who, as he has advanced in age, has receded from virtue, and becomes more wicked with less temptation; who prostitutes himself for money which he cannot enjoy; and spends the remains of his life in the ruin of his country.” Something like this Mr. Pitt might have said, but the language is that of Dr. Johnson, who then reported the debates for the Gentleman’s Magazine.

e spirits of the people, and it was conceived that we ought either to dictate a peace as conquerors, or continue the war till our adversaries should be more effectually

No fallen minister ever carried with him more completely the confidence and regret of the nation, over whose councils he had presided: but the king was also popular at this time, and the war being continued by his new ministers with vigour and success, no discontent appeared till after the conclusion of peace. Our triumphs in the West Indies over both France and Spain, had particularly elated the spirits of the people, and it was conceived that we ought either to dictate a peace as conquerors, or continue the war till our adversaries should be more effectually humbled. With these ideas, when the preliminaries for peace were discussed in parliament, Mr. Pitt, though he had been for some time confined by a severe fit of the gout, went down to the House of Commons, and spoke for nearly three hours in the debate. He gave his opinion distinctly upon almost every article in the treaty, and, upon the whole, maintained that it was inadequate to the conquests, and just expectations of the kingdom. Peace was however concluded on the 10th of February, 1763, and Mr. Pitt continued unemployed. He had the magnanimity not to enter into that petulant and undiscriminating plan of opposition, which has so frequently disgraced the ill-judging candidates for power; but maintained his popularity in dignified retirement, and came forward only when great occasions appeared to demand his interference. One of these was the important question of general warrants in 1764; the illegality of which he maintained with all the energy of his genius and eloquence. A search or seizure of papers, without a specific charge alledged, would be, as he justly contended, repugnant to every principle of liberty. The most innocent man could not be secure. “But by the British constitution,” he continued, “every man’s house is his castle. Not that it is surrounded with walls and battlements. It may be a straw-built shed. Every wind of heaven may whistle round it. All the elements of nature may enter it. But the king cannot; the king dare not.

ough not connected with them, very forcibly supported the measure, which was carried; whether wisely or fortunately, is still a matter of dispute. About this time died

When the discontents in America began to appear, on the occasion of the stamp act, Mr. Pitt again found a subject for his exertions. The repeal of that act being proposed in March 1766, by the new ministry of the Rockingham-party, Mr. Pitt, though not connected with them, very forcibly supported the measure, which was carried; whether wisely or fortunately, is still a matter of dispute. About this time died sir William Pynsent, of Burton Pynsent, in Somersetshire, a man of considerable property, who, through mere admiration of Mr. Pitt in his public character, disinherited his own relations, and made him heir to the bulk of his estate. It was certainly a remarkable proof of the very uncommon estimation in which this statesman was held, that a circumstance of this nature should have happened to him at two different periods of his life.

commoner; which, if he attains it, as Mr. Pitt appears to have done, without any improper concession or stipulation, may be considered as the fair reward of past services,

The Rockingham ministry proving unable to maintain its ground, a new administration was formed, and Mr. Pitt, in 1766, was made lord privy seal. At the same time he was created a peer, by the titles of viscount Pitt, of Burton Pynsent, in the county of Somerset, and earl of Chatham, in the county of Kent. Whatever might be his motives for accepting this elevation, he certainly sunk by it in popularity, at least as much as he rose in nominal dignity. The great commoner, as he was sometimes styled, had formed a rank to himself, on the sole basis of his talents and exertions, for which the titular honours, which he was now to participate with many others, could not in the public opinion compensate. Still it must be owned that the high and hereditary distinction of the peerage is a just and honourable object of ambition to a British commoner; which, if he attains it, as Mr. Pitt appears to have done, without any improper concession or stipulation, may be considered as the fair reward of past services, and the most permanent monument of public gratitude. Lord Chatham, whatever might be the cause, did not long continue in office; he resigned the place of lord privy seal on the 2d of November, 1768, and it was the last public employment which he ever accepted. He does not indeed appear to have been desirous of returning to office. He was now sixty; and the gout, by which he had been long afflicted, had become too frequent and violent in its attacks, to allow of close or regular application to business. In the intervals of his disorder he continued occasionally to exert himself, on questions of great magnitude, and was particularly strenuous in 1775, and the ensuing years, against the measures pursued by the ministers in the contest with America. Nevertheless, in all things he maintained his native spirit. When France began to interfere in the contest, he fired with indignation at the insult; and when, in 1778, it was thought necessary, after the repeated misfortunes of the war, to acknowledge the independence of America, he summoned up all the strength that remained within him, to pour out his disapprobation of a measure so inglorious. He did so in a speech of considerable energy, and being answered in the course of the debate by the duke of Richmond, seemed agitated with a desire to reply: but when he attempted to rise, the effort proved too violent for his debilitated constitution, and he sunk, in a kind of fit, into the arms of those who were near him. This extraordinary scene of a great statesman, almost dying in the last exertion of his talents, has been perpetuated by the pencil, and will live for ever in the memory of his countrymen. He did not long survive this effort. This debate happened on the 8th of April, 1778, and he died on the 11th of May ensuing.

ho have been witnesses to the wonders of his eloquence, who have listened to the music of his voice, or trembled at its majesty; who have seen the persuasive gracefulness

The principal outlines of lord Chatham’s character, sagacity, promptitude, and energy, will be perceived in the foregoing narrative. The peculiar powers of his eloquence have been characterized since his death in language which will convey a forcible idea of it to every reader. “They who have been witnesses to the wonders of his eloquence, who have listened to the music of his voice, or trembled at its majesty; who have seen the persuasive gracefulness of his action, or have felt its force; they who have caught the flame of eloquence from his eye, who have rejoiced in the glories of his countenance, or shrunk from his frowns, will remember the resistless power with which he impressed conviction. But to those who have never seen or heard this accomplished orator, the utmost effort of imagination will be necessary, to form a just idea of that combination of excellence, which gave perfection to his eloquence. His elevated aspect, commanding the awe and mute attention of all who beheld him, while a certain grace in his manner, arising from a consciousness of the dignity of his situation, of the solemn scene in which he acted, as well as of his own exalted character, seemed to acknowledge and repay the respect which he received.—This extraordinary personal dignity, supported on the basis of his well-earned fame, at once acquired to his opinions an assent, which is slowly given to the arguments of other men. His assertions rose into proof, his foresight became prophecy.—No clue was necessary to the labyrinth illuminated by his genius. Truth came forth at his bidding, and realised the wish of the philosopher: she was seen, and beloved.”—We have omitted some parts of this spirited character because not written with equal judgment: but the result of the whole is, that while he sought, with indefatigable diligence, the best and purest sources of political information, he had a mind which threw new lights upon every topic, and directed him with more certainty than any adventitious aid. Another account of his extraordinary powers, more concise, but drawn with wonderful spirit, is attributed to the pen of Mr. Wilkes. “He was born an orator, and from nature possessed every outward requisite to bespeak respect, and even awe. A manly figure, with the eagle eye of the famous Condé, fixed your attention, and almost commanded reverence the moment he appeared; and the keen lightnings of his eye spoke the high spirit of his soul, before his lips had pronounced a syllable. There was a kind of fascination in his look when he eyed any one askance. Nothing could withstand the force of that contagion. The fluent Murray has faultered, and even Fox (afterwards lord Holland) shrunk back appalled, from an adversary, ‘ fraught with fire unquenchable,’ if I may borrow the expression of our great Milton. He had not the correctness of language so striking in the great Roman orator (we may add, and in his son), but he had the verba ardentia, the bold glowing words.”—Lord Chesterfield has given a more general picture of his character, in the following words: “Mr. Pitt owed his rise to the most considerable post and power in this kingdom, singly to his own abilities. In him they supplied the want of birth and fortune, which latter, in others too often supply the want of the former. He was a younger brother, of a very new family, and his fortune was only an annuity of one hundred pounds a-year. The army was his original destination, and a cornetcy of horse his first and only commission in it. Thus unassisted by favour or fortune, he had no powerful protector to introduce him into business, and (if I may use that expression) to do the honours of his parts; but their own strength was fully sufficient. His constitution refused him the usual pleasures, and his genius forbid him the idle dissipations of youth; for so early as at the age of sixteen he was the martyr of an hereditary gout. He therefore employed the leisure which that tedious and painful distemper either procured or allowed him, in acquiring a great fund of premature and useful knowledge. Thus by the unaccountable relation of causes and effects, what seemed the greatest misfortune of his life, was perhaps the principal cause of its splendor. His private life was stained by no vice, nor sullied by any meanness. All his sentiments were liberal and elevated. His ruling passion was an unbounded ambition, which, when supported by great abilities, and crowned with great success, makes what the world calls a great man. He was haughty, imperious, impatient of contradiction, and overbearing; qualities which too often accompany, but always clog great ones. He had manners and address, but one might discover through them too great a consciousness of his own superior talents. He was a most agreeable and lively companion in social life, and had such a versatility of wit, that he would adapt it to all sorts of conversation. He had also a most happy turn to poetry, but he seldom indulged, and seldom avowed it. He came young into parliament, and upon that theatre he soon equalled the oldest and the ablest actors. His eloquence was of every kind, and he excelled in the argumentative, as well as in the declamatory way. But his invectives were terrible, and uttered with such energy of diction, and such dignity of action and countenance, that he intimidated those who were the most willing and best able to encounter him. Their arms fell out of their hands, and they shrunk under the ascendant which his genius gained over theirs.” As a proof of this wonderful power, it is related that sir Robert Walpole scarcely heard the sound of his voice in the House of Commons, when he was alarmed and thunder-struck. He told his friends, that he would be glad at any rate, “to muzzle that terrible cornet of horse.” That minister would have promoted his rise in the army, if he would have given up his seat in the house.

treasury, which he declined, either from a consciousness that he was destined for a higher station, or that he discerned the insecurity of the new ministers. Their

, second son of the preceding, and his legitimate successor in political talents and celebrity, was born May 28, 1759. He was educated at home under the immediate eye of his father, who, as he found him very early capable of receiving, imparted to him many of the principles which had guided his own political conduct, and in other respects paid so much attention to his education that at the age of fourteen, he was found fully qualified for the university; and accordingly, was then entered of Pembroke-hall, Cambridge, where he was distinguished alike for the closeness of his application, and for the success of his efforts, in attaining those branches of knowledge to which his studies were particularly directed; nor have many young men of rank passed through the probation of an university with a higher character for morals, abilities, industry, and regularity. He was intended by his father for the bar and the senate, and his education was regulated so as to embrace both these objects. Soon after he quitted the university, he went to the continent, and passed a short time at Rheims, the capital of Champagne. The death of his illustrious father, while he was in his 19th year, could not fail to cast a cloud over the prospects of a younger son, but the foundation was laid of those qualities which would enable him to clear the path to eminence by his own exertions. He had already entered himself a student of Lincoln’s Inn, and as soon as he was of age, in 1780, he was called to the bar, went the western circuit once, and appeared in a few causes as a junior counsel. His success during this short experiment was thought to be such as was amply sufficient to encourage him to pursue his legal career, and to render him almost certain of obtaining a high rank in his profession. A seat in parliament, however, seems to have given his ambition its proper direction, and at once placed him where he was best qualified to shine and to excel. At the general election in 1780, he had been persuaded to offer himself as a candidate to represent the university of Cambridge, but finding that his interest would not be equal to carry the election, he declined the contest, and in the following year was, through the influence of sir James Lowther, returned for the borough of Appleby. This was during the most violent period of political opposition to the American war, to which Mr. Pitt, it may be supposed, had an hereditary aversion. He was also, as most young men are, captivated by certain theories on the subject of political reform, which were to operate as a remedy for all national disasters. Among others of the more practical kind, Mr. Burke had, at the commencement of the session, brought forward his bill for making great retrenchments in the civil list. On this occasion Mr. Pitt, on the 26th of February, 1781, made his first speech in the British senate. The attention of the house was naturally fixed on the son of the illustrious Chatham, but in a few moments the regards of the whole audience were directed to the youthful orator on his own account. Unembarrassed by the novelty of the situation in which he had been so lately placed, he delivered himself with an ease, a grace, a richness of expression, a soundness of judgment, a closeness of argument, and a classical accuracy of language, which not only answered, but exceeded, all the expectations which had been formed of him, and drew the applauses of both parties. During the same and the subsequent session, he occasionally rose to give his sentiments on public affairs, and particularly on parliamentary reform. This he urged with an enthusiasm which he had afterwards occasion to repent; for when more mature consideration of the subject, had convinced him that the expedient was neither safe nor useful, he was considered as an apostate from his early professions. As a public speaker, however, it was soon evident that he was destined to act a high part on the political stage; yet, although he seemed to go along generally with the party in opposition to lord North, he had not otherwise much associated with them, and therefore when, on the dissolution of lord North’s, a new one was formed, at the head of which was the marquis of Rockingham, Mr. Pitt’s name did not appear on the list. Some say he was not invited to take a share; others, that he was offered the place of a lord of the treasury, which he declined, either from a consciousness that he was destined for a higher station, or that he discerned the insecurity of the new ministers. Their first misfortune was the death of the marquis of Rockingham, which occasioned a fatal breach of union between them, respecting the choice of a new head. Of this the earl of Shelburne availed himself, and in July 1782, having, with a part of the former members, been appointed first lord of the treasury, associated Mr. Pitt, who had just completed his 23d year, as chancellor of the exchequer. A general peace with America, France, Spain, &c. soon followed, which was made a ground of censure by a very powerful opposition; and in April 1783, the famous coalition ministry took the places of those whom they had expelled. Mr. Pitt, during his continuance in office, had found little opportunity to distinguish himself, otherwise than as an able defender of the measures of administration, and a keen animadverter upon the principles and conduct of his antagonists; but a circumstance occurred which constitutes the first great æra in his life. This, indeed, was the eventual cause not only of his return to office, but of his possession of a degree of authority with the king, and of popularity with the nation, which has rarely been the lot of any minister, and which he preserved, without interruption, to the end of his life, although his character was supposed to vary in many respects from the opinion that had been formed of it, and although he was never known to stoop to the common tricks of popularity. The coalition administration, of which some notice has been taken in our accounts of Mr. Burke and Mr. Fox, was, in its formation, most revolting to the opinions of the people. Its composition was such as to afford no hopes of future benefit to the nation, and it was therefore narrowly watched as a combination for self-interest. While the public was indulging such suspicions, Mr. Fox introduced his famous bill for the regulation of the affairs of India, the leading provision of which was to vest the whole management of the affairs of the East India company, in seven commissioners named in the act, and to be appointed by the ministry. It was in vain that this was represented as a measure alike beneficial to the company and to the nation; the public considered it as trenching too much on the prerogative, as creating a mass of ministerial influence which would be irresistible, and as rendering the ministry too strong for the crown. Mr. Pitt, who, in this instance, had rather to follow than to guide the public opinion, unfolded the hidden mystery of the vast mass of patronage which this bill would give, painted in the most glowing colours its danger to the crown and people on one hand, and to the company on the other, whose chartered rights were thus forcibly violated. The alarm thus becoming general, although the bill passed the House of Commons by the influence which the ministers still possessed in that assembly, it was rejected in the House of Lords.

iculed and despised by his opponents, as the arrogant assumption of a stripling who owed to accident or intrigue, what a few weeks or months must certainly deprive

His appearance, at the early age of twenty-four in this high character, was as much applauded on the part of the nation at large, as it was ridiculed and despised by his opponents, as the arrogant assumption of a stripling who owed to accident or intrigue, what a few weeks or months must certainly deprive him of. For some time, indeed, all this seemed not very improbable. The adherents of the coalition-ministry, in the House of Commons, had suffered no great diminution, and formed yet so considerable a majority, that when Mr. Pitt introduced his own bill into the House for the regulation of India affairs, it was rejected by 222 against 214. In this state matters remained for some months, during which meetings were held of the leading men of both parties, with a view to a general accommodation; but as Mr. Pitt’s previous resignation was demanded as a sine qua non, he determined to adhere in the utmost extremity to the sovereign by whom he had been called into office, and the people by whom he found himself supported. After many unavailing efforts, therefore, he determined on a step which, had his cause been less popular, might have been fatal to his sovereign as well as to himself. This was a dissolution of parliament, which took place in the month of March 1784; and although during the general election the country was thrown, by the struggles of the parties, into a greater degree of political heat and irritation than ever was known, and although some of his higher opponents greatly embarrassed their estates and families by the most wasteful expenditure, in order to secure the return of their friends, above thirty of the latter, all men of consideration, were thrown out, and the minister was enabled to meet the new parliament with a decided majority, including almost the whole of that class that had the credit of patriotism and independence, but certainly excluding a mass of talent such as few ministers have had to encounter.

this country. It is allowed by his enemies that he did not precipitately rush into war with France, or interfere in the affairs of that country, while the French seemed

The third great æra in Mr. Pitt’s life, and which, beyond all preceding parts of his conduct, will determine his character with posterity, was the French revolution, an event the most momentous in its consequences that modern history records. The influence of this vast convulsion could not be viewed, by the politician and the minister of a great empire, but in a double light, as exerted upon France itself, and upon the neighbouring states. In both cases, Mr. Pitt took up the opinion that it afforded just cause for jealousy, and he was the more strengthened in this opinion from observing the effects which the conduct of the French had already produced in this country. It is allowed by his enemies that he did not precipitately rush into war with France, or interfere in the affairs of that country, while the French seemed to be operating a change by means which were rational; and while their only objects seemed to be a representative government and a limited monarchy. It was not until they had destroyed the freedom of their representatives by the terrifying influence of clubs and parties more powerful than their legalized assemblies, and until they had dragged their helpless sovereign to the scaffold, that he saw the danger that would accrue to every country where such measures should be considered as a precedent. In England, it might have been thought that the enormities which preceded and followed the execution of the French king, would have excited universal abhorrence; that a moral, thinking, and industrious people, prosperous beyond all other nations in arts and commerce, and secure beyond all others in the essentials of liberty, would have found no provocation to imitate the most inhuman barbarities of the darkest ages. It soon, however, appeared that although the majority of the nation was disposed to contemplate what had happened in France, with the abhorrence it was naturally fitted to create, a party was arising, selected indeed from the lower and illiterate orders, but guided by leaders of some knowledge, and of great activity and resolution, who seemed determined on a close imitation of all the licentiousness of France, and whose attacks were at once directed against the throne, the state, and the church. For some time their sentiments were considerably disguised. They affected moderation, and derived too much countenance from those who really were inclined to moderate changes, moderate reforms; and, with no little art, they revived the popular delusions of annual parliaments and universal suffrage; but moderation was neither the characteristic nor the object of this party: and finding themselves for some time unnoticed by government, they began to disdain the protection of their insignificance, and boldly avowed that they did not mean to leave the accomplishment of their projected changes to any of the legal authorities. In imitation of the French clubs, they were to produce the effect by self-created societies that should dictate to parliament, and when parliament was completely overawed, supply its place.

sappeared, and the wild theories that had been propagated from the press either appeared ridiculous, or became obsolete.

Such were the effects which the proceedings in France had already produced in England, among a party, which, if not originally numerous, was fast increasing, when Mr. Pitt thought it necessary to interfere. In taking this step he was accused of precipitation and of severity: the dangers he dreaded were represented as in a great measure imaginary; and the plan he adopted was said to be pregnant with mischief to the freedom of the press. It appeared, however, in consequence of inquiries instituted, that had he exercised a longer forbearance, the greatest of the dangers he apprehended must have followed in regular progress. Forbearance, in the republican language of the day, was “timidity, and the happy consequence of the vigour and spirit of the people.” It was time therefore to set the question at rest by appealing to the nation at large; and Mr. Pitt had no sooner begun the experiment of checking a licentiousness so dangerous and unprovoked, than he was supported by the general mass of the people, who assembled in every county, city, town, and village, to testify their satisfaction with the constitution as then administered, and to offer their lives and fortunes in support of the government under which they had flourished. It has been objected to Mr. Pitt by his opponents that in some instances he followed, rather than produced, public opinion: why this should be an objection with those hold public opinion sacred, we know not. In the present instance, however, it may be allowed as a matter of fact, and it is a fact very honourable to the people of England, that he had, at this crisis, only to anticipate their wishes, and that in consequence of the precautions he took, harsh as they might have been thought at any other time, all the dangers of internal disturbance gradually disappeared, and the wild theories that had been propagated from the press either appeared ridiculous, or became obsolete.

of negociation. The pretended explanations, his lordship added, were insults rather than concessions or apologies; and the motives which had induced his sovereign to

With respect to the origin of the war with France, there was long a controversy turning on the question, whether it might not have been avoided by Great Britain preserving her relations of amity with the republican government of that nation. The party in opposition to Mr. Pitt contended that this was practicable, and the minister therefore was long censured as the cause, and held accountable for all the consequences of that war. The opinion of the minister, however, was, that enough had occurred in France to convince us that no relations of amity could be preserved with a country, which had decreed not only to spread its anarchical principles, but to send its arms to every people that sought its assistance. A negociation, indeed, had been opened between the French minister in this country, and lord Grenville, secretary of state, but was conducted on the part of the former in such a manner as to prove fruitless. The very last propositions offered by the French minister, lord Grenville said, involved new grounds of offence, which would prove a bar to every kind of negociation. The pretended explanations, his lordship added, were insults rather than concessions or apologies; and the motives which had induced his sovereign to prepare for violent extremities, still existed in full force; nor would the preparations be discontinued or omitted, while the French retained that turbulent and aggressive spirit which threatened danger to every nation in Europe. By a subsequent communication in the king’s name, the French minister was ordered to quit the realm within eight days. This mandate was considered by the French as equivalent to a declaration of war; and, as soon as the intelligence reached Paris, the convention declared that the king of Great Britain, and the Stadtholder of the United Provinces, were to be treated as enemies of the republic.

What has been termed the system or the principle of Mr. Pitt in commencing and continuing the war

What has been termed the system or the principle of Mr. Pitt in commencing and continuing the war with France, cannot perhaps be better expressed than in the above language of lord Grenville. Mr. Pitt considered it as our duty to continue it, “while the French retained that turbulent and aggressive spirit which threatened danger to every nation in Europe,” and which at length actually destroyed the independence of every nation in Europe, and ended in an attempt at universal empire, and slavish subjection to the ruler of France. It was Mr. Pitt’s opinion, and the opinion of all who acted with him, of the great majority of parliament and of the people at large, that no peace could be permanent or secure with France until she had returned to her proper station among the nations of Europe, admitted of the independence of other nations, and contented herself with the territories she possessed at the commencement of the revolution. On this principle the war was instituted, and on this principle it was supported at a risk and an expense beyond all precedent, but with a success so inadequate to produce the wished-for result, that when the opposition represented the continuance of it as obstinacy and infatuation, they seemed to speak a language which events fully justified. On our own element, our success was so great as to raise the character of our navy beyond all precedent; under such men as Howe, St. Vincent, Duncan, and Nelson, the navies of France, Spain, and Holland were almost annihilated, while ours had become, humanly speaking, invincible. Mr. Pitt was therefore blamed for not confining himself to a naval war, and his sending troops to join the powers of Europe in league against France, was represented as a species of Quixotism which would soon prove its own absurdity. All this for some years seemed confirmed by events. The French armies not only out-numbered those sent against them, but acquired a military skill absolutely new in their history. So frequent and decisive were their victories that all resistance seemed in vain, and either by valour or treachery they were enabled to dissolve every confederacy formed against them. Still the English minister saw nothing in this to prove his original opinion to be wrong; France, he conceived, must be ruined at last by successes of which she did not know how to make the proper use. With every extension of territory, she carried a portion of tyranny and a system of plunder and destruction, that must one day excite an effectual resistance in the nations which she had deluded by offers of liberty and friendship. Mr. Pitt and his supporters, therefore, persisted in the opinion that France must at last yield to some confederacy or other; and when the state of Europe was such as to render it unwise to send English troops to join the confederates, he conceived that no better use could be made of the annual supplies than to subsidize the powers that were still willing to take the field. He even determined to continue the struggle when, in 1800, Bonaparte, the most successful of the French generals, had assumed the sovereign power, under the name of consul, and addressed a letter to our king intimating a desire for peace. The answer of our minister was, that it would be useless to negociate while the French seemed to cherish those principles which had involved Europe in a long and destructive war. And although he gave his assent to the experiment made by Mr. Addington in 1801, to conclude a peace with the French government, he soon had reason to revert to his former sentiments, and when recalled into office in 1804, again exerted all the vigour of his character to render the contest successful.

elder sister, for whom he had manifested the sincerest affection, he said, “I could wish a thousand or fifteen hundred a-year to be given them; if the public should

He did not, however, live to witness that glorious and wonderful termination which was at last brought about by a continuance of the same system he all along pursued, and which finally ended in the conquest of France, the annihilation of her armies, and the banishment of her ruler. The last event of importance in Mr. Pitt’s life-time was the fatal battle of Austerlitz, and he was at this time in a state of health ill calculated to meet this stroke. He had, from an early period of life, given indications of inheriting his father’s gouty constitution, with his talents, and it had been thought necessary to make the liberal use of wine a part of his ordinary regimen, a stimulant which, added to the cares and exertions of office during his long and momentous administration, brought on a premature exhaustion of the vital powers. In December 1805, he was recommended to go to Bath, but the change afforded him no permanent relief. On the 11th of January he returned to his seat at Putney, in so debilitated a state, as to require four days for the performance of the journey. The physicians, even yet, saw no danger, and they said there was no disease, but great weakness, in consequence of an attack of the gout. On the following Sunday he appeared better, and entered upon some points of public business with his colleagues in office: the subject was supposed to relate to the dissolution of the new confederacy, by the peace of Presburgh, which greatly agitated him. On the 17th, at a consultation of his physicians, it was agreed, that though it was not advisable he should attend to business for the next two months, yet there was hope he would be able to take a part in the House of Commons in the course of the winter. On the 20th, however, he grew much worse, and his medical friends now saw that he was in the most imminent danger, and that, probably, he had not many hours to live. The bishop of Lincoln, who never left him during his illness, informed him of the opinion now entertained by sir Walter Farquhar, and requested to administer to him the consolations of religion. Mr. Pitt asked sir Walter, who stood near his bed, “How long do you think I have to live?” The physician answered that he could not say, at the same time he expressed a faint hope of his recovery. A half smile on the patient’s countenance shewed that he placed this language to its true account. In answer to the bishop’s request to pray with him, Mr. Pitt replied, “I fear I have, like too many other men, neglected prayer too much, to have any ground for hope that it can be efficacious on a death-bed—but,” making an effort to rise as he spoke, “I throw myself entirely on the mercy of God.” The bishop then read the prayers, and Mr. Pitt appeared to join in them with a calm and humble piety. He desired that the arrangement of his papers and the settlement of his affairs might be left to his brother and the bishop of Lincoln. Adverting to his nieces, the daughters of earl Stanhope by his elder sister, for whom he had manifested the sincerest affection, he said, “I could wish a thousand or fifteen hundred a-year to be given them; if the public should think my long services deserving of it.” He expressed also much anxiety respecting major Stanhope, that youthful hero, who fell a sacrifice to his valour at Corunna, in company with his friend and patron, general sir John Moore, and his brother, who was also at Corunna at the same time, and who has been engaged in all the great battles in the peninsula, and more than once severely wounded in his country’s service. Mr. Pitt died about four o'clock in the morning of the 23d of January 1806, in the 47th year of his age. A public funeral was decreed to his honour by parliament, and 40,000l. to pay those debts which he had incurred in his country’s service. Public monuments have been since erected to his memory in Westminster-Abbey, in the Guildhall of the city of London, and by many public bodies in different parts of the kingdom.

Mr. Pitt possessed no particular advantages of person or physiognomy, but as a speaker he was thought to be without a

Mr. Pitt possessed no particular advantages of person or physiognomy, but as a speaker he was thought to be without a rival; such was the happy choice of his words, the judicious arrangement of his subject, and the fascinating effect of a perennial eloquence, that his wonderful powers were acknowledged even by those who happened to be prepossessed against his arguments. In his financial speeches he manifested a perspicuity, eloquence, and talent, altogether wonderful; which carried the audience along with him in every arithmetical statement, left no calculation obscure or ambiguous, and impressed the House, at its close, with tumultuous admiration. When employed, say his opponents, in a good cause, he was irresistible; and in a bad one he could dazzle the judgment, lead the imagination captive, and seduce the heart, even while the mind remained firm and unconvinced. Yet they allow that although ambition and the love of power were his ruling passions, his mind was elevated above the meanness of avarice. His personal integrity was unimpeached, and so far was he from making use of his opportunities to acquire wealth, that he died involved in debts, which negligence, and the demands of his public station, rather than extravagance, had obliged him to contract; for his tastes were simple, and he does not appear to have had a fondness for splendour or parade. His private character has been drawn by a friend (the right hon. George Rose), and it corresponds perfectly with other accounts that we have had from those much in his confidence, and who were frequently in his company at times when the man and not the minister was displayed in all its native colours: “With a manner somewhat reserved and distant in what might be termed his public deportment, no man was ever better qualified to gain, or more successful in fixing, the attachment of his friends, than Mr. Pitt. They saw all the powerful energies of his character softened into the most perfect complacency and sweetness of disposition in the circles of private life, the pleasures of which no one more cheerfully enjoyed, or more agreeably promoted, when the paramount duties he conceived himself to owe the public, admitted of his mixing in them. That indignant severity with which he met and subdued what he considered unfounded opposition; that keenness of sarcasm with which he expelled and withered, as it might be said, the powers of most of his assailants in debate, were exchanged in the society of his intimate friends for a kindness of heart, a gentleness of demeanour, and a playfulness of good humour, which no one ever witnessed without interest, or participated without delight.

was likewise made by that council clerk of the ceremonies, abbreviator, and one of the duodecemviri, or twelve men, an office of great importance. He was employed in

, whose name was Æneas Sylvius Piccolomini, was born in 1405, at Corsignano in Sienna, where his father lived in exile. He was educated at the grammar-school of that place; but his parents being in low circumstances, he was obliged, in his early years, to submit to many servile employments. In 1423, by the assistance of his friends, he was enabled to go to the university of Sienna, where he applied himself to his studies with great success, and in a short time published several pieces in the Latin and Tuscan languages. In 1431 he attended cardinal Dominic Capranica to the council of Basil as his secretary. He was likewise in the same capacity with cardinal Albergoti, who sent him to Scotland to mediate a peace betwixt the English and Scots; and he was in that country when king James I. was murdered. Upon his return from Scotland, he was made secretary to the council of Basil, which he defended against the authority of the popes, both by his speeches and writings, particularly in a dialogue and epistles which he wrote to the rector and university of Cologn. He was likewise made by that council clerk of the ceremonies, abbreviator, and one of the duodecemviri, or twelve men, an office of great importance. He was employed in several embassies; once to Trent, another time to Frankfort, twice to Constance, and as often to Savoy, and thrice to Strasburg, where he had an intrigue with a lady, by whom he had a son: he has given an account of this affair in a letter to his father, in which he endeavours to vindicate himself with much indecent buffoonery. In 1439 he was employed in the service of pope Felix; and being soon after sent ambassador to the emperor Frederic, he was crowned by him with the poetic laurel, and ranked amongst his friends. In 1442 he was sent for from Basil by the emperor, who appointed him secretary to the empire, and raised him to the senatorial order. He could not at first be prevailed on to condemn the council of Basil, nor to go over absolutely to Eugenius’s party, but remained neuter. However, when the emperor Frederic began to favour Eugenius, Æneas likewise changed his opinion gradually. He afterwards represented the emperor in the diet of Nuremberg, when they were consulting about methods to put an end to the schism, and was sent ambassador to Eugenius: at the persuasion of Thomas Sarzanus, the apostolical legate in Germany, he submitted to Eugenius entirely, and made the following speech to his holiness, as related by John Gobelin, in his Commentaries of the life of Pius II. “Most holy father (said he), before I declare the emperor’s commission, give me leave to say one word concerning myself. I do not question but you have heard a great many things which are not to my advantage. They ought not to have been mentioned to you; but I must confess, that my accusers have reported nothing but what is true. I own I have said, and done, and written, at Basil, many things against your interests; it is impossible to deny it: yet all this has been done not with a design to injure you, but to serve the church. I have been in an error, without question; but I have been in just the same circumstances with many great men, as particularly with Julian cardinal of St. Angelo, with Nicholas archbishop of Palermo, with Lewis du Pont (Pontanus) the secretary of the holy see; men who are esteemed the greatest luminaries in the law, and doctors of the truth; to omit mentioning the universities and colleges which are generally against you. Who would not have erred with persons of their character and merit? It is true, that when I discovered the error of those at Basil, I did not at first go over to you, as the greatest part did; but being afraid of falling from one error to another, and by avoiding Charybdis, as the proverb expresses it, to run upon Scylla, I joined myself, after a long deliberation and conflict within myself, to those who thought proper to continue in a state of neutrality. I lived three years in the emperor’s court in this situation of mind, where having an opportunity of hearing constantly the disputes between those of Basil and your legates, I was convinced that the truth was on your side: it was upon this motive that, when the emperor thought fit to send me to your clemency, I accepted the opportunity with the utmost satisfaction, in hopes that I should be so happy as to gain your favour again: I throw myself therefore at your feet; and since I sinned out of ignorance, I entreat you to grant me your pardon. After which I shall open to you the emperor’s intentions.” This was the prelude to the famous retraction which Æneas Sylvius made afterwards. The pope pardoned every thing that was past; and in a short time made him his secretary, without obliging him to quit the post which he had with the emperor.

are men (says he), and we have erred as men; we do not deny, but that many things which we have said or written, may justly be condemned: we have been seduced, like

Upon the decease of pope Eugenius, Æneas was chosen by the cardinals to preside in the conclave till another pope should be elected. He was made bishop of Trieste by pope Nicholas, and went again into Germany, where he was appointed counsellor to the emperor, and had the direction of all the important affairs of the empire. Four years after he was made archbishop of Sienna; and in 1452 he attended Frederic to Rome, when he went to receive the imperial crown. Æneas, upon his return, was named legate of Bohemia and Austria. About 1456, being sent by the emperor into Italy, to treat with pope Callixtus III. about a war with the Turks, he was made a cardinal. Upon the decease of Callixtus, in 1458 he was elected pope by the name of Pius II. After his promotion to the papal chair he published a bull, retracting all he had written in defence of the council of Basil, with an apology which shows how little he was influenced by principle: “We are men (says he), and we have erred as men; we do not deny, but that many things which we have said or written, may justly be condemned: we have been seduced, like Paul, and have persecuted the church of God through ignorance; we now follow St. Austin’s example, who, having suffered several erroneous sentiments to escape him in his writings, retracted them; we do just the same thing: we ingenuously confess our ignorance, being apprehensive lest what we have written in our youth should occasion some error, which may prejudice the holy see. For if it is suitable to any person’s character to maintain the eminence and glory of the first throne of the church, it is certainly so to ours, whom the merciful God, out of pure goodness, has raised to the dignity of vicegerent of Christ, without any merit on our part. For all these reasons, we exhort you and advise you in the Lord, not to pay any regard to those writings, which injure in any manner the authority of the apostolic see, and assert opinions which the holy Roman church does not receive. If you find any thing contrary to this in our dialogues and letters, or in any other of our works, despise such notions, reject them, follow what we maintain now; believe what I assert now I am in years, rather than what I said when I was young: regard a pope rather than a private man; in short, reject Æneas Sylvius, and receive Pius II.

atholic writers are profuse in their praises of this pope, whose character, however, whether private or public, will not bear the strictest scrutiny. His secretary,

Pius, in the latter part of his pontificate, made great preparations against the Turks, for which purpose he summoned the assistance of the several princes in Europe; and having raised a considerable number of troops, he went to Ancona to see them embarked; where he was seized with a fever, and died the 14th of August, 1464, in the fifty-­ninth year of his age, and the seventh of his pontificate. His body was carried to Rome, and interred in the Vatican. The Roman catholic writers are profuse in their praises of this pope, whose character, however, whether private or public, will not bear the strictest scrutiny. His secretary, John Gobelin, published a history of his life, which is supposed to have been written by this pope himself: it was printed at Rome in quarto in 1584 and 1589 and at Francfort in folio in 1614. We have an edition of Æneas Sylvius’s works, printed at Basil, in folio, in 1551. They consist of Memoirs of the Council of Bâle; The History of the Bohemians from their origin till A. D. 1458; Cosmography, in two books; the History of Frederick III. whose vice-chancellor he was; a Treatise on the education of children; a Poem on the Passion of Jesus Christ; a collection of 482 Letters; Historia rerum ubicunque gestarum; the first part only of which was published at Venice in 1477, fol. Euryalus and Lucretia, a romance. A collection of all these, with his life, was also published at Helmstadt in 1700, fol. He was, notwithstanding the applauses of the catholics, a man of great ambition, and great duplicity. He has been praised for his wise and witty sayings, but he was also famous for sayings of a very different description. He indulged himself, respecting the reformers, in a rancour of language which must be offensive to every sober Christian; and his letters show that he indulged great licence in point of morals. Mr. Gilpin, after selecting some striking proofs of this, says, “Such is the testimony which Æneas Sylvius hath given us of himself. It may serve to invalidate what he hath said of others; as it seems entirely to show that his censures are founded upon a mere difference of opinion, without any regard to practice, which is one of the characteristics of bigotry. They who are not acquainted with the history of this writer will be surprised to hear that the man of whom we have this authentic character, was not only a pope, but is acknowledged by the generality of popish writers, as one of the most respectable of all the Roman pontiffs.

dious additions to the reproachful scenes acted by the Spaniards in America, as nothing can palliate or obliterate. Pizarro, favoured by the distracted state of Peru,

, the conqueror of Peru, celebrated rather for his abilities than for his virtues, his glory being tarnished by the cruelties which he practised towards those whom he had conquered, was the illegitimate son of a gentleman, by a very low woman, and apparently destined by his ungenerous parent not to rise above the condition of his mother, being put to the mean employment of keeping hogs. The genius of young Pizarro disdained this low occupation. He enlisted as a soldier, served some time in Italy, and then embarked for America, which offered at that period a strong allurement to every active adventurer. Distinguished by his utter disdain of every hardship and danger, he was soon regarded, though so illiterate that he was unable to read, as a man formed for command; and being settled in Panama, where the Spanish emigrants had found their sanguine expectations wholly disappointed, he united in 1524 with Diego de Almagro, another military adventurer, and Hernando Lucque, a priest, to prosecute discoveries to the eastward of that settlement. This attempt had frequently been made, but had failed through the inability of the persons concerned in it; it had now fallen into such hands as were calculated to make it successful, and their confederacy was sanctioned by the governor of Panama. The enterprise was begun in a very humble manner. Pizarro set sail with a single vessel, and, from universal ignorance of the climate, at the very worst season of the year, in November, when the periodical winds were precisely against his course. He had no success, nor was his colleague Almagro, who followed, more fortunate. After undergoing extreme hardships, and obtaining only a glimpse of a better country, the utmost they could do was to establish themselves in an island near the coast. Nothing could deter Pizarro from his enterprise; the refusal of further sanction from the governor, the desertion of all his associates, except thirteen, all was in vain. He remained with his small band, till, in spite of all obstacles, they obtained another vessel, with some reinforcements. They set sail again in 1526, and on the twentieth day after their departure, discovered the fertile coast of Peru. They were yet too weak to attempt the invasion of an empire so populous, and Pizarro contented himself with carrying back, by means of an amicable intercourse, such specimens of the wealth and civilization of the country as might invite others to accede to the enterprise. Unable to bring the governor of Panama to adopt his views, he returned to Spain, and explaining to that court the magnitude of the object, obtained every grant of authority he could wish, but no other assistance; and being left to his own resources, could have effected nothing had he not been assisted with money by Cortez, just then returned from Mexico. It was February 1531, before he and his associates were again able to sail from Panama on their great undertaking; and then their whole armament consisted only of three small vessels and 180 soldiers, thirty-six of whom were horsemen. When they landed in Peru, as they had the imprudence to attack the natives, instead of conciliating them, they were at first exposed to famine, and several other calamities. Pizarro, however, had the good fortune to enter Peru when the forces of the empire were divided by an obstinate civil war between Huascar the legitimate monarch, and Atahualpa (commonly called Atabalipa), his half brother. By degrees understanding the state of the country, Pizarro engaged to be the ally of Atahualpa, and under that pretence was permitted to penetrate unmolested to Caxamalca, twelve days’ journey within the country. He was received pacifically and with state, as the ambassador of a great monarch but, perfidiously taking advantage of the unsuspecting good faith of Atahualpa, he made a sudden attack, and took him prisoner. The exaction of an immense ransom, the division of which served to invite new invaders; the disgraceful breach of faith by which the king was kept a prisoner after his ransom was paid; and the detestable murder of him, a short time after, under the infamous mockery of a trial; with the insults superadded by bigotry, to make him die a Christian, without being able to comprehend that faith; all contribute to accumulate disgrace upon the head of the treacherous and unfeeling conqueror, and form such odious additions to the reproachful scenes acted by the Spaniards in America, as nothing can palliate or obliterate. Pizarro, favoured by the distracted state of Peru, which now increased, though Huascar had been put to death by order of his brother, and reinforced by more soldiers from Spain, proceeded in his conquests, and on Jan. 18, 1535, laid the foundation of Lima, called by him and his countrymen Ciudad de los Reyes. In 1537 he found a new enemy in his original associate Almagro, who claiming Cuzco, the ancient capital of Peru, as belonging to his jurisdiction, got possession of it. This, and other advantages gained by him, at once distressed and roused Pizarro. They came to an engagement in 1538, in which Almagro was defeated and taken prisoner; and, after an interval of confinement, was tried and executed. This was the last of the successes of Pizarro; the son and friends of Almagro conspired against him, and on June 26, 1541, he was assassinated by them in his palace, making a most resolute defence, well worthy of his long-tried courage. He was at this time advanced in years, though his exact age is not known. The glory he justly acquired by military talents, courage, and sagacity, would have placed him in the rank of heroes, had not his character been disgraced by the indelible stains of perfidy and cruelty.

2 tom. The first contains a treatise “On Types;” treatises on “The imputation of Adam’s first Sin,” or, “The order of the Divine Decrees, and on Freewill,” with an

, a learned protestant minister, and celebrated professor of divinity at Saumur, was descended from a noble and ancient family, and born in 1596. He gained great credit by his writings against the Socinians, but held a singular opinion concerning the imputation of Adam’s sin, which was condemned in a French synod. He died August 7, 1655, at Saumur, aged fifty-nine. His works were reprinted at Franeker, 1699, and 1703, 4to, 2 tom. The first contains a treatise “On Types;” treatises on “The imputation of Adam’s first Sin,or, “The order of the Divine Decrees, and on Freewill,” with an “Abridgment of Theology:” the second volume contains his “Disputes against the Socinians,” the most important part of his works. He also wrote “An Examination of the arguments for and against the Sacrifice of the Mass,” 8vo.

Sujets de Morale,” all in 12mo. 14. “De Insanabili Edclesia Romana, Scepticismo, Dissertatio,” 1686, or 1696, 4to. 15. “De l'Autorite des Sens contre la Transubstantiation,”

, a protestant minister of great eminence, was born at Pontac in Berne, Jan. 19, 1639; and his father, who was a minister, trained him with the greatest attention and care. From 1660, he exercised the ministry in France; but, after the revocation of the edict of Nantz in 1685, he retired to Denmark, where he continued till the death of the queen in 1711; for that princess, apprised of his gr,eat merit, kept him near her. From Denmark he passed to Holland, and fixed himself first at the Hague then removed to Utrecht, where he died April 25, 1718, aged seventy-nine. He was the author of many works upon piety and morality, which are reckoned excellent in their kind; and of some of the polemic kind, against the church of Rome, and particularly against Bayle’s sceptical works. Among these we may enumerate, 1. “Nouveaux Essais de Morale,” 6 vols. 12mo. 2. “Traité de l'Orgueil,” the best edition of which is 1699, 3. “Traité de la Conscience.” 4. “Traité de la Restitution.” 5. “La Communion deVote,” the best edition of which is that of 1699. 6. “Traité des bonnes CEuvres en general.” 7, “Traité du Serment” 8. “Divers Traités sur des Matieres de Conscience.” 9. “La Mort des Justes.” 10. “Traité de l'Aumône.” 11. “Traité des Jeux de Hazard.” 12. “La Morale Chretien abregee,1701. 13. “Reflexions Chretiennes sur divers Sujets de Morale,” all in 12mo. 14. “De Insanabili Edclesia Romana, Scepticismo, Dissertatio,1686, or 1696, 4to. 15. “De l'Autorite des Sens contre la Transubstantiation,” 12mo. 16. “Traité de la Foi divine,” 4 vols. 4to. 17. “Dissertation sur divers Sujets de Theologie et de Morale,” 12mo, &c. Some of the above have been published in English, particularly the “Treatise on Conscience,” and that on the “Death of the Just.

our decree they shall all go hence, whithersoever they please I am pope, and have a right to ratify or cancel the acts of others at pleasure.” These abbreviators,

, so called, a learned Italian, and author of a “History of the Popes,” was born in 1421 at Piadena, in Latin Platina, a village between Cremona and Mantua; whence he took the name by which he is generally known. He first embraced a military life, which he followed for a considerable time but afterwards devoted himself to literature, and made a considerable progress in it. He went to Rome under Calixtus III. who was made pope in 1455 and procuring an introduction to cardinal Bessarion, he obtained some small benefices of pope Pius II. who succeeded Calixtus in 1458, and afterwards was appointed to an office which Pius II. created, called the college of apostolical abbreviators. But when Paul II. sue-‘ ceeded Pius in 1464, Platina’ s affairs took a very unfavourable turn. Paul hated him because he was the favourite of fris predecessor Pius, and removed all the abbreviators from their employments, by abolishing their places, notwithstanding some had purchased them with great sums of money. On this Platina ventured to complain to the pope, and most humbly besought him to order their cause to be judged by the auditors of the Rota. The pope was offended at the liberty, and gave him a very haughty repulse “Is it thus,” said he, looking at him sternly, “is it thus, that you summon us before your judges, as if you knew riot that all laws were centered in our breast Such is our decree they shall all go hence, whithersoever they please I am pope, and have a right to ratify or cancel the acts of others at pleasure.” These abbreviators, thus divested of their employments, used their utmost endeavours, for some days, to obtain audience of the pope, but were repulsed with contempt. Upon this, Platina wrote to him in bolder language “If you had a right to dispossess us, without a hearing, of the employments we lawfully purchased; we, on the other side, may surely be permitted to complain of the injustice we suffer, and the ignominy with which we are branded. As you have repulsed us so contumeliousjy, we will go to all the courts of princes, and intreat them to call a council; whose principal business shall be, to oblige you to shew cause, why you have divested us of our lawful possessions.” This letter being considered as an act of rebellion, the writer was imprisoned, and endured great hardships. At the end of four months he had his liberty, with orders not to leave Rome, and continued in quiet for some time; but afterwards, being suspected of a plot, was again imprisoned, and, with many others, put to the rack. The plot being found imaginary, the charge was turned to heresy, which also came to nothing; and Platina was set at liberty some time after. The pope then flattered him with a prospect of preferment, but died before he could perform his promises, if ever he meant to do so. On the accession, however, of Sixtus IV. to the pontificate, he recompensed Platina in some measure by appointing him in 1475, keeper of the Vatican library, which was established by this pope. It was a place of moderate income then, but was highly acceptable to Platina, who enjoyed it with great contentment until 1481, when he was snatched away by the plague. He bequeathed to Pomponius Laetus the house which he built on the Mons Quirinalis, with the laurel grove, out of which the poetical crowns were taken. He was the author of several works, the most considerable of which is, “De Vitis ac Gestis Summorum Pontificumor, History of the Popes from St. Peter to Sixtus IV. to whom he dedicated it. This work is written with an elegance of style, and discovers powers of research and discrimination which were then unknown in biographical works. He seems always desirous of stating the truth, and does this with as much boldness as could be expected in that age. The best proof of this, perhaps, is that all the editions after 1500 were mutilated by the licensers of the press. The Account he gives of his sufferings under Paul II. has been objected to him as a breach of the impartiality to be observed by a historian but it was at the same time no inconsiderable proof of his courage. This work was first printed at Venice in 1479, folio, and reprinted once or twice before 1500. Platina wrote also, 2. “A History of Mantua,” in Latin, which was first published by Lambecius, with notes, at Vienna, 1675, in 4to. 3. “De Naturis rerum.” 4. “Epistolae ad diversos.” 5. “De honesta voluptate et valetutiine.” 6. “De falso et vero bono.” 7. “Contra amores.” 8. “De vera nobilitate.” 9. “De optimo cive.” 10.“Panegyricus in Bessarionem.” 11. “Oratio ad Paulum II.” 12. “De pace Italiae componenda et bello Turcico indicendo.” 13. “De flosculis lingua? Latin.” Sannazarius wrote an humorous epigram on the treatise “de honesta voluptate,” including directions for the kitchen, de Obsoniis, which Mr. Gresswell has. thus translated:

to Solon. The time of his birth is commonly placed in the first year of the eighty-eighth olympiad, or B.C. 428; but Brucker thinks, it may perhaps be more accurately

, the most illustrious of the Greek philosophers, and whose sect outlived every other, was by descent an Athenian, but born in the island of Ægina, then subject to Athens. His origin is traced back, on his father Aristo’s side, to Codrus; and on that of his mother Pericthiohe, through five generations, to Solon. The time of his birth is commonly placed in the first year of the eighty-eighth olympiad, or B.C. 428; but Brucker thinks, it may perhaps be more accurately fixed in the third year of the eighty-seventh olympiad, or B. C. 430. He gave early indications of an extensive and original genius, and was instructed in the rudiments of letters by the grammarian Dionysius, and trained in athletic exercises by Aristo of Argos. He applied also with great diligence to the arts of painting and poetry, and produced an epic poem, which he had the wisdom afterwards, upon comparing it with Homer, to commit to the flames. At the age of twenty years, he composed a dramatic piece, which was about to be performed on the theatre, but the day before the intended exhibition, he happened to hear a discourse of Socrates, which induced him to withdraw the piece, and relinquish the muses for the study of philosophy. Accordingly he became a regular pupil of Socrates for eight years, and although he sometimes mixed foreign tenets with those of his master, always preserved a strong attachment to him, and attended him at his trial. During the imprisonment also of that celebrated philosopher, Plato had an opportunity of hearing his sentiments on the immortality of the soul, the substance of which he inserted in his beautiful dialogue entitled “Phajdo,” along with some of his own peculiar opinions. On the death of Socrates, he retired, with other friends of Socrates, to Megara, where they were hospitably entertained by Euclid, who taught Plato the art of reasoning, and probably increased his fondness for disputation.

een the Mosaic and Platonic doctrines, that historian thinks that either the agreement is imaginary, or it consists in such particulars as might be easily discovered

Desirous of making himself master of all the wisdom and learning which the age could furnish, Plato commenced his travels with visiting that part of Italy, called Magna Græcia, where he was instructed in all the mysteries of the Pythagorean system, the subtleties of which he afterwards too freely blended with the more simple doctrine of Socrates. He next visited Theodorus of Gyrene, and when under this master he found himself sufficiently instructed in the elements of mathematics, he determined to study astronomy, and other sciences, in Egypt, and that he might travel with safety, he assumed the character of a merchant. Wherever he came, he obtained information from the Egyptian priests concerning their astronomical observations and calculations; and it has been asserted, that Plato acquired in Egypt his opinions concerning the origin of the world, and learned the doctrines of transmigration, and the immortality of the soul: but it is more probable that he learned the latter doctrine from Socrates, and the former from Pythagoras. Nor, according to Brucker, is there more reason for thinking that he learned in Egypt, the doctrine of the Hebrews, and enriched his system from the sacred Scriptures, although the contrary has been maintained by several eminent Jewish and Christian writers, and was commonly received by the Christian fathers. As to the supposed agreement between the Mosaic and Platonic doctrines, that historian thinks that either the agreement is imaginary, or it consists in such particulars as might be easily discovered by the light of reason. After learning what distant countries could teach, Plato returned to Italy, to the Pythagorean school at Tarentum, where he endeavoured to improve his own system, by a mixture of the Pythagorean, as then taught by Archytas, TimsEus, and others. And afterwards, when he visited Sicily, he retained such an attachment to the Italic school, that, through the bounty of Dionysius, he purchased, at a vast price, several books, which contained the doctrine of Pythagoras, from Philolaus, one of his followers. In this way Plato accumulated his knowledge. His dialectics he borrowed from Euclid of Megara; the principles of natural philosophy he learned in the Eleatic school from Hermogenes and Cratylus: and combining these with the Pythagorean doctrine of natural causes, he framed from both his system of metaphysics. Mathematics and astronomy he was taught in the Cyrenaic school, and by the Egyptian priests. From Socrates he imbibed the pure principles of moral and political wisdom; but he afterwards obscured their simplicity by Pythagorean speculations.

age of an athletic constitution, and lived all his days temperately, he arrived at the eighty-first, or, according to some writers, the seventy-ninth, year of his age,

Plato, now restored to his country and his school, devoted himself to science, and spent the last years of a long life in the instruction of youth. Having enjoyed the advantage of an athletic constitution, and lived all his days temperately, he arrived at the eighty-first, or, according to some writers, the seventy-ninth, year of his age, and died, through the mere decay of nature, in the first year of the hundred and eighth olympiad. He passed his whole life in a state of celibacy, and therefore left no natural heirs, but transferred his effects by will to his friend Adiamantus. The grove and garden, which had been the scene of his philosophical labours, at last afforded him a sepulchre. Statues aad altars were erected to his memory; the day of his birth long continued to be celebrated as a festival by his followers; and his portrait is to this day preserved in gems.

red for their liter rary merit the introductions are pertinent and amusing the course of the debate, or conversation, is clearly marked; the characters are accurately

It is from the writings of Plato, chiefly, that we are to form a judgment of his merit as a philosopher, and of the service which he rendered to science. No one can be conversant with these without perceiving, that his diction always retained a strong tincture of that poetical spirit which he discovered in his first productions. This is the principal ground of those lofty encomiums, which both autient and modern critics have passed upon his language, and, particularly, of the high estimation in which it was held by Cicero, who, treating on the subject of language, says, that “if Jupiter were to speak in the Greek tongue, he would borrow the style of Plato.” The accurate Stagyrite describes it, as “a middle species of diction, between verse and prose.” Some of his dialogues are elevated by such sublime and glowing conceptions, are enriched with such copious and splendid diction, and flow in so harmonious a rythmus, that they may truly be pronouncedhighly poetical. Most of them are justly admired for their liter rary merit the introductions are pertinent and amusing the course of the debate, or conversation, is clearly marked; the characters are accurately supported every speaker has his proper place, language, and manners the scenery of the conference is painted in lively colouring and the whole is, with admirable art, adorned and enlivened by those minute embellishments, which render the colloquial mode of writing so peculiarly pleasing. Even upon abstract subjects, whether moral, metaphysical, or mathematical, the language of Plato is often clear as the running stream, and in simplicity and sweetness vies with the humble violet which perfumes the vale. In these beautiful parts of his works, it has been conjectured, not without probability, that Socrates and Lysias were his models. At other times, however, we find him swelling into the turgid style, a tincture of which he seems to have retained from his juvenile studies, and involving himself in obscurities, which were the offspring of a lofty fancy, or were borrowed from the Italic school. Several ancient critics have noticed these blemishes in the writings of Plato. Dionysius Halicarnassensis particularly censures Plato for the harshness of his metaphors, and his bold innovations in the use of terms, and quotes from his Phædrus examples of the bombast, the puerile, and the frigid style. The same inequality, which is so apparent in the style of Plato, may also be observed in his conceptions. Whilst he adheres to the school of Socrates, and discourses upon moral topics, he is much more pleasing than when he loses himself, with Pythagoras, in abstruse speculations.

esembling the teaching of the rudiments of the art; and the Peirastic, as represented by a skirmish, or trial of proficiency. The Agonistic dialogues, supposed to resemble

The Dialogues of Plato, which treat of various subjects, and were written with different views, are classed by the ancients ufider the two heads of Didactic and Inquisitive. The Didactic, are subdivided into Speculative, including physical and logical and Practical, comprehending ethical and political. The second class, the Inquisitive, is characterised by terms taken from the athletic art, and divided into the Gymnastic, and the Agonistic; the dialogues termed Gymnastic were imagined to be similar to the exercise, and were subdivided into the Maieutic, as resembling the teaching of the rudiments of the art; and the Peirastic, as represented by a skirmish, or trial of proficiency. The Agonistic dialogues, supposed to resemble the combat, were either Endeictic, exhibiting a specimen of skill or Anatreptic, presenting the spectacle of a perfect defeat. Instead of this whimsical classification, an arrangement of the dialogues, taken from the subjects on which they treat, would be much more obvious and useful. They may not improperly be divided into physical, logical, ethical, and political.

o coalesce; and that, out of this heterogeneous mass, he framed a confused system, destitute of form or consistency. This will be acknowledged by every one, who, in

The truth appears to have been, that Plato, ambitious of the honour of forming a new sect, and endued by nature with more brilliancy of fancy than strength of judgment, collected the tenets of other philosophers, which were, in many particulars, contradictory, and could by no exertion of ingenuity be brought to coalesce; and that, out of this heterogeneous mass, he framed a confused system, destitute of form or consistency. This will be acknowledged by every one, who, in perusing the philosophical writings of Plato, is capable of divesting himself of that blind respect for antiquity, by which the learned so frequently suffer themselves to be misled. The followers, too, of Plato, far from dispersing the clouds which from the first, hung over his system, appear to have entered into a general combination to increase its obscurity. The successive changes, which took place in the academy after the death of its founder, by introducing a succession of new opinions, continually increased the difficulty of arriving at the true sense of Plato. And when, in a subsequent, period, the Platonic philosophy was professed in Alexandria, it was still further adulterated by an injudicious and absurd attempt to mould into one system the doctrines of Plato, the traditionary tenets of Egypt and the eastern nations, and the sacred creeds of the Jews and Christians: a coalition which proved exceedingly injurious both to philosophy and religion.

ces of his life are known; Cicero has told us in general that he was some years younger than Naevius or Ennius, and that he died the first year of the elder Cato’s

, a comic writer of ancient Rome, was born at Sarsina, a small town in Umbria, a province of Italy; his proper name was Marcus Accius he is supposed to have acquired the surname of Plautus, from having broad and ill-formed feet. His parentage seems to have been mean; and some have thought him the son of a slave. Few circumstances of his life are known; Cicero has told us in general that he was some years younger than Naevius or Ennius, and that he died the first year of the elder Cato’s censorship, when Claudius Pulcher and Lucius Portius Licinius were consuls. This was about the year of Rome 569, when Terence was about nine years old, and 184 years B. C. A. Gellius says, that Plautus was distinguished at the same time for his poetry uptm the theatre, that Cato was for his eloquence in the forum and observes elsewhere, from Varro, that he was so well paid for his plays, as to think of doubling his stock by trading in which, however, he was so unfortunate, that he lost all he had got by the Muses, and for his subsistence was reduced, in the time of a general famine, to work at the mill. How long he continued in this distress, is uncertain; but Varro adds, that the poet’s wit was his best support, and that he composed three plays during this daily drudgery.

f music during the seventeenth century; and he and his son Henry, appear, without a special licence, or authorized monopoly, to have had almost the whole business of

, a man distinguished in the musical world, was born in 1613. He was a stationer and a seller of musical instruments, music-books, and musicpaper, and was clerk of the Temple church. What his education had been, is not known; but that he had attained to a considerable proficiency in the practice of music and musical composition, is certain. His skill in music was not so great as to entitle him to the appellation of a master; he knew nothing of the theory of the science, but was very well versed in the practice, and understood the rules of composition well enough to write good harmony. He was also the first and the most intelligent printer of music during the seventeenth century; and he and his son Henry, appear, without a special licence, or authorized monopoly, to have had almost the whole business of furnishing the nation with musical instruments, music books, and music paper, to themselves. In 1655 he published the first edition of his “Introduction to the Skill of Music,” a compendium compiled from Morley, Butler, and other more bulky and abstruse books, which had so rapid a sale, that in 1683 ten editions of it had been circulated through the kingdom. The book, indeed, contained no late discoveries or new doctrines, either in the theory or practice of the art; yet the form, price, and style, were so suited to every kind of musical readers, that it seems to have been more generally purchased and read, than any elementary musical tract that ever appeared in this or in any other country.

the second book of the '< Pleasant Musical Companion, being a choice collection of catches for three or four voices" published chiefly for the encouragement of the

His second son, Henry, succeeded his father as a musicseller, at first at his shop in the Temple, but afterwards in the Temple Exchange, Fleet-street; but the music-books advertised by him were few compared with those published by his father. Among them were the “Orpheus Britannicus,” and the ten sonatas and airs of Purcell. He published, in 1701, what he called the second book of the '< Pleasant Musical Companion, being a choice collection of catches for three or four voices" published chiefly for the encouragement of the musical societies, which, he said, would be speedily set upn the chief cities and towns of England. We know not that this v as the case, but certainly the publication of Purcell’s catches in two small volumes of the elder Walsh in queen Anne’s time, was th means of establishing catch-clubs in almost every town in the kingdom. It is conjectured that Henry Playford survived his father but a short time, for we meet with no publication by him after 17 10.

business, nor prevent him from filling the most important offices with credit. He was a procurator, or manager of the emperor’s revenue, in the provinces of Spain

, called the elder, to distinguish him from his nephew, was one of the most learned of the ancient Roman writers, and was born in the reign of Tiberius Caesar, about the year of Christ 23. His birth-place was Verona, as appears from his calling Catullus his countryman, who was unquestionably of that city. Tho ancient writer of his life, ascribed to Suetonius, and, after him, St. Jerom, have made him a native of Rome: father Hardouin has also taken some pains to confirm this notion, which however has not prevailed. We can more readily believe Aulus Gellius, who represents him as one of the most ingenious men of his age; and what is related of his application by his nephew the younger Pliny, is almost incredible. Yet his excessive love of study did not spoil the man of business, nor prevent him from filling the most important offices with credit. He was a procurator, or manager of the emperor’s revenue, in the provinces of Spain and Africa; and was advanced to the high dignity of augur. He had also several considerable commands in the army, and was distinguished by his courage in the field, as well as by his eloquence at the bar. His manner of life, as it is described by his nephew, exhibits a degree of industry and perseverance scarcely to be paralleled. In summer he always began his studies as soon as it was night: in winter, generally at one in the morning, but never later than two, and often at midnight. No man ever spent less time in bed; and sometimes he would, without retiring from his books, indulge in a short sleep, and then pursue his studies. Before day-break, it was his custom to wait upon Vespasian, who likewise chose that season to transact business: and when he had finished the affairs which the emperor committed to his charge, he returned home again to his studies. After a slender repast at noon, he would frequently, in the summer, if he was disengaged from business, recline in the sun: during which time some author was read to him, from which he made extracts and observations. This was his constant method, whatever book he read; for it was a maxim of his, that “no book was so bad, but something might be learned from it.” When this was over, he generally went into the cold-bath, after which he took a slight refreshment of food and rest and then, as if it had been a new day, resumed his studies till supper-time, when a book was again read to him, upon which he would make some remarks as they went on. His nephew mentions a singular instance to shew how parsimonious he was of his time, and how covetous of knowledge. His reader having pronounced a word wrong, some person at the table made him repeat it: upon which, Pliny asked that person if he understood it? and when he acknowledged that he did, “Why then,” said he, “would you make him go back again we have lost, by this interruption, above ten lines.” In summer, he always rose from supper by clay-light and in winter, as soon as it was dark. Such was his way of life amidst the noise and hurry of the town but in the country his whole time was devoted to study without intermission, excepting only when he bathed, that is, was actually in the bath for during the operation of rubbing and wiping, he was employed either in hearing some book read' to him, or in dictating himself. In his journeys, he lost no time from his studies, his mind at those seasons being disengaged from all other thoughts, and a secretary or amanuensis constantly attended him in his chariot; and that he might suffer the less interruption to his studies, instead of walking, he always used a carriage in Rome. By this extraordinary application he found leisure to write a great many volumes.

of branches; and it appeared sometimes bright, and sometimes dark and spotted, as it was either more or less impregnated with earth and cinders. This was a noble phenomenon

The circumstances of his death, like his manner of livr ing, were very singular, and are also described at large by the elegant pen of his nephew. He was at that time, with a fleet under his command, at Mis en urn, in the gulf of Naples; his sister and her son, the younger Pliny, being with him. On the 24th of August, in the year 79, about one in the afternoon, his sister desired him to observe a cloud of a very unusual size and shape. He was in his study; but immediately arose, and went out upon an eminence to view it more distinctly. It was not at that distance discernible from what mountain this cloud issued, but it was found afterwards to ascend from mount Vesuvius. Its figure resembled that of a pine-tree; for it shot up to a great height in the form of a trunk, which extended itself at the top into a sort of branches; and it appeared sometimes bright, and sometimes dark and spotted, as it was either more or less impregnated with earth and cinders. This was a noble phenomenon for the philosophic Pliny, who immediately ordered a light vessel to be got ready; but as he was coming out of the house, with his tablets for his observations, the mariners belonging to the gallies stationed at Retina, earnestly intreated him to come to their assistance, since that port being situated at the foot of mount Vesuvius, there was no way for them to escape, but by sea. He therefore ordered the gallies to put to sea, and went himself on board, with intention of assisting not only Retina, but several other towns, situated upon that beautiful coast. He steered directly to the point of danger, whence ethers fled with the utmost terror; and with so much calmness and presence of mind, as to be able to make and dictate his observations upon the motion and figure of that dreadful scene. He went so nigh the mountain, that tha cinders, which grew thicker and hotter the nearer he approached, fell into the ships, together with pumice-stonet and black pieces of burning rock: they were likewise in danger, not only of being aground by the sudden retreat of the sea, but also from the vast fragments which rolled down from the mountain, and obstructed all the shore. Here he stopped to consider, whether he should return; to which the pilot advising him, “Fortune,” said he, “befriends the brave; carry me to Pomponianus.” Pomponianus was then at Stabioe, a town separated by a gulf, which the sea, after several windings, forms upon that shore. He found him in the greatest consternation, but exhorted him to keep up his spirits; and, the more to dissipate his fears, he ordered, with an air of unconcern, the baths to be got ready; when, after having bathed, he sat down to supper with apparent cheerfulness. Jn the mean while, the eruption from Vesuvius flamed out in several places with much violence, which the darkness of the night contributed to render still more visible and dreadful. Pliny, to soothe the apprehensions of his friend, assured him it was only the burning of the villages, which the country people had abandoned to the flames: after this he retired, and had some sleep. The court which led to his apartment being in the mean time almost filled with stones and ashes, if he had continued there any longer, it would have been impossible for him to have made his way out: it was therefore thought proper to awaken him. He got up, and went to Pomponianus and the rest of the company, who were not unconcerned enough to think of going to bed. They consulted together, whether it would be most prudent to trust to the houses, which now shook from side to side with frequent and violent rockings; or to fly to the open fields, where the calcined stones and cinders, though light indeed, yet fell in large showers, and threatened destruction. In this distress they resolved for the fields, as the less dangerous situation of the two; and went out, having pillows tied upon their heads with napkins, which was all their defence against the storms of stones that fell around them. It was now day every where else, but there a deeper darkness prevailed than in the most obscure night; which, however, was in some degree dissipated by torches, and other lights of various kinds. They thought proper to go down farther upon the shore, to observe if they might safely put out to sea; but they found the waves still run extremely high and boisterous. There Pliny, taking a draught or two of water, threw himself down upon a cloth which was spread for him; when immediately the flames and a strong smell of sulphur, wkich was the forerunner of them, dispersed the rest of the company, and obliged him to arise. He raised himself, with the assistance of two of his servants, for he was corpulent, and instantly fell down dead: suffocated, as his nephew conjectures, by some gross and noxious vapour; for he had always weak lungs, and was frequently subject to a difficulty of breathing. As soon as it was light again, which was not till the third day after, his body was found entire, and without any marks of violence upon it; exactly in the same posture that he fell, and looking more like a man asleep than dead.

t being buried in the heap. At length this dreadful darkness was dissipated by degrees, like a cloud or smoke: the real day returned, and even the sun appeared, though

The sister and nephew, whom the uncle left at Misenum, continued there that night, but had their rest extremely broken and disturbed. There had been for many days before some shocks of an earthquake, which was the less surprising, as they were always extremely frequent in Campania: but they were so particularly violent that night, that they seemed to threaten a total destruction. When the morning came, the light was exceedingly faint and languid, and the buildings continued to totter; so that Pliny and his mother resolved to quit the town, and the people followed them in the utmost consternation. When at a convenient distance from the houses, they stood still, in the midst of a most dangerous and dreadful scene. The chariots, they had ordered to be drawn out, were so agitated backwards and forwards; though upon the most level ground, that they could not keep them stedfast, even by supporting them with large stones. The sea seemed to roll back upon itself, and to be driven from its banks by the convulsive motion of the earth; it was certain at least, the shore was considerably enlarged, and several sea animals were left upon it. On the other side, a black and dreadful cloud, bursting with an igneous serpentine vapour, darted out a' long train of fire, resembling flashes of lightning, but much larger. Soon afterwards, the cloud seemed to descend, and cover the whole ocean; as indeed, it entirely hid the island of Capreoe, and the promontory of Misenum. Pliny’s mother earnestly conjured him to make his escape, which; being young, for he was only eighteen years of age, he might easily do; as for herself, she said, her age and unwieldy person rendered all attempts of that sort impossible: but he refused to leave her, and, taking her by the hand, led her on. The ashes began to fall upon them, though in no great quantity: but a thick smoke, like a torrent, came rolling after them. Pliny proposed, while they had any light, to turn out of the high road, lest his mother should be pressed to death in the dark, by the crowd that followed them: and they had scarce stepped out of the path, when utter darkness entirely overspread them. Nothing then was to he heard. says Pliny, but the shrieks of women, the screams of children, and the cries of men: some calling for their children, others for their parents, others for their husbands, and only distinguishing each other by their voices; one lamenting his own fate, another that of his family, some wishing to die from the very fear of dying, some lifting up their hands to the gods, but the greater part imagining that the last and eternal night was come, which was to destroy both the gods and the world together. At length a glimmering light appeared, not the return of day, but only the forerunner of an approaching burst of flames, which, however, fell at a distance from them; then again they were immersed in thick darkness, and a heavy shower of ashes rained upon them, which they were obliged every now and then to shake off, to prevent being buried in the heap. At length this dreadful darkness was dissipated by degrees, like a cloud or smoke: the real day returned, and even the sun appeared, though very faintly, and as when an eclipse is coming on; and every object seemed changed, being covered over with white ashes, as with a deep snow. Pliny owns very frankly, that his support, during this terrible phenomenon, was chiefly founded in that miserable, though strong consolation, that all mankind were involved in the same calamity, and that the world itself was perishing. They returned to Misenum, but without yet getting rid of their fears; for the earthquake still continued, while, as was extremely natural in such a situation, several enthusiastic people ran up and down, heightening their own and their friends calamities by terrible predictions.

here to any sect, but occasionally borrowed such tenets from each, as suited his present inclination or purpose. He reprobates the Epicurean tenet of an infinity of

With respect to philosophical opinions, Pliny did not rigidly adhere to any sect, but occasionally borrowed such tenets from each, as suited his present inclination or purpose. He reprobates the Epicurean tenet of an infinity of worlds; favours the Pythagorean notion of the harmony of the spheres; speaks of the universe as God, after the manner of the stoics; and sometimes seems to pass over into the field of the sceptics. For the most part, however, he leans towards the doctrine of Epicurus.

ier, Paris, 1779, 6 vols. 8vo. And a third, Bipont, 1783, 6 vols, 8vo. There are translations of it, or of parts, in all languages. That endless translator Philemon

To the works of this author may be added a vast quantity of manuscripts, which he left to his nephew, and for which he had been offered by Largius Licinius 400,000 sesterces, that is, about 3200l. of our money. “You will wonder,” says his nephew, “how a man, so engaged as he was, could find time to compose such a number of books; and some of them too upon abstruse subjects. Your surprise will rise still higher, when you hear, that for some time he engaged in the profession of an advocate, that he died in his 56th year, that from the time of his quitting the bar to his death he was employed in the highest posts, and in the service of his prince: but he had a quick apprehension, joined to an unwearied application.” Ep. iii. 5. Hence he became not only a master in polite literature, in grammar, eloquence, and history, but possessed a knowledge of the various arts and sciences, geography, mathematics, philosophy, astronomy, medicine, botany, sculpture, painting, architecture, &c. for of all these things has he treated in the very important work that he has left us. The first edition of Pliny’s “Naturalis Historia” canlfc from the press of Spira at Venice in 1469, and is reckoned one of the most beautiful, rare, and valuable publications of the fifteenth century. Mr. Dibdin describes the copy in lord Spencer’s library as the finest extant. Five other editions were published from 1470 to 1476, such was the demand for this store-house of natural history. Of the modern editions, the preference is usually given to that by the celebrated father Hardouin, of which there are two, the first “in usum Delphini,” Paris, 5 vols. 4to; the second, 1723, 3 vols. folio, which is a more copious, splendid, and critical performance. Since that, we have an excellent edition by Franzius, Leipsic, 1778 9J, 10 vols, 8vo. Another by Brotier, Paris, 1779, 6 vols. 8vo. And a third, Bipont, 1783, 6 vols, 8vo. There are translations of it, or of parts, in all languages. That endless translator Philemon Holland exerted his own and his readers’ patience on a version into English, published in 1601, folio.

rteen years of age. He lost his father when he was young, and had the famous Virginius for his tutor or guardian, of whom he gives a high character. He frequented the

, nephew of the preceding, was born A. D. 62, at Novocomum, a town upon the lake Larius, near which he had several beautiful villas. Caecilius was the name of his father, and Plinius Secundus that of his mother’s brother, who adopted him. He discovered from his infancy, good talents and an elegant taste, which he did not fail to cultivate, and informs us himself that he wrote a Greek tragedy at fourteen years of age. He lost his father when he was young, and had the famous Virginius for his tutor or guardian, of whom he gives a high character. He frequented the schools of the rhetoricians, and heard Quintilian; for whom he ever after entertained so high an esteem, that he bestowed a considerable portion upon his daughter at her marriage. He was in his eighteenth year when his uncle died and it was then that he began to plead in the forum, the usual road to promotion. About a year after, he assumed the military character, and went into Syria with the commission of tribune: but as this did not suit his taste, he returned after a campaign or two. He tells us, that in his passage homewards he was detained by contrary winds at the island Icaria, and that he employed himself in making verses: he enlarges, in the same place, upon his poetical efforts; but in this respect, like Cicero, he valued himself upon a taleftt which he did not eminently possess.

information as to the time of his death; but it is conjectured that he died either a little before, or soon after, his patron the emperor Trajan, that is, about A.

He had married on settling at Rome, but losing his wife in the beginning of Nerva’s reign, he soon after took his beloved Calphurnia; of whom we read so much in his Epistles. He had not however any children by either of his wives: and hence we find him thanking Trajan for the jus trium liberorum, which he afterwards obtained of that emperor for his friend Suetonius Tranquillus. He was promoted to the consulate by Trajan in the year 100, when he was thirty-eight years of age: and in this office pronounced that famous panegyric, which has ever since been admired, as well for the copiousness of the topics, as the elegance of address. He was then elected augur, and afterwards made proconsul of Bithynia; whence he wrote to Trajan that curious letter concerning the primitive Christians, which, with Trajan’s rescript, is happily extant among his “Epistles.” “Pliny’s letter,” as Melmoth observes, in a note upon the passage, “is esteemed as almost the only genuine monument of ecclesiastical antiquity, relating to the times immediately succeeding the apostles, it being written at most not above forty years after the death of St. Paul. It was preserved by the Christians themselves, as a clear and unsuspicious evidence of the purity of their doctrines; and is frequently appealed to by the early writers of the church, against the calumnies of their adversaries.” It is not known what became of Pliny, after his return from Bithynia; nor have we any information as to the time of his death; but it is conjectured that he died either a little before, or soon after, his patron the emperor Trajan, that is, about A. D. 116.

ind of historical sketch, in which we have a view of him in some striking attitude, either of active or contemplative life. In them are preserved anecdotes of many

Pliny was unquestionably a man of talents, and various accomplishments, and a man of virtue; but in dislike of the Christians he seems to have indulged equally his master Trajan, whose liberal sentiments respecting informers in his short letter cannot be sufficiently admired. Pliny wrote and published a great number of books: but nothing has escaped the wreck of time, except the books of Epistles, and the “Panegyric upon Trajan,” which has ever been considered as a master-piece. His Letters seem to have been intended for the public; and in them he may be considered as writing his own memoirs. Every epistle is a kind of historical sketch, in which we have a view of him in some striking attitude, either of active or contemplative life. In them are preserved anecdotes of many eminent persons, whose works are come down to us, as Suetonius, Silius Italicus, Martial, Tacitus, and Quintilian; and of curious facts, which throw great light upon the history of those times. They are written with great politeness and spirit; and, if they abound too much in turn and metaphor, we must impute it to that degeneracy of taste, which was then accompanying the degenerate manners of Rome. Pliny, however, seems to have preserved himself in this latter respect from the general contagion: whatever the manners of the Romans were, his were pure and incorrupt. His writings breathe a spirit of great goodness and humanity: his only imperfection is, he was too desirous that the public and posterity should know how humane and good he was; and while he represents himself, as he does, calling for Livy, reading him at his leisure, and even making extracts from him, when the eruption of Vesuvius was shaking the ground beneath him, antl striking terror through the hearts of mortals by appearances unheard of before, it is not possible to avoid being of the opinion of those, who think that he had, with all his virtues, something of affectation.

accompanied by the “Panegyricus,” which was first printed separately, in 1476, quarto, without place or printer’s name. The best edition since is that of Schwarz, at

The “Epistles” have been translated into English by lord Orrery but this gave way to the more elegant translation of Melmoth some of whose opinions appear to have been borrowed by our predecessors in this and the preceding life. The first edition of the original “Epistolse” is that of Carbo, printed probably by Valdarfer at Venice, in 1471, folio. Of the modern editions, the Variorum, at Leyden, 1669, 8vo, is praised by Dr. Harwood as one of the scarcest and most valuable of the octavo variorum classics. There are also correct and critical editions by Thomasius, Leipsic, 1675, 8vo; by Hearne, Oxford, 1703, 8vo; by Longolius, Amst. 1734, 4to; by Gesner, Leipsic, 1770, 8vo; a beautiful edition published by Mr. Payne in 1790, edited by Mr. Homer and a very recent one by Gierigius, Leipsic, 1806, 2 vols. 4to. Most of these are accompanied by the “Panegyricus,” which was first printed separately, in 1476, quarto, without place or printer’s name. The best edition since is that of Schwarz, at Nuremberg, 1746, 4to.

he first reader in chemistry in that university. In 1687, he was made secretary to the earl-marshal, or court of chivalry, which was then renewed, after it had lain

, eminent for being the first who formed a plan for a natural history of England, the son of Robert Plot, esq. captain of the militia, in the hundred of Milton, in Kent, was born in 1640, at Sutton Baron, in the parish of Borden, in that county, and educated at the free -school of Wye, in the same county. In March 1658, he went to Magdalen-hall, in Oxford, where Josiah Pullen was his tutor took a bachelor of arts degree in 1661, a master’s in 1664, and both the degrees in law in 1671. He removed afterwards to University-college, where he was at the expence of placing the statue of king Alfred over the hall-door. His general knowledge and acuteness, and particularly his attachment to natural history, procured his being chosen, in 1677, a fellow of the royal society and in 1682, elected one of the secretaries of that learned body. He published their “Philosophical Transactions,” from No. 143, to No. 166, inclusive. In 1683, Elias Ashmole, esq. appointed him the first keeper of his museum and about the same time he was nominated by the vicechancellor the first reader in chemistry in that university. In 1687, he was made secretary to the earl-marshal, or court of chivalry, which was then renewed, after it had lain dormant from the year 1641. In 1690, he resigned his professorship of chemistry, and also his place of keeper of the museum; which he then augmented by a very large collection of natural curiosities, being such as he had figured and described in his Histories of Oxfordshire and Staffordshire, and there distinguished by the names of “Scrinium Plotianum Oxoniense,” and “Scrinium Plotianum Staffordiense.” In 1688 he received the title of Historiographer to James II. which he could not long retain, as this was just before the abdication of that sovereign. In 1694-5, Henry Howard, earl-marshal, nominated him Mowbray herald extraordinary; and two days after, he was constituted registrar of the court of honour. He died of the stone, April 30, 1696, at his house in Borden, and was buried in the church there, where a monument was afterwards erected to his memory. He left two sons by his wife Rebecca, widow of Henry Burman, to whom he was married in August 1690.

is visible in the heavens, earth, and waters; whatever is dug out of the ground, whatever is natural or unnatural; and whatever is observable in art and science, were

Natural history was his delight; and he gave very agreeable specimens of it, in his “Natural Histories of Oxfordshire and Staffordshire.” The former was published at Oxford, in 1677, folio, and reprinted 1705, with additions and corrections, by John Burman, M. A. fellow of University-college, his step-son, and afterwards vicar of Newington, in Kent; the latter was printed also at Oxford, 1686, in the same size . These were intended as essays towards “A Natural History of England” for, in order to discover antiquities and other curiosities, and to promote learning and trade, he formed a design of travelling through England and Wales. By such researches, he was persuaded that many additions might be made to Camden’s Britannia, and other works, concerning the history and antiquities of England. He drew up a plan of his scheme in a letter to bishop Fell, which may be seen at the end of the second volume of Leland’s Itinerary, of the edition of 1744. In these Histories, whatever is visible in the heavens, earth, and waters; whatever is dug out of the ground, whatever is natural or unnatural; and whatever is observable in art and science, were the objects of his speculation and inquiry; and various and dissimilar as his matter is, it is in general well connected; and his transitions are easy. His books indeed deserve to be called the “natural and artificial histories” of these counties. In the eagerness and rapidity of his various pursuits, he took upon trust, and committed to writing, some things which, upon mature consideration, he must have rejected. He did not, perhaps, know enough of experimental philosophy to exert a proper degree of scepticism in the information given to him. Besides these works, he was the author of several other productions. In 1685, he published “De Origine Fontium, Tentamen Philosophicum,” 8vo and the nine following papers of his are inserted in the “Philosophical Transactions:” 1. “An Account of Elden Hole, in Derbyshire,” No. 2. 2. “The Formation of Salt and Sand from Brine,” No. 145. 3. “Discourse concerning the Effects of the great Frost on Trees and other Plants, in 1683,” No. 165. 4. “A Discourse of perpetual Lamps,” No. 166. 5. “The History of the Weather at Oxford, in 1684 or the Observations of a full Year, made by Order of the Philosophical Society at Oxford,” No. 169. 6. “A large and curious Account of the Amianthos or Asbestine Linen,” No. 1708. 7. “Discourse concerning the most seasonable Time of felling Timber, written at the request of Samuel Pepys,esq. secretary of the admiralty,” No. 192. 8. “Of an Irishman of an extraordinary size, viz. Edward Mallone, nineteen years old, seven feet six inches high,” No. 240. 9. “A Catalogue of Electrical Bodies,” No. 245. In 1680, he published “The Clog, or Staffordshire Almanack,” engraven on a copper-plate, and inserted afterwards in his “History of Staffordshire.

ed Platonic philosopher, was born at Lycopolis, in Egypt, in the year 205, but concerning his family or education, nothing is known. About the age of twenty, he first

, a celebrated Platonic philosopher, was born at Lycopolis, in Egypt, in the year 205, but concerning his family or education, nothing is known. About the age of twenty, he first studied philosophy at the different schools of Alexandria, but attached himself particularly to Ammonius, in whom he found a disposition to superstition and fanaticism like his own. On the death of this preceptor, haying in his school frequently heard the Oriental philosophy commended, and expecting to find in it that kind of doctrine concerning divine natures which he was most desirous of studying, he determined to travel into Persia and India, to learn wisdom of the Magi and Gymnosophists and as the emperor Gordian was at this time undertaking an expedition against the Parthians, Plotinus seized the occasion, and in the year 243 joined the emperor’s army; but the emperor being killed, Plotinus fled to Antioch, and thence came to Rome, where Philip was now emperor.

y medicines when indisposed; nor for the same reason would he suffer his birth-day to be celebrated, or any portrait to be taken of his person. His pupil Amelius, however,

Although Plotinus’s plan was new, it was obscure, and he had but few disciples. He was not the less assiduous, however, in teaching, and studied very hard, preparing himself by watching and fasting. He was so respected for wisdom and integrity, that many private quarrels were referred to his arbitration, and parents on their death-beds were very desirous of consigning their children to his care. During his residence of twenty-six years at Rome, he became a favourite with Galienus, and would have persuaded that emperor to re-build a city in Campania, and people it with philosophers, to be governed by the laws of Plato but this was not effected. Although skilled in the medical art, he had such a contempt for the body, that he would never take any medicines when indisposed; nor for the same reason would he suffer his birth-day to be celebrated, or any portrait to be taken of his person. His pupil Amelius, however, procured one by stealth, painted while he was lecturing. Such abstinence, and neglect of health, brought him into a state of disease and infirmity, which rendered the latter part of his life exceedingly painful. When he found his end approaching, he said to Eustochius, “The divine principle within me is now hastening to unite itself with that divine being which animates the universe” herein expressing a leading principle of his philosophy, that the human soul is an emanation from the divine nature, and will return to the source whence it proceeded. Plotinus died in the year 270, aged sixty-six years. Porphyry represents him as having been possessed of miraculous powers, but there is more reason to conclude from his life and writings, that he belonged to the class of fanatics. His natural temper, his education, his system, all inclined him to fanaticism. Suffering himself to be led astray by a volatile imagination, from the plain path of good sense, he poured forth crude and confused conceptions, in obscure and incoherent language. Sometimes he soared in extatic flights into the regions of mysticism. Porphyry relates, that he ascended through all the Platonic steps of divine contemplation, to the actual vision of the deity himself, and was admitted to such intercourse with him, as no other philosopher ever enjoyed. They who are well acquainted with human nature, will easily perceive in these flights, unequivocal proofs of a feeble or disordered mind, and will not wonder that the system of Plotinus was mystical, and his writings obscure. It is much to be regretted that such a man should have become, in a great degree, the preceptor of the world, and should, by means of his disciples, have every where disseminated a species of false philosophy, which was compounded of superstition, enthusiasm, and imposture. The muddy waters sent forth from this polluted spring, were spread through the most celebrated seats of learning, and were even permitted to mingle with the pure stream of Christian doctrine.

The work by which Mr. Plowden is best known by the profession, is his “Commentaries or Reports, containing divers cases upon matters of law, argued

The work by which Mr. Plowden is best known by the profession, is his “Commentaries or Reports, containing divers cases upon matters of law, argued and determined in the reigns of Edward VI., Mary, Philip and Mary, and Eliz.” These were originally written in French, and the editions of 1571, 1578, 1599, 1613, and 1684, were published in that language. It was not until 1761, that an English translation appeared, improved by many original notes and references to the ancient and modern Common Law books. To this edition were added his “Queries, or Moot-Book for young Students,” and “The Argument,” in the case of William Morgan et al. v. Sir Rice Manxell. Mr. Daines Harrington calls Plowden the most accurate of all reporters; and Mr. Hargrave says that his “Commentaries” deservedly bear as high a character as any book of reports ever published in our law.

proposes a short and easy method of learning languages, by the use of translations instead of themes or exercises. 4. “Concorde de la Geographic des differens ages,”

, a French writer, born at Rheims, in 1688, was early distinguished by his progress in polite letters, and by his amiable character, qualities which procured him to be appointed classical professor in the university of Rheims. Some time after, he was removed to the professorship of rhetoric, and admitted into holy orders. Clermont, bishop of Laon, being made acquainted with his merit, offered him the place of director of the college of Clermont, and he was advancing the reputation of this seminary, when the peculiar opinions he held respecting some subjects which then interested the public, obliged him to leave his situation. On this, Gasville, the intendant of Rouen, appointed him tutor to his son, upon the recommendation of the celebrated Rollin. After this, he went to Paris, where he first gave lectures upon history and geography, and then acquired a considerable reputation by some works which he published I. His “Spectacle de la Nature” is generally known, having been translated into perhaps all the European languages, and was no where more popular than in England for many years. This work is written with perspicuity and elegance, and is equally instructive and agreeable; its only fault is, that the author uses too many words for his matter, which, however, is perhaps unavoidable in the dialogue form of writing. 2. 61 Histoire du Ciel,“in 2 vols. 12mo, is another work of the abbe” Pluche, a kind of mythological history of the heavens, consisting of two parts, almost independent of one another. The first, which contains some learned inquiries into the origin of the poetic heavens, and an attempt to prove that the pagan deities had not been real men, was animadverted upon by M. Silouette, in “Observations on the Abbe Pluche' s History,” &c. an account of which may be seen in the “History of the Works of the Learned” for April 1743, with notes by Warburton. 3. He wrote a tract also “De artificio linguarum,1735, 12mo, which he translated himself, under the title of “La Mechanique des Langues,” in which he proposes a short and easy method of learning languages, by the use of translations instead of themes or exercises. 4. “Concorde de la Geographic des differens ages,1764, 12mo, a posthumous work, well conceived, but executed superficially. 5. “Harmonic des Pseaumes et de PEvangile,1764, 12mo, a translation of the Psalms, remarkable for its fidelity and elegance, with many learned notes of reference and illustration from other parts of Scripture. Pluche had obtained the abbey of Varenne St Maur, to which he retired in 1749, and gave himself up entirely to devotion and study, which was a happy relief to him, as he lost all the pleasures of literary society, by an incurable deafness. He died of an apoplexy, Nov. 20, 1761. He was a believer in all the mysteries of his church, even to an extreme; and when some free-thinkers used to express their astonishment that a man of abbé Pluche’s force of understanding could think so like the vulgar, he used to say, “I glory in this it is more reasonable to believe the word of God, than to follow the vain and uncertain lights of reason.

lebrated English botanist, was born, as he himself has recorded, in 1642, but where he was educated, or in what university he received his degrees, has. not been ascertained.

, a celebrated English botanist, was born, as he himself has recorded, in 1642, but where he was educated, or in what university he received his degrees, has. not been ascertained. It has been conjectured, from a few circumstances, that it was at Cambridge. His name seems of French extraction, plus que net, and has been Latinized plus quam nitidus. He dates the prefaces to his works from Old Palace-yard, Westminster, where he seems to have had a small garden. It does not appear that he attained to any considerable eminence in his profession of phjsic, and it is suspected he was only an apothecary, but he was absorbed in the study of plants, and devoted all his leisure to the composition of his “Phytographia.” He spared no pains to procure specimens of rare and new plants, had correspondents in all parts of the world, and access to the gardens of Hampton-court, then Very flourishing, and all others that were curious. PIukenet was one of those to whom Ray was indebted for assistance in the arrangement of the second volume of his history, and that eminent man every where bears the strongest testimony to his merit. Yet he was in want of patronage, and felt that want severely. With Sloane and Petiver, two of the first botanists of his own age, he seems to have been at variance, and censures their writings with too much asperity. “Plukenet,” says sir J. E. Smith, whose opinion in such matters we are always happy to follow, “was, apparently, a man of more solid learning than either of those distinguished writers, and having been less prosperous than either, he was perhaps less disposed to palliate their errors. As far as we have examined, his criticisms, however severe, are not unjust.” No obstacles damped the ardour of Plukenet in his favourite pursuit. He was himself at the charge of his engravings, and printed the whole work at his own expence, with the exception of a small subscription of about fifty-five guineas, which he obtained near the conclusion of it. Towards the close of his life he is said to have been assisted by the queen, and to have obtained the superintendance of the garden at Hampton-court. He was also honoured with the title of royal professor of botany. The time of his decease is not precisely ascertained, but it is probable that he did not long survive his last publication, which appeared in 1705. His works were, 1. “Phytographia, sive stirpium illustrium et minus cognitorum Icones,1691—1696, published in four parts, and containing 328 plates, in 4to. 2. “Almagestum Botanicum, sive Phytographiae Piukenetianae Onornasticon,” &c. 1696, 4to the catalogue is alphabetical, and contains near 6000 species, of which, he tells us, 500 were new. No man, after Caspar Bauhine, had till then examined the ancient authors with so much attention as he did, that he might settle his synonyms with accuracy. He follows no system. 3. “Almagesti Botanici Mantissa,1700, 4to, with twenty-five new plates. Besides many new plants, this volume contains very numerous additions to the synonyms of the Almagestum. 4. Five years after the Mantissa he published the “Amaltheum Botanicum,” with three plates, 4to. It abounds with new subjects, sent from China and the East Indies, with some from Florida. These works of Plukenet contain upwards of 2740 figures, most of them engraved from dried specimens, and many from small sprigs, destitute of flowers, or any parts of fructification, and consequently not to be ascertained: but several of these, as better specimens came to hand, are figured again in the subsequent plates. As he employed a variety of artists, they are unequally executed; those by Vander Gucht have usually the preference. It is much to be regretted that he had it not in his power to give his figures on a larger scale yet, with all their imperfections, these publications form a large treasure of botanical knowledge. The herbarium of Plukenet consisted of 8000 plants, an astonishing number to be collected by a private and not opulent individual: it came, after his death, into the hands of sir Hans Sloane, and is now in the British museum. His works were republished, with new titlepages, in 1720, and entirely reprinted, with some additions, in 1769; and in 1779 an Index Linnaeanus to his plates were published by Dr. Giseke, of Hamburgh, which contains a few notes, from a ms. left by Plukenet. The original ms. of Plukenet’s works is now in the library of sir J. E. Smith, president of the Linnaean society. Plumier, to be mentioned in the next article, complimented this learned botanist by giving his name to a plant, a native of both Indies.

eir kind, but also all the sayings and observations of wise men, which he had heard in conversation, or had received from others by tradition and likewise to consult

After he had received his first instructions from Ammonius, he considered with himself, that a larger communication with the wise and learned was yet necessary, and therefore resolved to travel. Egypt was, at that time, as formerly it had been, famous for learning and probably the mysteriousness of their doctrine might tempt him, as it had tempted Pythagoras and others, to converse with the priesthood of that country. This appears to have been particularly his business, by his treatise “Of Isis and Osiris,” in which he shews himself versed in the ancient theology and philosophy of the wise men. From Egypt he returned into Greece; and, visiting in his way all the academies and schools of the philosophers, gathered from them many of those observations with which he has abundantly enriched posterity. He does not seem to have been attached to any particular sect, but chose from each of them whatever he thought excellent and worthy to be regarded. He could not bear the paradoxes of the Stoics, but yet was more averse to the impiety of the Epicureans in many things he followed Aristotle but his favourites were Socrates and Plato, whose memory he reverenced so highly, that he annually celebrated their birth-days with much solemnity. Besides this, he applied himself witri extreme diligence to collect, not only all books that were excellent in their kind, but also all the sayings and observations of wise men, which he had heard in conversation, or had received from others by tradition and likewise to consult the records and public instruments preserved in cities which he had visited in his travels. He took a particular journey to Sparta, to search the archives of that famous commonwealth, to understand thoroughly the model of their ancient government, the history of their legislators, their kings, and their ephori; and digested all their memorable deeds and sayings with so much care, that he has not omitted even those of their women. He took the same methods with regard to many other commonwealths; and thus was enabled to leave in his works such observations upon men and manners, as have rendered him, in the opinion of many, the most valuable author of antiquity.

all his children, who seems to have inherited his father’s philosophy; and to him we owe the table, or catalogue of Plutarch’s writings, and perhaps also his “Apophthegms.”

The circumstances of Plutarch’s life are not known, and therefore cannot be related with any exactness. He was married, and his wife’s name was Timoxena, as Rualdus conjectures with probability. He had several children, and among them two sons, one called Plutarch after himself, the other Lamprias, in memory of his grandfather. Lamprias was he, of all his children, who seems to have inherited his father’s philosophy; and to him we owe the table, or catalogue of Plutarch’s writings, and perhaps also his “Apophthegms.” He had a nephew, Sextus Chseroneus, who taught the emperor Marcus Aurelius the Greek language, and was much honoured by him. Some think that the critic Longinus was of his family; and Apuleius, in the first book of his Metamorphoses, affirms himself to be descended from him.

bestowed on him the consular ornaments, and also caused an edict to be passed, that the magistrates or officers of Illyria should do nothing in that province without

On what occasion, and at what time of his life, he went to Rome, how long he lived there, and when he finally returned to his own country, are all uncertain. It is probable, that the fame of him went thither before him, not only because he had published several of his works, but because immediately upon his arrival, as there is reason to believe, he had a great resort of the Roman nobility to hear him: for he tells us himself, that he was so taken up in giving lectures of philosophy to the great men of Rome, that he had not time to make himself master of the Latin tongue, which is one of the first things that would naturally have engaged his attention. It appears, that he was several times at Rome; and perhaps one motive to his inhabiting there was, the intimacy he had contracted in some of these journeys with Sossius Senecio, a great and worthy man, who had been four times consul, and to whom Plutarch has dedicated many of his lives. But the great inducement which carried him first to Rome was, undoubtedly, that which had carried him into so many other parts of the world; 'namely, to make observations upon men and manners, and to collect materials for writing “The Lives of the Roman Worthies,” in the same manner as he had already written those of Greece: and, accordingly, he not only conversed with all the living, but searched the records of the Capitol, and of all the libraries. Not but, as we learn from Suidas, he was entrusted also with the management of public affairs in the empire, during his residence in the metropolis: “Plutarch,” says he, “lived in the time of Trajan, who bestowed on him the consular ornaments, and also caused an edict to be passed, that the magistrates or officers of Illyria should do nothing in that province without his knowledge and approbation.

, prevailed with him at length to leave Italy; and, at his return, he was unanimously chosen archon, or chief magistrate, of Chaeronea, and not long after admitted

When, and how, he was made known to Trajan, is likewise uncertain: but it is generally supposed, that Trajan, a private man when Plutarch first came to Rome, was, among other nobility, one of his auditors. It is also supposed, that this wise emperor made use of him in his councils; and much of the happiness of his reign has been imputed to Plutarch. The desire of visiting his native country, so natural to all men, and especially when growing old, prevailed with him at length to leave Italy; and, at his return, he was unanimously chosen archon, or chief magistrate, of Chaeronea, and not long after admitted into the number of the Delphic Apollo’s priests. We have no particular account of his death, either as to the manner or the year; but conjecture has fixed it about the year 120. It is evident that he lived, and continued his studies, to an extreme old age.:,i

re he reports, and attempts to elucidate, the opinions of others, he frequently falls into mistakes, or is chargeable with misrepresentations. In proof of this assertion,

His works have been divided, and they admit of a tolerably equal division, into “Lives” and “Morals:” the former of which, in his own estimation, were to be preferred, as more noble than the latter. As a biographer he has great merit, and to him we stand indebted for much of the knowledge we possess, concerning several of the most eminent personages of antiquity. His style perhaps may be justly censured for harshness and obscurity, and he has also been criticized for some mistakes in Roman antiquities, and for a. little partiality to the Greeks. On the other hand, he has been justly praised, for sense, learning, integrity, and a certain air of goodness, which appears in all he wrote. Some have affirmed his works to be a kind of library, and collection of all that was wisely said and done among the ancient Greeks and Romans: and if so, the saying of Theodorus Gaza was not extravagant. This learned man, and great preceptor of the Greek tongue at the revival of literature, being asked by a friend “If learning must suffer a general shipwreck, and he have only his choice of one author to be preserved, who that author should be?” answered, “Plutarch.” But although it is unquestionable that in extent and variety of learning Plutarch had few equals, he does not appear to have excelled as much in depth and solidity of judgment. Where he expresses his own conceptions and opinions, he often supports them by feeble and slender arguments: where he reports, and attempts to elucidate, the opinions of others, he frequently falls into mistakes, or is chargeable with misrepresentations. In proof of this assertion, Brucker mentions what he has advanced concerning Plato’s notion of the soul of the world, and concerning the Epicurean philosophy. Brucker adds, that Plutarch is often inaccurate in method, and sometimes betrays a degree of credulity unworthy of a philosopher.

inted chaplain to the English merchants at Aleppo, where he arrived in Oct. 1630, and continued five or six years. Here he distinguished himself by an exemplary discharge

In Dec. 1629 Mr. Pocock was ordained priest by Corbet, bishop of Oxford, by whom he had some time before been admitted into deacon’s orders, and was now appointed chaplain to the English merchants at Aleppo, where he arrived in Oct. 1630, and continued five or six years. Here he distinguished himself by an exemplary discharge of the duties of his function, and when the plague broke out in 1634, was not to be diverted from what he thought his duty, when the merchants fled to the mountains; but continued to administer such comfort as was possible to the inhabitants of the city; and the mercy on which he relied for his own preservation, was remarkably extended to his countrymen, not one dying either of those who left, or those who remained in the city. While here he paid considerable attention to the natural history of the place, as far as concerned the illustration of the Scriptures, and besides making some farther progress in the Hebrew, Syriac, and Ethiopic languages, took the opportunity which his situation afforded of acquiring a familiar knowledge of the Arabic. For this purpose he agreed with an Arabian doctor to give him lessons, and engaged also a servant of the same country to live with him for the sake of conversing io the language. He also studied such grammars and lexicons as he could find read the Alcoran with great care, and translated much from books in the Arabic, particularly a collection which he procured of 6000 proverbs, containing the wisdom of the Arabians, and referring to the most remarkable passages of their history. These opportunities and advantages iri time reconciled him to a situation which at first greatly depressed his spirits the transition indeed from Oxford and its scholars to Aleppo and its barbarians, could not but affect a man of his disposition.

mission extended generally to the purchase of ancient Greek coins, and such Mss. either in the Greek or Eastern languages, as he thought would form a valuable addition

Another object he had very much at heart while here, was the purchase of Arabic Mss. in which he had considerable success. This appears at first to have been done at his private expence and for his private use but in a letter from Laud, then bishop of London, dated Oct. 30, 1631, he received a commission from that munificent prelate, which must have been highly gratifying to him, especially as he had no previous acquaintance with his lordship. The bishop’s commission extended generally to the purchase of ancient Greek coins, and such Mss. either in the Greek or Eastern languages, as he thought would form a valuable addition to the university library. Whether any the Mss. afterwards given by Laud to the Bodleian were procured at this time seems doubtful. In a letter from Laud, then archbishop, dated May 1634, we find him thanking Pocock for some Gr-eek coins, but no mention of manuscripts. In this letter, however, is the first intimation of the archbishop’s design with respect to the foundation of an Arabic professorship at Oxford, and a hope that Pocock, before his return, would so far make himself master of that language as to be able to teach it. And having carried his design into execution about two years afterwards, he invited Mr. Pocock to fill the new chair, with these encouraging words, that “he could do him no greater honour, than to name him to the university for his first professor.” His departure from Aleppo seems to have been much regretted by his Mahometan friends, to whom he had endeared himself by his amiable manners; and it appears also that he had established such a correspondence as might still enable him to procure valuable manuscripts.

en dynasties that author divided his work), where being about to treat of the empire of the Saracens or Arabians, he gives a compendious account of that people before

In 1648, on the recommendation of Dr. Sheldon and Dr. Hammond, he was nominated Hebrew professor, with the canonry of Christ church annexed, by the king, then a prisoner in the Isle of Wight, and was soon after voted into the same lecture by the Committee of Parliament, but a different canonry being assigned him than that which had been annexed to the professorship, he entered a protest against it, that it might not become a precedent, and prejudice his successors. In the interim he found leisure and composure to publish at Oxford, in the latter end of 1649, his very learned work entitled “Specimen Historic Arabum.” This contains a short discourse in Arabic, with his Latin translation, and large and very useful notes. The discourse itself is taken out of the general History of Gregory Abulfaragius, being his introduction to his ninth dynasty (for into ten dynasties that author divided his work), where being about to treat of the empire of the Saracens or Arabians, he gives a compendious account of that people before Mahomet as also of that impostor himself, and the new religion introduced by him, and of the several sects into which it was divided. And Mr. Pocock’s Notes on this Discourse are a collection of a great variety of things relating to those matters out of more than an hundred Arabic manuscripts, a catalogue of which he adds in the end of his book.

ble of study, it being impossible for him, when he attempted it, duly to remember what he had to do, or to apply himself to it with any attention.

In November 1650, about a year after publishing the preceding work, he was ejected from his canonry of Christ church for refusing to take the engagement, and soon after a vote passed for depriving him of the Hebrew and Arabic lectures but upon a petition from the heads of houses at Oxford, the masters, scholars, &c. two only of the whole number of subscribers being loyalists, this vote was reversed, and he was suffered to enjoy both places, and took lodgings, when at Oxford, in Baliol college. In 1655 a more ridiculous instance of persecution was intended, and would have been inflicted, if there had not yet been some sense and spirit left even among those who had contributed to bring on such calamities. It appears that some of his parishioners had presented an information against him to the commissioners appointed by parliament “for ejecting ignorant, scandalous, insufficient, and negligent ministers.” But the connection of the name of Pocock with such epithets was too gross to be endured, and, we are told, filled several men of great fame and eminence at that time at Oxford with indignation, in consequence of which they resolve'd to go to the place where the commissioners were to meet, and expostulate with them about it. In the number of those who went, were Dr. Seth Ward, Dr. John Wilkins, Dr. John Wailis, and Dr. John Owen, who all laboured with much earnestness to convince those men of the strange absurdity of what they were undertaking particularly Dr. Owen, who endeavoured with some warmth to make them sensible of the infinite contempt and reproach, which would certainly fall upon them, when it should be said, that they had turned out a man for imiifficiency, whom all the leamed, not of England only, but of all Europe, so justly admired for his vast knowledge and extraordinary accomplishments. And being himself one of the commissioners appointed by the act, he added, that he was now come to deliver himself, as well as he could, from a share in such disgrace, by protesting against a proceeding so strangely foolish and unjust. The commissioners being very much mortified at the remonstrances of so many eminent men, especially of Dr. Owen, in whom they had a particular confidence, thought it best to extricate themselves from their dilemma, by discharging Mr. Pocock from any farther attendance. And indeed he had been sufficiently tired with it; this persecution, which lasted for many months, being the most grievous to him of all he had undergone. It made him, as he declared to the world some time after, in the preface to the “Annales Eutychianae,” utterly incapable of study, it being impossible for him, when he attempted it, duly to remember what he had to do, or to apply himself to it with any attention.

probation of the author. His next publication, in 1661, was an Arabic poem entitled “Lamiato'l Ajam, or Carmen Abu Ismaelis Tograi,” with his Latin translation of it,

The restoration having been at last accomplished, Mr. Pocock was, in June 1660, replaced in, his canonry of Christ church, as originally annexed to the Hebrew professorship by Charles I. and on Sept. 20 took his degree of D. D. In the same year he was enabled by the liberality of Mr. Boyle, to print his Arabic translation of Grotius on the Truth of the Christian religion, which, we have already mentioned, he undertook with the full approbation of the author. His next publication, in 1661, was an Arabic poem entitled “Lamiato'l Ajam, or Carmen Abu Ismaelis Tograi,” with his Latin translation of it, and large notes upon it, with a preface by the learned Samuel Clarke, architypographus to the university, who had the care of the press, and contributed a treatise of his own on the Arabic prosody. This poem is held to be of the greatest elegance, answerable to the fame of its author, who, as Dr. Pocock gives his character, was eminent for learning and virtue, and esteemed the Phoenix of the age in which he lived, for poetry and eloquence. The doctor’s design in this work was, not only to give a specimen of Arabian poetry, but also to make the attainment of the Arabic tongue more easy to those who study it; and his notes, containing a grammatical explanation of all the words of this author, were unquestionably serviceable for promoting the knowledge of that language. These notes bei-ng the sum of many lectures, which, he read on -this poem, the speech, which he delivered, when entering on his office, is prefixed to it, and contains a succinct, but very accurate account of the Arabic tongue.

sometimes done him of being called upon to translate Arabic letters from the princes of the Levant, or the credential letters of ambassadors coming from those parts;

In 1663, Dr. Pocock published at Oxford, as we noticed in our account of that author, the whole of Gregory Abulfaragius’s “Historia Dynastiarum;” but this work was not much encouraged by the public, which his biographer accounts for in a manner not very creditable to the reign of Charles II. compared to the state of solid learning during tbat of the protectorate. The love of Arabic learning, he informs us, was now growing cold, and Pocock, in his correspondence with Mr. Thomas Greaves, seems very sensible of, and much hurt by this declension of literary taste. This also, his biographer thinks may in some measure account for our author’s rising no higher in church-preferment at the restoration, when such numbers of vacant dignities were filled. Perhaps, adds Mr. Twells, “he is almost the only instance of a clergyman, then at the highest pitch of eminence for learning, and every other merit proper to his profession, who lived throughout the reign of Charles II. without the least regard from the court, except the favour sometimes done him of being called upon to translate Arabic letters from the princes of the Levant, or the credential letters of ambassadors coming from those parts; for which yet we do not find he had any recompenc besides good words and compliments. But he was modest, as he was deserving, and probably, after his presenting Abulfaragius to the king, he never put himself in the way of royal regards any more.

aterford, and in 1745 he printed the second volume under the same title, “Observations on Palestine, or the Holy Land, Syria, Mesopotamia, Cyprus, and Candia,” which

, D. D. who was distantly related to the preceding, but added the e to his name, was the son of Mr. Richard Pococke, sequestrator of the. church of All-saints in Southampton, and head master of the freeschool there, by the only daughter of the rev. Mr. Isaac Milles, minister of Highcleer in Hampshire, and was born at Southampton in 1704. He received his scbool-learning there, and his academical education at Corpns-Christi college, Oxford, where he took his degree of LL. B. May 5, 1731 and that of LL. D. (being then precentor of Lismore) June 28, 1733 together with Dr. Seeker, then rector of St. James’s, and afterwards archbishop of Canterbury. He began his travels into the East in 1737, and returned in 1742, and was made precentor of Waterford in 1744. In 1743, he published the first part of those travels, under the title of “A Description of the East, and of some other Countries, vol. I. Observations on Egypt.” In 1744 he was made precentor of Waterford, and in 1745 he printed the second volume under the same title, “Observations on Palestine, or the Holy Land, Syria, Mesopotamia, Cyprus, and Candia,” which he dedicated to the earl of Chesterfield, then made lord-lieutenant of Ireland attended his lordship thither as one of his domestic chaplains, and was soon after appointed by his lordship archdeacon of Dublin. In March 1756, he was promoted by the duke of Devonshire (then lord-lieutenant) to the bishopric of Ossory, vacant by the death of Dr. Edward Maurice. He was translated by the king’s letter from Ossory to Elphin, in June 1765, bishop Gore of Elphin bc'ing then promoted to Meath; but bishop Gore finding a great sum was to be paid to his predecessor’s executors for the house at Ardbracean, declined taking out his patent; and therefore bishop Pococke, in July, was translated by the duke of Northumberland directly to the see of Meath, and died in the month of September the same year, suddenly, of an apoplectic stroke, while he was in the course of his visitation. An eulogium of his Description of Egypt is given in a work entitled “Pauli Ernestt Jablonski Pantheon Ægyptiorum, Praetat. ad part, iii.” He penetrated no further up the Nile than to Philse, now Gieuret Ell Hiereff; whereas Mr. Norden, in 1737, went as far as Derri, between the two cataracts. The two travellers are supposed to have met on the Nile, in the neighbourhood of Esnay, in Jan. 1738. But the fact, as Dr. Pococke told some of his friends, was, that being on his return, not knowing that Mr. Norden was gone up, he passed by him in the night, without having the pleasure of seeing him. There was an admirable whole length of the bishop, in a Turkish dress, painted by Liotard, in the possession of the late Dr. Milles, dean of Exeter, his first cousin. He was a great traveller, and visited other places besides the East His description of a rock on the westside of Dunbar harbour in Scotland, resembling the GiantsCauseway, is in the Philos. Trans, vol. LII. art. 17; and in Archaeologia,vol. II. p. 32, his account of some antiquities found in Ireland. When travelling through Scotland (where he preached several times to crowded congregations), he stopped at Dingwal, and said he was much struck and pleased with its appearance for the situation of it brought Jerusalem to his remembrance, and he pointed out the hill which resembled Calvary. The same similitude was observed by him in regard to Dartmouth but a 4to volume of his letters, containing his travels ia England and Scotland, was lost. He preached a sermon in 1761 for the benefit of the Magdalen charity in London, and one in 1762 before the incorporated Society in Dublin.

He inherited from his father who had been a notary, but had lost his property, no advantages of rank or fortune, yet in a literary point of view, some circumstances

, one of the. revivers of literature, was the son of Guccio Bracciolini, and was born in 1380, at Terranuova, a small town situated in the territory of the republic of Florence, not far from Arezzo. He inherited from his father who had been a notary, but had lost his property, no advantages of rank or fortune, yet in a literary point of view, some circumstances of his birth were singularly propitious. At the close of the fourteenth century, the dawn of literature was appearing, and the city of Florence was distinguished by the zeal with which its principal inhabitants cultivated and patronized the liberal arts. It was consequently the favourite resort of the ablest scholars of the time; some of whom were induced by the offer of considerable salaries, to undertake the task of public instruction. In this celebrated school, Poggio applied himself to the study of the Latin tongue, under the direction of John of Ravenna; and of Greek, under Manuel Chrysoloras. When he had acquired a competent knowledge of these languages, he quitted Florence, and went to Rome, where his literary reputation introduced him to the notice of pope Boniface IX. who took him into his service, and promoted him to the office of writer of the apostolic letters, probably about 1402. At this time Italy was convulsed by war and faction, and in that celebrated ecclesiastical feud, which is commonly distinguished by the name of the “schism of the West,” no fewer than six of Poggio’s patrons, the popes, were implicated in its progress and consequences. In 1414 we find Poggio attending the infamous pope John to Constance, in quality of secretary; but as this pontiff fled from the council, his household was dispersed, and Poggio remained some time at Constance. Having a good deal of leisure, he employed his vacant hours in studying the Hebrew language, under the direction of a Jew who had been converted to the Christian faith. The first act of the council of Constance was the trial of pope John, who was convicted of the most atrocious vices incident to the vilest corruption of human nature, for which they degraded him from his dignity, and deprived him of his liberty. It was also by this council that John Huss, the celebrated Bohemian reformer, was examined and condemned, and that Jerome of Prague, in 1416, was tried. Poggio, who was present at Jerome’s trial, gave that very eloquent account of the martyr’s behaviour which we have already noticed (See Jerome Of Prague), and which proves, in the opinion of Poggio’s biographer, that he possessed a heart “which daily intercourse with bjgoted believers and licentious hypocrites could not deaden to the impulses of humanity.

arcellinus Lucretius Columella Tertullian twelve of the comedies of Plautus and various other works, or parts of the works of the ancient classics, which are enumerated

The vacancy in the pontifical throne still affording Poggio a considerable degree of leisure, he undertook about this time an expedition of no small importance to the interests of literature, in quest of such ancient manuscripts of classic authors as were scattered rh various monasteries and other repositories in the neighbourhood of Constance, where they were in danger of perishing through neglect and in this he was successful beyond any individual of his time. Among other precious relics thus recovered, was a complete copy of Quintilian pare of the Argonautics of Valerius Flaccus; Asconius Pedianus’s Comment on eight of Cicero’s orations several of the orations of Cicero Silius Italicus; Lactantius “de ira Dei” Vegetius “de re militari” Nonnius Marcellus Ammianus Marcellinus Lucretius Columella Tertullian twelve of the comedies of Plautus and various other works, or parts of the works of the ancient classics, which are enumerated by his Biographer.

f of this interval of relaxation from the duties of his office, he published his “Liber Facetiarum,” or collection of jocose tales, containing anecdotes of several

Although Poggio held the office of apostolic secretary under seven pontiffs, he had never reached any of the superior departments of the Roman chancery. But when Nicholas V. ascended the pontifical throne, his prospects were brightened and he indulged the hope of spending the remainder of his days in a state of independence, if not of affluence. With a viewof improving his interest with the new pontiff, he addressed to him a congratulatory oration, which was recompensed by very liberal presents. This was succeeded by a dedicatory epistle, introducing to his patronage a dialogue “On the Vicissitudes of Fortune,” the most interesting of Poggio’s works, and inculcating maxims of sublime philosophy, enforced by a detail of splendid and striking events. Confiding in the pontiff, he also published the dialogue “On Hypocrisy,” already mentioned. At the request, and under the patronage of Nicolas, he also contributed to the illustration of Grecian literature, by a Latin translation of the works of Diodorus Siculus, and the “Cyropaedia” of Xenophon. During the plague, which raged in various parts of Italy, in 1450, Poggio visited the place of his nativity; and availing himself of this interval of relaxation from the duties of his office, he published his “Liber Facetiarum,or collection of jocose tales, containing anecdotes of several eminent persons who flourished during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. This work acquired a considerable degree of popularity, and was read, not only in the native country of its author, but also in France, Spain, Germany, and Britain, very little indeed to the credit of the readers, as it abounds with gross and abominable indecencies. In 1451 he dedicated to the cardinal Prospero Colonna, his “Historia disceptativa convivialis.” In 1453 Poggio was elevated to the chancellorship of Florence; and at the same time he was chosen one of the “Priori degli arti,or presidents of the trading companies; both which offices he held till his death, which happened October 30, 1459. Notwithstanding the multiplicity of his business, and the advances of age, he prosecuted his studies with his accustomed ardour, and published a dialogue “De miseria hurnanae conditionis,” and a version of Lucian’s “Ass,” with a view of establishing a point of literary history, which seems to nave been till that time unknown namely, that Apuleius was indebted to Lucian for the stamina of his “Asinus aureus.” The last literary work in which he engaged, was his “History of Florence,” divided into eight books, and comprehending the events in which the Florentines were concerned from 1350 to the peace of Naples in 1455. This history was translated into Italian by Jacopo, the son of Poggio but the original was published by Recanati, and has been republished in the collections of Graevius and Muratori. Poggio concluded his career in the possession of universal respect, and in the tranquil enjoyment of social and domestic comforts. His remains were interred with solemn magnificence in the church of Santa Croce at Florence and his fellow-citizens testified thek respect for his talents and virtues, by erecting a statue to his memory on the front of the church of Santa Maria del Fiore. As the citizeu of a free state, which he deemed a high honour, he improved every opportunity that occurred for increasing and displaying the glory of the Tuscan republic. Although he was honoured by the favour of the great, he never sacrificed his independence at the shrine of power, but uniformly maintained the ingenuous sentiments of freedom. Such was the state of morals in his time, that the licentiousness which disgraced the early period of his life, and the indecent levity which occurs in some of his writings, did not deprive him of the countenance of the greatest ecclesiastical dignitaries, or cause him to forfeit the favour of the pious Eugenius, or of the moral and accomplished Nicolas V. To those with whom he maintained a personal intercourse, he recommended himself by the urbanity of his manners, the strength of his judgment, and the sportiveness of his wit. “As a scholar, Poggio is entitled to distinguished praise. By assiduous study, he became a considerable proficient in the Greek language, and intimately conversant with the works of the Roman classic authors. In selecting, as his exemplar in Latin composition, the style of Cicero, he manifested the discernment of true taste and his endeavours to imitate this exquisite model, were far from being unsuccessful. His diction is flowing, and his periods are well balanced. But by the occasional admission of barbarous words and unauthorized phraseology, he reminds his readers that at the time when he wrote, the iron age of literature was but lately terminated. His striking fault is diffuseness a diffuseness which seems to arise, not so much from the copiousness of his thoughts, as from the difficulty which he experienced in clearly expressing his ideas. It must, however, be observed, that he did not, like many modern authors who are celebrated for their Latinity, slavishly confine himself to the compilation of centos from the works of the ancients. In the prosecution of his literary labours, he drew from his own stores and those frequent allusions to the customs and transactions of his own times, which render his writings so interesting, must, at a period when the Latin language was just rescued from the grossest barbarism, have rendered their composition peculiarly difficult.” When compared with the works of his immediate predecessors, the writings of Poggio are truly astonishing. Rising to a degree of elegance, to be sought for in vain in the rugged Latinity of Petrarca and Coluccio Salutati, he prepared the way for the correctness of Politian, and of the other eminent scholars whose gratitude has reflected such splendid lustre on the character of Lorenzo de Medici." The works of Poggio were published together at Basil, in 1538, which is reckoned the most complete edition.

that of Ley den 1733), was published, with a preface, by the celebrated Boerhaave. A selection from, or an abridgment of it, was also printed in 1639, with the title

, son of the preceding, was born at Nancy in 1563, and educated at the college of Navarre, at Paris, where he distinguished himself by his rapid advancement in the knowledge of the languages, belles lettres, and philosophy. He received the degree of M. A, in the university of Paris in 1581, and immediately commenced his career in the schools of medicine, which he pursued at Paris, Padua, and other schools of Italy. When he returned to Paris in 1588 he took his bachelor’s degree in medicine, and became a licentiate but having already expended his little income on the previous parts of his medical progress, he was obliged to leave Paris without having taken the degree of doctor. He then returned to his native city, where duke Charles III. of Lorraine appointed him his consulting physician, and Duke Henry II. instituted a faculty of medicine at Pont-aMousson, and nominated him dean and first professor. Being now enabled to take his doctor’s degree, he went to Paris for that purpose and, on his return, commenced the duties of his professorship in November 1598, which he performed for many years with the highest reputation, and enjoyed very extensive practice until his death, which was occasioned by the plague, at Nancy, whither he had gone to administer relief to those afflicted by that disorder, in 1633. His principal publication is entitled “Selectiorum Observationum et Consiliorum de proeteritis hactenus morbis, effectibusque praeter naturam ab aqua, seu scrosa colluvie et deiuvie ortis, Liber singularis,” Pont-a-Mousson, 1618, in quarto'. This work passed through several subsequent editions, one of which, (that of Ley den 1733), was published, with a preface, by the celebrated Boerhaave. A selection from, or an abridgment of it, was also printed in 1639, with the title of “Piso enucleatus,” in 12mo. His other works were, “Physicum Cometae Speculum,” Ponte ad Montionem, 1619, in 8vo and “Discours de la Nature, Causes, et Remedes, tant curatifs que prevservatifs, des maladies populaires, accompagnees de Dysenteric et autres Flux de Ventre,” ibid. 1623, in 12mo. He translated from the. Spanish into Latin, “Ludovici Mercati Institutiones ad usum et examen eorum qui artem luxatoriam exercent,” Francfort, 1625, in folio. He likewise published the following eulogy of his first patron “Caroli III., Serenissimi, Potentissimique Ducis Lotharingiae, &c., Macarismos, seu felicitatis et virtutum egregio Principe dignarum coronse,” 1690.

ole family, by Robespierre but was liberated on the death of that monster. He died in September 1797 or 179S. He is said to have left behind him a very valuable collection

, a celebrated French physician, was born at Dijon, July 5, 1720. After studying medicine, he succeeded M. Dubois in 1746 as protessor of physic in the college de France. He was one of the first who gave a course of chemical lectures in Paris. In 1757 he was appointed first physic‘an to the French army, and the year following went to Russia to attend the empress Elizabeth in her illness. He remained two years in Russia, and assisted at the famous experiment relative to the congelation of quicksilver, of which he afterwards gave an account (inserted in their memoirs), to the Academy of sciences at Paris, who had elected him a member. Soon after he returned to France he was promoted to the rank of counsellor of state; and in 1764 was appointed inspectorgeneral of physic; surgery, and pharmacy, in the ports and colonies of France. His ingenious method of procuring fresh from sea-water, by distillation, procured him, in 1765, a pension of 12,000 livres a-year from the French government. In nil, he resigned his chair at the college of France; but, in conformity ’to an unanimous vote of the professors, continued to preside at their public meetings as long as his health would permit. M. Laiande says, that he did honour to this office “by a grand and striking figure: by the dignity of his speech the nobleness of his manner and the deservedly high estimation in which he was held by the public.” He was, during the reign of terror, imprisoned, with his whole family, by Robespierre but was liberated on the death of that monster. He died in September 1797 or 179S. He is said to have left behind him a very valuable collection of natural history, medals, and other curiosities. He wrote several treatises belonging to his profession, viz. on the fever of St. Domingo, the diseases of seamen, an abridgment of anatomy, &C.

t, daughter of George duke of Clarence, younger brother to king Edward IV. He was born at Stoverton, or Stourton castle, in Staffordshire, in 1500, and educated at

, an eminent cardinal, and archbishop of Canterbury, was descended from the bloodroyal of England, being a younger son of sir Richard Pole, K.G. and cousin-german to Henry VII. by Margaret, daughter of George duke of Clarence, younger brother to king Edward IV. He was born at Stoverton, or Stourton castle, in Staffordshire, in 1500, and educated at first in the Carthusian monastery at Sheen, near Richmond, in Surrey, whence, at the early age of twelve, he was removed to Magdalen-college, Oxford, and there assisted in his studies by Linacre and William Latimer. In June 1515, he took the degree of B. A. and soon after entered into deacon’s orders. Without doubting his proficiency in his studies, it may be supposed that this rapid progress in academical honours was owing to his family interest and pretensions. Among the popish states abroad it was not uncommon to admit boys of noble families to a rank in the universities or the church, long before the statutable or canonical periods. One object for such hasty preferment was, that they might be entitled to hold lucrative benefices, and the rank of their family thus supported and accordingly, in March 1517, we find that Pole was made prebendary of Roscombe, in the church of Salisbury, to which were added, before he had reached his nineteenth year, the deaneries of Winbourne Minster, and Exeter, For all these he was doubtless indebted to his relation Henry VIII. who intended him for the highest dignities of the church.

ved, but he is said to have had some reasons for his disapprobation, different from what conscience, or his religious principles, might fairly have suggested. Notwithstanding

The affair of king Henry’s divorce drevr Pole from his retirement, and led to the singular vicissitudes of his life. This was a measure which he greatly disapproved, but he is said to have had some reasons for his disapprobation, different from what conscience, or his religious principles, might fairly have suggested. Notwithstanding his being an ecclesiastic, we are told that he had entertained hopes of espousing the princess Mary, and that this project was even favoured by queen Catherine, who had committed the care of the princess’s education to the countess of Salisbury, Pole’s mother. Whatever may be in this suspicion, which prevailed for many years, it appears that he wished to be out of the way while the matter was in agitation, and therefore obtained leave from the king to go to the university of Paris, under pretence of continuing his theological studies. Accordingly he spent a year at Paris, from Oct. 1529 to Oct. 1530, during which time the king having determined to consult the universities of Europe respecting the divorce, sent to Pole to solicit his cause at Paris. Pole, however, excused himself on account of his want of experience, and when Henry sent over Bellay, as joint commissioner, left the whole business to this coadjutor, and returning to England, went again to his. favourite retirement at Sheen, Here he drew up his reasons for disapproving of the divorce, which were shown to the king, who probably put them into Cranmer’s hands. Cranmer praised the wit and argument employed, and chiefly objected to committing the cause to the decision of the pope, which Pole had recommended. Pole’s consent to the measure, however, appears to have been a favourite object with the king; and therefore in 1531, the archbishopric of York was offered him on condition that he would not oppose the divorce but he refused this dignity on such terms, after a sharp contention, as he says in his epistle to king Edward, between his ambition and his conscience. He is said also to have given his opinion on this subject so very freely to the king, that he dismissed him in great anger from his presence, and never sent for him more.

h which the pope seemed satisfied but the very next day, whether induced by the imperial emissaries, or of his own will, he commanded Pole’s immediate obedience, and

About this time the pope, having resolved to call a general council for the reformation of the church, summoned several learned men to Rome, for that purpose, and among these he summoned Pole to represent England. As soon as this was known in that country, his mother and other friends requested him not to obey the pope’s summons; and at first he was irresolute, but the importunities of his Italian friends prevailed, and he arrived at Rome in 1536, where he was lodged in the pope’s palace, and treated with the utmost respect, being considered as one who might prove a very powerful agent in any future attempt to reduce his native land to the dominion of the pope. The projected scheme of reformation, in which Pole assisted, came to nothing; but a design was now formed of advancing him to the purple, to enable him the better to promote the interests of the papal see. To this he objected, and his objections certainly do him no discredit, as a zealous adherent to the order and discipline of his church. He was not yet in holy orders, nor had received even the clerical tonsure, notwithstanding the benefices which had been bestowed on him and he represented to the pope, that such a dignity would at this juncture destroy all his influence in England, by subjecting him to the imputation of being too much biassed to the interest of the papal see and would also have a natural tendency to bring ruin on his own family. He, therefore, intreated his holiness to leave him, at least for the present, where he was, adding other persuasives, with which the pope seemed satisfied but the very next day, whether induced by the imperial emissaries, or of his own will, he commanded Pole’s immediate obedience, and he having submitted to the tonsure, was created cardinal- deacon of S. Nereus and Achilleus, on Dec. 22, 1536. Soon after he was also appointed legate, and received orders to depart immediately for the coasts of France and Flanders, to keep up the spirit of the popish party in England and he had at the same time letters from the pope to the English nation, or rather the English catholics, the French king, the king of Scotland, and to the emperor’s sister, who was regent of the Low Countries. Pole undertook this commission with great readiness, and whether from ambition or bigotry, consented to be a traitor to his country. In the beginning of Lent 1537, he set out from Rome, along with his particular friend, the bishop of Verona, and a handsome retinue. His first destination was to France, and there he received his first check, for on the very day of his arrival at Paris, the French king sent him word that he conld neither admic him to treat of the business on which be came, nor allow him 'to make any stay in his dominions. Pole now learnt that Henry VIII. had proclaimed him a traitor, and set a price (50,000 crowns) on his head. Pole then proceeded to Cambray, but there he met with the same opposition, and was not allowed to pursue his journey. The cardinal bishop of Liege, however, invited him, and liberally entertained him in that city, where he remained three months, in hopes of more favourable accounts from the emperor and the king of France but nothing of this kind occurring, he returned to Ro'iki[ after an expedition that had been somewhat disgracefu and totally unsuccessful. In 1538 he again set out on a similar design, with as little effect, and was now impeded by the necessary caution he was obliged to preserve for fear of falling into the hands of some of Henry’s agents. In the mean time, he was not only himself attainted of high treason by the Parliament of England, but his eldest brother Henry Pole, lord Montague, the marquis of Exeter, sir Edward Nevil, and sir Nicholas Carew, were condemned and executed for high treason, which consisted in a conspiracy to raise cardinal Pole to the crown. Sir Geoffrey Pole, another brother of the cardinal’s, was condemned on the same account, but pardoned in cpnsequence of his giving information against the rest. Margaret, also, countess of Salisbury, the cardinal’s mother, was condemned, but not executed until two years after. The cardinal now found how truly he had said to the pope that his being raised to that dignity would be the ruin of his family but he appears to have at this time in a great measure subdued his natural affection, as he received the account of his mother’s death with great composure, consoling himself with the consideration that she died a martyr to the catholic faith. When his secretary Beccatelli informed him of the news, and probably with much concern, the cardinal said, “Be of good courage, we have now one patron more added to those we already had in heaven.

ut all this had no effect, and the members of the privy-council refused to receive either the letter or him who brought it. The cardinal also drew up a treatise, and

On the death of Henry VIII. in 1547, he endeavoured to renew his designs, in order, as his partial historian says, “to repair the breaches which Henry had made in the faith and discipline of the church.” On this occasion he solicited the pope’s assistance, and wrote to the privycouncil of England, partly soothing and partly threatening them with what the pope could t do; but all this had no effect, and the members of the privy-council refused to receive either the letter or him who brought it. The cardinal also drew up a treatise, and inscribed it to Edward VI. which contained an elaborate vindication of his conduct towards the late king, but it does not appear that it ever came into Edward’s hands. Pole therefore remained still attainted, and was one of the few excepted in the acts of grace which passed at the accession of the young king.

e also absolved the whole realm from all ecclesiastical censure. Bin however gratifying to the court or parliament all this mummery might be, the citizens of London

All obstacles being now removed, he proceeded homewards, and arrived at Dover, Nov. 20, 1554, where he was received by some persons of rank, and reaching London, was welcomed by their majesties in the most honourable manner. No time was now lost in endeavouring to promote the great objects of his mission. On the 27th of November, the cardinal legate went to the House of Peers, where the king and queen were present, and made a long Speech, in which he invited the parliament to a reconciliation with the apostolic see from whence, he said, he was sent by the common pastor of Christendom, to bring back them who had long strayed from the inclosure of the church; and two days after the Speaker reported to the House of Commons the substance of this speech. What followed may be read with a blush. The two Houses of Parliament agreed in a petition to be reconciled to the see of Rome, which was presented to the king and queen, and stated, on the part of the parliament, that “whereas they had been guilty of a most horrible defection and schism from the Apostolic see, they did now sincerely repent of it; and in sign of their repentance, were ready to repeal all the laws made in prejudice of that see; therefore, since the king and queen had been no way defiled by their schism, they prayed them to intercede with the legate to grant them absolution, and to receive them again into the bosom of the church.” This petition being presented by both Houses on their knees to the king and queen, their majesties made their intercession with the legate, who, in a long speech, thanked the parliament for repealing the act against him, and making him a member of the nation, from which he was by that act cut off; in recompense of which, he was npw to reconcile them to the body of the church. After enjoining them, by way of penance, to repeal the laws which they had made against the Romish religion, he granted them, in the pope’s name, a full absolution, which they received on their knees; and he also absolved the whole realm from all ecclesiastical censure. Bin however gratifying to the court or parliament all this mummery might be, the citizens of London and the people at large felt no interest in the favours which the pope’s representative bestowed. In London, during one of his processions, no respect was paid to him, or to the cross carried before him and so remiss were the people in other parts in their congratulations on the above joyful occasion, that the queen was obliged to write circular letters to the sheriffs, compelling them to rejoice.

diner laboured to hasten the bloody persecution which followed'; but, either out-argued by Gardiner, or influenced by the court, we find that -he granted commissions

After the dissolution of parliament, the first thing taken into consideration was, in what manner to proceed against the heretics. Pole, as we have before noticed, had been charged by some with favouring the protestants; but he now expressed a great detestation of them, adding probably something of personal resentment to his constitutional bigotry, and would not now converse with any who had been of that party, except sir William Cecil. Since his arrival as legate, his temper appeared to have undergone an unpleasant alteration: he was reserved to all except Priuli and Ormaneto, two Italians whom he brought with him, and in whom he confided. Still for some time he recommended moderate measures with respect to heretics, while Gardiner laboured to hasten the bloody persecution which followed'; but, either out-argued by Gardiner, or influenced by the court, we find that -he granted commissions for the prosecution of heretics, as one of the first acts of his legantine authority. If in this he was persuaded contrary to his opinion and feelings, he must have been the most miserable of all men; for the consequences, it is well known, were such as no man of feeling could contemplate without horror.

ants, &c. the pope, Paul IV. discovered a more violent animosity against him than before. The cause, or one of the causes, was of a political nature. Paul was now engaged

It was cardinal Pole’s misfortune that he was never long successful in that line of conduct which he thought would have most recommended him; and now, when he was doing every thing to gratify the Roman see, by the persecution of the protestants, &c. the pope, Paul IV. discovered a more violent animosity against him than before. The cause, or one of the causes, was of a political nature. Paul was now engaged in a war with Philip, king of Spain and husband to Mary, and he knew that the cardinal was devoted to the interests of Spain. He therefore wanted a legate at the court of England like himself, vigorous and resolute who, by taking the lead in council, and gaining the queen’s confidence, might prevent her from engaging in her husband’s quarrels. But while Pole remained in that station, he was apprehensive that by his instigation she might enter into alliances destructive to his politics. Upon various pretensions, therefore, Paul IV. revived the old accusation against the cardinal, of being a suspected heretic, and summoned him to Rome to answer the charge. He deprived him also of the office of legate, which he conferred upon Peyto, a Franciscan friar, whom he had made a cardinal for the purpose, designing also the see of Salisbury for him. This appointment took place in Sept. 1557, and the new legate was on his way to England, when the bulls came into the hands of queen Mary, who having been informed of their contents by her ambassador, laid them up without opening them, or acquainting Pole with them. She also directed her ambassador at Rome to tell his holiness, “that this was not the method to keep the kingdom steadfast in the catholic faith, but rather to make it more heretical than ever, for that cardinal Pole was the very anchor of the catholic party.” She did yet more, and with somewhat of her father’s spirit, charged Peyto at his peril to set foot upon English ground. Pole, however, who by some means became acquainted with the fact, displayed that superstitious veneration for the apostolic see which was the bane of his character, and immediately, laid clown the ensigns of his legantine power and dispatched his friend Ormaneto to the pope with an apology so submissive, that, we are told, it melted the obdurate heart of Paul. The cardinal appears to have been restored to his power as legate soon after, but did not live to enjoy it a full year, being seized with an ague which carried him ff Nov. 18, 1558, the day after the death of queen Mary. With them expired the power of the papal see over the political or religious constitution of this kingdom, and all its fatal effects on religion, liberty, and learning.

or Poelemburg, a celebrated Dutch painter, was born at Utrecht

, or Poelemburg, a celebrated Dutch painter, was born at Utrecht in 1586, where he became the disciple of Abraham Bloemart, but went to complete his studies at Rome. His first determination was to imitate the manner of Elsheimer but when he contemplated the works of Raphael, he was so affected, that he was led irresistibly to copy after that much higher model. This union of objects produced a mixed but original style; more free and graceful than the Flemish, though with far less grandeur and excellence of design than the Italian. He could not rise to the execution of large figures; his best pieces, therefore, are of the cabinet size; but he surpassed all his contemporaries in the delicacy of his touch, the sweetness of his colouring, and the choice of agreeable objects aud situations. His skies are clear, light, and transparent his back-grounds often ornamented with the vestiges of magnificent Roman edifices and his female figures, which are usually without drapery, are highly beautiful. He returned rather reluctantly to Utrecht, where, however, his merit was acknowledged by the great Rubens. Charles I. invited him to London, where he was much employed, and richly paid; but, though he was much solicited to remain here, his love for his native country prevailed, and he returned to Utrecht, where he died in 1660, affluent and highly esteemed. The genuine works of Polemberg are extremely scarce; but figures by him maybe found in the works of other artists, particularly those of Steenwyck, and Kierings; and his disciple John Vander Lis so successfully imitated his style, that the works of the pupil are frequently taken for those of the master.

is father was a doctor of the civil law. His name, according to M. Baillet, was Benedictus de Cinis, or, de Ambroginis, for he considers the former as a corruption

, a most ingenious and learned Italian, was born July 14, 1454, at Monte Pulciano in Tuscany and from the name of this town, in Latin Mons Politianus, he derived the surname of Politian. His father was a doctor of the civil law. His name, according to M. Baillet, was Benedictus de Cinis, or, de Ambroginis, for he considers the former as a corruption of the latter. Politian, who gave early proofs of an extraordinary genius; had the advantage of Christophero Landino’s instructions in the Latin language. His preceptors in the Greek were Andronicus of Thessalonica and John Argyropylus. His abilities, at a very early period of his life, attracted the notice of Lorenzo and Julius de Medici. An Italian poem, the production of his juvenile pen, in which he celebrated an equestrian spectacle, or Giostra, wherein the latter bore away the prize, greatly contributed to establish his reputation. He was thence honoured with the peculiar patronage of the Medicean family; and, among other persons remarkable for genius and learning, whom the munificence of Lorenzo attracted to Florence, Politian was seen to shinq as a star of the first magnitude. Lorenzo confided to him the education of his own children and in this honourable employment he passed a great part of his life, favoured with the peculiar friendship of his patron, and the society and correspondence of men of letters. Among the more intimate associates of Poiitian, was Picus of Mi ran ­dula, and between these eminent scholars there was a strict attachment, and a friendly communication of studies. The Platonic philosopher, Marsilius Ficinus, completed this literary triumvirate.

on the very questionable authority of Paulus Jovius of whom it is said, that prejudice, resentment, or interest, generally guided his pen. Politian has found able

Serious charges have been alleged against the purity of his morals but these are, for the most part, allowed to rest on the very questionable authority of Paulus Jovius of whom it is said, that prejudice, resentment, or interest, generally guided his pen. Politian has found able advocates in Pierius Valerian us “De Infelicitate Literatorum,” in Barthius’ “Adversaria,” and in Mr. Roscoe. It must be acknowledged, however, says his late biographer, Mr. Gresswell, that the youthful muse of Politian did not always adhere to the strictness of decorum, a fault too common amongst the poetical writers of his age. A few of his Greek epigrams, as well as of his Latin verses, are very exceptionable.

up for, and inscribed to this prince while his father Marcus Antoninus was living, an “Onomasticon, or Greek Vocabulary,” divided into ten books. It is still extant,

, an ancient Greek grammarian, was born at Naucrates, a town in Egypt, in the year 180. Having been educated under the sophists, he became eminent in grammatical and critical learning taught rhetoric at Athens, and acquired so much reputation, that he was advanced to be preceptor of the emperor Commodus. He drew up for, and inscribed to this prince while his father Marcus Antoninus was living, an “Onomasticon, or Greek Vocabulary,” divided into ten books. It is still extant, and contains a vast variety of synonymous words and phrases, agreeably to the copiousness of the Greek language, ranged under the general classes of things. The first edition of the “Onomasticon” was published at Venice by Aldus in 1502, and a Latin version was added in the edition of 1608, by Seberus; but there was.no correct and handsome edition of it, till that of Amsterdam, 1706, in folio, by Lederlin and Hemsterhuis. Lederlin went through the first seven books, correcting the text and version, and subjoining his own, with the notes of Salmasius, Is. Vossius, Valesius, and of Kuhnius, whose scholar he had been, and whom he succeeded in the professorship of the Oriental languages in the university of Strasburgh. Hemsterhuis continued the same method through the three last books. Pollux died in the year 238. He is said to have written many other works, none of which are come down to us but there was another of the same name, who is supposed to have flourished about the end of the fourth century, and wrote “Historia physica, seu chronicon ab origine mundi ad Valentis tempora.” Of this Bianconi published the first edition at Bonon. 1779, fol. and Ignatius Hardt, a second in 1792, 8vo, without knowing of the preceding.

were then the most powerful republic in Greece. He was born in the fourth year of the 143d olympiad, or in the 548th year of the building of Rome, or about 203 years

, an eminent Greek historian, was of Megalopolis, a city of Arcadia, and was the son of Lycortas, general of the Achaeans, who were then the most powerful republic in Greece. He was born in the fourth year of the 143d olympiad, or in the 548th year of the building of Rome, or about 203 years before Christ. When twentyfour years of age, the Achaeans sent him and his father Lycortas ambassadors to the king of Egypt; and the son had afterwards the same honour, when he was deputed to go to the Roman consul, who made war upon Perses, king of Macedon. In the consulships of Æmilius Paetus and Julius Pennus, a thousand Achaeans were ordered to Rome, as hostages, for the good behaviour of their countrymen who were suspected of designs against the Romans; and were there detained seventeen years. Polybius, who was one of them, and was then thirty-eight years of age, had great talents from nature, which were well cultivated by education; and his residence at Rome appears to have been of great advantage to him since he owed to it, not only the best part of his learning, but the important friendship he contracted with Scipio and Lselius and when the time of his detention expired, he accompanied Scipio into Africa. After this he was witness to the sack and destruc* tion of Corinth, and of the reduction of Achaia to tho condition of a Roman provinces Amidst these dreadful scenes, he displayed noble traits of patriotism and disinterestedness, which obtained for him so much credit, that he was entrusted with the care of settling the new form of government in the cities of Greece, which office he performed to the satisfaction both of the Romans and the Greeks. In all his journeys he amassed materials for his history, and took such observations as to render his descriptions very accurate. Although his chief object was the history of the Romans, whose language he had learned with great care, and the establishment of their empire, yet he had in his eye the general history of the times in which he lived and therefore he gave his work the name of “Catholic or Universal” nor was this at all inconsistent with his general purpose, there being scarcely any nations at that time in the known world, which had not some contest with, or dependence upon, the Romans. Of forty books which he composed, there remain but the first five entire; with an epitome of the twelve following, which is supposed to have been made by that great assertor of Roman liberty, Marcus Brutus. Brutus is said to have been so particularly fond of Polybius, that, even in the last and most unfortunate hours of his life, he amused himself not only in reading, but also in abridging his history. The space of time which this history includes, is fifty-three years, beginning, after two of introductory matter, at the third book.

have only the Brst five books entire, and an abridgment of the twelve following, with some excerpta or extracts of this history, formerly made by Constantinus For

How much this historian was valued by the ancients, appears by the number of statues erected to his honour, and Cicero, Strabo, Josephus, Plutarch, and others, have spoken, of him in terms of the highest applause. Livy however has been censured for calling him only auctor haudquaquam spernendus, “an author by no means to be despised,” after he had borrowed very largely from him but Casaubon and Vossius think that according to the usual phraseology of the ancients, Livy’s expression implies a rery high eulogium. Polybius’s style is by no means elegant, but the accuracy and fidelity of his narrative render his history a work of great importance. There is no historian among the ancients, from whom more is to be learned of the events which he professes to narrate, and it is much to be lamented that his history has not descended to us in a perfect state. We have only the Brst five books entire, and an abridgment of the twelve following, with some excerpta or extracts of this history, formerly made by Constantinus Forphyrogenitus which were first published in Greek by Ursinus in 1582, and in Greek and Latin by the learned Henry Valesius in 1634. Poly bi us lived to a great age; but concerning the particulars of his life much eannot be collected. He was highly honoured by the friendship of Scipio who, when the other hostages from Achaia were distributed through the cities of Italy, obtained leave by his interest for Polybius to live at Rome. He died at eighty-two years of age, of an illness occasioned by a fall from his horse.

was set upon an ass, and conducted towards the city. Upon the road he was met by Herod, an Irenarch or justice of the province, and his father, who were the principal

The persecution growing violent at Smyrna, and many having already sealed their confession with their blood, the general outcry was, “Away with the impious; let Polycarp be sought for.” On this he withdrew privately into a neighbouring village, where he lay concealed for some time, continuing night and day in prayer for the peace of the church. He was thus occupied, when, one night falling into a trance, he dreamed that his pillow took fire, and was burnt to ashes; which he told his friends was a presage, that he should be burnt alive for the cause of Christ. Three days after this dream, in. order to escape the search which was carried on incessantly after him, he retired into another village, where he was discovered, although some say he had time to escape but he refused it, saying, “The will of the Lord be done.” Accordingly he saluted his persecutors with a cheerful countenance and, ordering a table to be set with provisions, invited them to partake of them, only requesting for himself one hour for prayer. This being over, he was set upon an ass, and conducted towards the city. Upon the road he was met by Herod, an Irenarch or justice of the province, and his father, who were the principal agents in this persecution. This magistrate taking him up into his chariot, tried to undermine his constancy and, being defeated in the attempt, thrust him out of the chariot with so much violence, that he bruised his thigh with the fall. On his arrival at the place of execution, there came, as is said, a voice from heaven, saying, “Polycarp, be strong, and quit thyself like a man.” Being brought before the tribunal, he was urged to swear by the genius of Caesar. “Repent,” continues the proconsul, “and say with us, Take away the impious.” On this the martyr looking round the stadium, and beholding the crowd with a severe and angry countenance, beckoned with his hand, and looking up to heaven, said with a sigh, quite in another tone than they intended, “Take away the impious.” At last, confessing himself to be a Christian, proclamation was made thrice of his confession by the crier, at which the people shouted, “This is the great teacher of Asia, and the father of the Christians; this is the destroyer of our gods, that teaches men not to do sacrifice, or worship the deities.” The fire being prepared, Polycarp, at his own request, was not, as usual, nailed, but only tied to the stake and after pronouncing a short prayer, with a clear and audible voice, the executioner blew up the fire, which increasing to a mighty flame, “Behold a wonder seen,” says Eusebius, “by us who were purposely reserved, that we might declare it to others the flames disposing themselves into the resemblance of an arch, like the sails of a ship swelled with the wind, gentty encircled the body of the martyr, who stood all the while in the midst, not like roasted flesh, but like the gold or silver purified in the furnace, his body sending forth a delightful fragrancy, which, like frankincense, or some other costly spices, presented itself to our senses. The infidels, exasperated by the miracle, commanded a spearman to run him through with a sword which he had no sooner done, but such a vast quantity of blood flowed from the wound, as extinguished the fire when a dove was seen to fly from the wound, which some suppose to have been his soul, cloathed in a visible shape at the time of its departure.” The Christians would have carried off his body entire, but were not suffered by the Irenarch, who commanded it to be burnt to ashes. The bones, however, were gathered up, and decently interred by the Christians.

canon of proportion; we read also of the statue of a boy, which was estimated at a hundred talents, or perhaps nearly 20,000l. according to our mode of reckoning.

, a famous sculptor of antiquity, was a native of Sicyon, and flourished about the year 430 B. C. We know nothing of his history but from incidental notice of him in Pliny. His Doryphorus, one of his figures, for his excellence lay in single figures, was esteemed a canon of proportion; we read also of the statue of a boy, which was estimated at a hundred talents, or perhaps nearly 20,000l. according to our mode of reckoning. The emperor Titus had two naked boys playing at a game, by his hand, which was considered as a perfect performance. Lysippus the painter formed his manner on the study of the Doryphorus of this artist.

on,” and written in 1700, when the disputes about the Trinity ran high; the other, “Dies Novissima,” or, “The Last Epiphany,” a Pindaric ode. His versification is sometimes

A volume of his poems was published by himself in 1699, with a very modest and sensible preface. Two pieces of his were published after his death by a friend under the name of Philalethes one called “Reason,” and written in 1700, when the disputes about the Trinity ran high; the other, “Dies Novissima,or, “The Last Epiphany,” a Pindaric ode. His versification is sometimes not unmusical; but there is not the force in his writings which is 'necessary to constitute a poet. A dissenting teacher of his name, and who published some rhimes upon spiritual subjects, occasioned fanaticism to be imputed to him; but from this his friend Philalethes has justly cleared him. Pomfret had a very strong mixture of devotion in him, but no fanaticism.

y the pleasure of smooth metre is afforded to the ear, and the mind is not oppressed with ponderous, or entangled with intricate sentiment. He pleases many, and he

The Choice,” says Dr. Johnson, “exhibits a system of life adapted to common notions, and equal to common expectations such a state as affords plenty and tranquillity, without exclusion of intellectual pleasures. Perhaps no composition in our language has been oftener perused than. Pomfret‘ s * Choice.’ In his other poems there is an easy volubility the pleasure of smooth metre is afforded to the ear, and the mind is not oppressed with ponderous, or entangled with intricate sentiment. He pleases many, and he who pleases many must have merit,” His son, John, had the office of Rouge-croix in the heralds’ office, and wrote some satirical verses on the removal of the family portraits of the Howards from the hall of the heralds’ college to Arundei castle. He died March 24, 1751, aged forty-nine.

or P0MPEIUS (CNEius), surnamed Magnus, or the Great, was of a noble

, or P0MPEIUS (CNEius), surnamed Magnus, or the Great, was of a noble Roman family, the son of Pompeius Strabo, and Lucilia. He was born the same year with Cicero, but nine months later, namely, in the consulship of Csepio and Serranus, 105 years before the Christian sera. His father was a general of great abilities, and under him he learned the art of war. When he was only twenty-three he raised three legions, which he led to Sylla. Three years after, he drove the opponents of Sylla from Africa and Sicily. Young as he was, he had already won the soldiers sufficiently, by his mildness and military talents, to excite the jealousy of Sylla, who therefore recalled him to Rome. His soldiers would have detained him in spite of the dictator’s orders, but he obeyed, and was rewarded on his arrival by the name of Magnus, given him by Sylla, and soon after confirmed unanimously by his countrymen. He obtained also the honours of a triumph, which the dictator permitted rather unwillingly, and was the first instance of a Roman knight, who had not risen to any magistracy, being advanced to that elevation. This was in 81 B. C. In a short time, he had obtained as much power by the voluntary favour of the people, as Sylla had before by arms and after the death of that extraordinary man, obliged Lepidus to quit Rome, and then undertook the war against Sertorius in Spain, which he brought to a fortunate conclusion. For this victory he triumphed a second time, B. C. 73, being still only in the rank of a knight. Not long afterwards he was chosen consul. In that office he re-established the power of the tribunes; and, in the course of a few years, exterminated the pirates who infested the Mediterranean, gained great advantages against Tigranes and Mithriclates, and carried his victorious arms into Media, Albania, Iberia, and the most important parts of Asia; and so extended the boundaries of the Roman empire, that Asia Minor, which before formed the extremity of its provinces, now became, in a manner, the centre of them. When he returned to receive a triumph for these victories, he courted popularity by dismissing his troops and entering the city as a private citizen. He triumphed with great splendour but not feeling his influence such as he had hoped, he united with Caesar and Crassus to form the first triumvirate. He strengthened his union with Ccesar by marrying his daughter Julia; he was destined nevertheless to find in Caesar not a friend, but too successful a rival. While Caesar was gaining in his long Gallic wars a fame and a power that were soon to be invincible, Pompey was endeavouring to cultivate his popularity and influence in Rome. Ere long they took directly contrary parties. Pompey became the hope and the support of the patricians and the senate, while Caesar was the idol of the people. On the return of the latter from Gaul, in the year 51 A. C. the civil war broke out, which terminated, as is well known, by the defeat of Pompey in the battle of Pharsalia, A. C. 49, and the base assassination of him by the officers of Ptolemy in Egypt. It appears that Pompey had not less ambition than Caesar, but was either more scrupulous, or less sagacious and fortunate in his choice of means to gratify that passion. He was unwilling to throw off the mask of virtue and moderation, and hoped to gain every thing by intrigue and the appearance of transcendant merit. In this he might have been successful, had he not been opposed to a man whose prompt and decisive measures disconcerted his secret plans, drove things a once to extremities, and forced him to have recourse to the decision of arms, in which victory declared against him. The moderate men, and those who were sincerely attached to the republic of Rome, dreaded, almost equally, the success of Pompey and of Caesar. Cato, who took the mourning habit on the breaking out of the civil war, had resolved upon death if Caesar should be victorious, and exile if sue* cess should declare for Pompey.

ut this was a circumstance on which he preserved an inflexible silence, and admitted no conversation or questions on the subject. Even when that family sent him an

, an eminent Italian antiquary, all whose names were of his own choice, was the illegitimate offspring of the illustrious house of Sanseverino, in the kingdom of Naples; but this was a circumstance on which he preserved an inflexible silence, and admitted no conversation or questions on the subject. Even when that family sent him an invitation to reside with them, he rejected it by a laconic note which is preserved by Tiraboschi “Pomponius Laetus cognatis et propinquis suis salutem. Quod petitis fieri non potest. Valete.” “Pomponius Laetus to his kinsmen and relations what you ask cannot be granted. Farewell.” He went young to Home, where he studied first under a very able grammarian of that time, Pietro da Monopoli, and afterwards under Laurentius Valia. On the death of this eminent scholar in 1457, he was thought qualified to succeed him in his professorship. He now began to found an academy, the members of which were men of letters, fond of antiquary researches, like himself, but who sometimes entered upon philosophical discussions. They were mostly young men, and in their zeal for past times, the glorious days of Rome, adopted Latinized names. Our author took that of Pomponius Lsetus, and Buonaccorsi that of Callimachus Experiens, &c. In their philosophical discussions, they went so far as to compare ancient with modern institutions, not much to the credit of the latter and at length this was represented to pope Paul II. (whom we have recently noticed as the persecutor of Platina) first as inferring a contempt for religion secondly, as an attack on the church and lastly, as a conspiracy against the pope himself. The pope, either really alarmed, or pretending to be so, ordered all the members of the academy to be arrested, that could be found, and imprisoned and put them to the torture, of which one very promising young scholar died and although Pomponius was at this time (1468) at Venice, and had been indeed residing for three years with the Cornaro family, he was dragged in chains to Rome, and shared the same horrible fate as his fellow academicians; and although, after various examinations, conducted by the pope himself, no proof of guilt appeared, he and his companions remained in confinement a very considerable time. The death of their persecutor, however, restored them to liberty, and it was no inconsiderable testimony of their innocence that his successor Sixtus IV. equally strict in matters of heresy, made Platina librarian of the Vatican, and restored Pomponius to his professorship, in which office he continued to draw a great concourse of scholars. He also endeavoured to revive his academy, against which Paul It. had been so inveterate that he forbid its name to be mentioned either in jest or earnest, “vel serio vel joco,” attd we find two grand commemorations held by the members, in 1482 and 1483; the one on account of the death of Platina, the other to celebrate the foundation of Rome.

, an eminent French engineer, is considered as the first military topographer, or rather as the inventor of that art, in the time of Louis XIV.

, an eminent French engineer, is considered as the first military topographer, or rather as the inventor of that art, in the time of Louis XIV. It was his practice to follow the army, and construct upon the spot plans of the battles and sieges, with historical and perspective accompaniments. We find many of his plans in the “GEvre de Delle-Bella” but his most important work is entitled “Les glorieuses Conquetes de Louis-le-Grand ou Recueil de Plans et Vues des places assiegees, et de celles ou se sont donnee*s des batailles, avec des Discours,” 2 vols. folio. This work, one of the most magnificent of the kind, comprehends all the operations of war, from the battle of Rocroi, in 1643, to the taking of Namur, in 1692. De Pontault died in 1674; but the work was completed to the above date at the expence of his niece, the widow of the sieur Des Roches. This edition is usually called the Grand Beaulieu, to distinguish it' from one on a reduced scale, in oblong quarto, called the Petit fieaulieu, of which there are two series, one in three volumes, comprehending views of the actions in the Netherlands; the other in four, which includes those of France. From the death of this able draftsman, military topography is said to have been productive of very few good specimens in France, uptil within the last fifty years.

ginally of Vicenza, but settled at Bassano, a small town on the Brenta, whence he was called Bassan, or Bassano. He may be considered as the head of the Bassanese school

, one of a family of artists, was originally of Vicenza, but settled at Bassano, a small town on the Brenta, whence he was called Bassan, or Bassano. He may be considered as the head of the Bassanese school and his education is said to have been sufficiently learned. The different styles that discriminate his works clearly shew which were the first and which the last. He is diligent, but dry, in the St. Bartolomeo of the cathedral, more genial and mellow in another picture of the church of S. Giovanni at Bassano but in the Pentecost which he painted in the village of Olero, he shews himself almost a modern painter; the arrangement is masterly, the colour has suavity, Variety, harmony, the expression is warm, pleasing, and characteristic of the subject. He was the father and first instructor of Jacob da Pome. He died about 1530.

He went to Venice, recommended to Bonifazio, a master not less jealous of his ‘ mystery’ than Titian or Tintoretto so that Jacob saw little more of his method than

, called also IL Bassano, and IL Bassan Vecchio, was born at Bassano, 1510, and initiated in the first principles of the art by his father, of which the proofs are his earliest works in the church of S. Bernardino. He went to Venice, recommended to Bonifazio, a master not less jealous of his ‘ mystery’ than Titian or Tintoretto so that Jacob saw little more of his method than what he could discover through a key-hole or a crevice. The short time he staid at Venice was employed drawing from the designs of Parmegiano, and in making copies from the pictures of Bonifazio and Titian, whose scholar he is even called in some ms. and not without probability, if conformity of manner were sufficient to prove it, so much does his second style resemble that of Titian. The death of his father obliged him to return and to fix himself at Bassano, a small opulent town surrounded by a picturesque country, abounding in cattle and pastures, and conveniently situated for markets and fairs: from which objects arose his third style, natural, simple, and pleasing, the Italian prelude to that which afterwards distinguished the Flemish school. In the handling of the pencil he had two methods: one highly finished in blended tints, and only at last decided by bolder touches; the second, which must be the result of the first, was formed of simple pencilstrokes, and dashes of gay and lucid tints, laid on with conscious power, and a kind of contemptuous security, which, on close inspection, appear a confused mass, at a distance from a magic charm of colours. His composition in both is the same, and peculiar to himself, blending circular with triangular forms, and the most contrasted postures with parallel lines. He veils his light, and by its sober distribution, the frequent use of demi-tints, and little or no black, contrives to produce harmony from the most opposite colours. In the degradation of his lights, he often makes the shade of an interior figure serve for the ground of an exterior one, and strikes the strongest lights on the most angular parts, such as the top of the shoulders, the knee, the elbows. His drapery, simple in appearance, is disposed with great art for this purpose, and the folds are varied according to the difference of the stuffs with unusual refinement. His colours even now have the brilliancy of gems, especially the green, which has an emerald lustre peculiar to himself.

ng the Philistines, with a fierceness not unworthy of Michael Angelo. But whether prompted by nature or judgment, he soon confined himself to smaller proportions and

In the beginning he aimed at grandeur of style, and left some traces of it in certain pictures still existing in front of the house Michieli, chiefly remarkable for a figure of Samson slaying the Philistines, with a fierceness not unworthy of Michael Angelo. But whether prompted by nature or judgment, he soon confined himself to smaller proportions and subjects of less energy. Even in altarpieces his figures are generally below the natural size, and seldom much alive so that socne one said, the elders of Tintoretto had all the rage of yocith, and the youth of Bassano all the apathy of age. His situation, the monotony and meanness of the objects that surrounded him, limited his ideas, debased his fancy, and caused frequent repetitions of the same subjects without much variation. He had contracted the habit of working at his ease in his study assisted by his scholars, and of dispatching the produce to Venice, or the most frequented fairs. Hence those swarms of pictures of all sizes, which make it less a boast for a collector to possess a Bassan, than a disgrace not to have one. The Banquet of Martha and the Pharisee, the Prodigal Son, Noah’s Ark, the Return of Jacob, the Annunciation to the Shepherds, the Queen of Sheba, the Three Magi, the Seizure of Christ, and the taking down from the Cross by torch-light, nearly compose the series of his sacred subjects. The profane ones consist chiefly in markets, rustic employments, kitchens, larders, &c. His daughters generally sat for his females, whether queens, Magdalens, or country wenches. The grand objection to his works is a repetition of similar conceits; but these, it must be allowed, he carried to a high degree of perfection. He lived equally employed by the public and the great, and highly esteemed, if not by Vasari, by the most celebrated of his contemporaries and rivals, Titian, Tintoretto, Annibal Caracci, and Paul Veronese. He died in 1592, aged eighty-two, leaving four sons, Francis, Leander, John Baptist, and Jerom all of whom preserved the reputation of the family, in a considerable degree, for many years.

sq. by a daughter of alderman Toppin of York, and was descended from the ancient family of the Pools or Pooles, of Sprinkhill, in Derbyshire, but his grandfather, being

, a learned Nonconformist, was born in the city of York in 1624. He was the son of Francis Pool, esq. by a daughter of alderman Toppin of York, and was descended from the ancient family of the Pools or Pooles, of Sprinkhill, in Derbyshire, but his grandfather, being obliged to leave that county on. account of his attachment to the reformation, lived at Sikehouse, and afterwards at Drax-abbey, in Yorkshire. Our author was educated at Emanuel-college, Cambridge, under the learned Dr. Worthington, and took the degree of M. A. in which he was incorporated at Oxford, July 14, 1657. Having long before this adopted the prevailing notions during the usurpation, concerning ecclesiastical polity, on the presbyterian plan, he was ordained according to the forms then used; and about 1648, was appointed rector or rather minister of St. Michael le Querne, in London, in which he succeeded Dr. Anthony Tuckney.

Socinian tenets of John Biddle, and was entitled “The Blasphemer slain with the sword of the Spirit, or a plea for the Godhead of the Holy Ghost, wherein the Deity

His first publication appeared in 1654, against the Socinian tenets of John Biddle, and was entitled “The Blasphemer slain with the sword of the Spirit, or a plea for the Godhead of the Holy Ghost, wherein the Deity of the Spirit is proved, against the cavils of John Biddle,” 12mo. In 1657 he went to Oxford, to be present at the installation of Richard Cromwell, who then succeeded his father Oliver, as chancellor of that university, and it was upon this occasion that Mr. Pool was incorporated M. A. In the following year he published a schemeof education under the title of, “A model for the maintaining of students of choice abilities at the university, and principally in order to the ministry. Together with a Preface before it, and after it a recommendation from the university; and two serious exhortations recommended unto all the unfeigned lovers of piety and learning, and more particularly to those rich men who desire to honour the Lord with their substance,1658, 4to. Among the learned persons who approved this scheme, we find the names of John Worthington, John Arrowsmith, Anthony Tuckney, Benjamin Whichcot, Ralph Cudworth, and William Dillingham. Its object was to provide a fund, out of which a certain number of young men might be maintained at the university, who could obtain no other maintenance by exhibitions, scholarships, &c. Dr. Sherlock, afterwards deaa of St. Paul’s, was indebted to this fund, being supported, out of it in taking his bachelor’s degree. The whole sum. raised was about 900l. but the restoration put a stop to any farther accumulation.

ns.“This expression he totally denies, but admits that he did dislike and speak against instrumental or vocal music when so refined as to take up the attention of the

In support of the opinions of himself and his party, he published in 1659, a letter, in one sheet 4to, addressed to the lord Charles Fleetwood, and delivered to him o,n the 13th of December, which related to the juncture of affairs at that time and in the same year appeared “Quo Warran to a moderate debate about the preaching of unordained persons election, ordination, and the extent of the ministerial relation, in vindication of the Jus Divinum Ministerii, from the exceptions of a late piece, entitled” The Preacher sent.“4to. In the title-page of this” Quo Warranto“it is said to be written by the appointment of the provincial assembly at London. In 1660 he took a share in the morning exercise, a series of sermons then preached by those of the London clergy who were deemed puritans; and he contributed some of the most learned and argumentative of their printed collection. The same year he published a sermon upon John iv. 23, 24, preached before the lord mayor of London at St. Paul’s, Aug. 26, in the preface to which he informs us that he printed it exactly as it was preached, in consequence of some misrepresentations that had gone abroad one of which, says he, was” that I wished their ringers might rot that played upon the organs.“This expression he totally denies, but admits that he did dislike and speak against instrumental or vocal music when so refined as to take up the attention of the hearers” I appeal,“he adds,” to the experience of any ingenuous person, whether curiosity of voice and musical sounds in churches does not tickle the fancy with a carnal delight, and engage a man’s ear and most diligent attention unto those sensible motions and audible sounds, and therefore must necessarily, in great measure, recall him from spiritual communion with God; seeing the mind of man cannot attend to two things at once with all it’s might [to each], and when we serve God we must do it with all our mig;ht. And hence it is, that the ancients have some of them given this rule that even vocal singing [in churches] should not be too curious, sed legenti similior giiam canenti. And Paul himself gives it a wipe, Eph. v. 19, Speaking to yourselves in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, making melody in your hearts to the Lord“This sermon was revived in 1698, 4to, with the title of” A reveres to Mr. Oliver’s Sermon of Spiritual Worship." The descendants of the nonconformists have, however, in our times effectually got rid of their prejudices against organs.

which appeared very formidable was thrown in his way by Cornelius Bee, a bookseller, who, in a paper or pamphlet called “The case of Cornelius Bee,” accused Mr. Pool

With much encouragement he had also some difficulties to encounter. When the first volume was ready for the press, an obstruction which appeared very formidable was thrown in his way by Cornelius Bee, a bookseller, who, in a paper or pamphlet called “The case of Cornelius Bee,” accused Mr. Pool of invading his property. To understand this it is necessary to know that this Mr. Bee, unquestionably a man of an enterprizing spirit, equal perhaps to any instance known in our days among the trade, had published a very few years before, i. e. in 1660, the “Critici Sacri,or a body of criticisms of the most learned men in Europe, amounting to ninety, on the Old and New Testament, given at large from their works, and extending to nine volumes folio. Bee had a patent for this work, and unquestionably deserved every encouragement and protection the law could give, but the language of his patent seems to have given him a narrow notion of literary property. It stated that no person should print the Critics either in whole or in party and therefore he considered Mr. Pool as prohibited from taking any thing from this vast collection of criticisms which separately were in every persons’ hands, or from making any abridgment, or compiling any work that resembled the “Critici Sacri,” however improved in the plan, or augmented, as Pool’s was, from a variety authors not used in it. He also complained that he should sustain a double injury by the “Synopsis:” first, in the loss of the sale of the remaining copies of his own work, for which he did Mr. Pool the honour to think there would be no longer a demand; and secondly, in being prevented from publishing an improved edition of the “Critici Sacri” which he intended.

truly, that for this sum the purchaser had more works than he could have bought separately for 50l. or 60l. But as he had blamed Pool for Occasioning a depreciation

In answer to this, Mr. Pool said, that as soon as he heard of Mr. Bee’s objections, he took the opinion of counsel, which was in favour of his proceeding with the “Synopsis” that he also offered to submit the matter to arbitration, which Bee refused, and that he, in vain proposed other terms of accommodation, offering him a fourth part of the property of the work, which Mr. Bee treated with contempt; “but,” adds Pool, “I doubt not Mr. Bee will be more reconciled to it the next time that Mr. Pool shall make him such another offer,” which we shall see proved to be true. With regard to the supposed injury that would accrue to Mr. Bee, part appears imaginary, and part contradictory. We learn from this controversy, that the price of the “Critici Sacri” (which, as well- as of the “Synopsis,” has been, in our time, that of waste paper) was originally 13l. 10s. and Bee says in his preface, and truly, that for this sum the purchaser had more works than he could have bought separately for 50l. or 60l. But as he had blamed Pool for Occasioning a depreciation of the remaining copies of the “Critici Sacri,” the latter tells him that if this was a crime, he was himself guilty of it in two ways for first when he brought down the price of divers books from 50l. or 60l. to 13l. 10s. the possessors of those books were forced to sell them at far lower prices than they cost; and secondly, Pool contends that his projected new edition of the “Critici Sacri” would be a manifest injury to hundreds who bought the old one at a dear rate, and would now find them worth little more than waste paper.

at granted to Bee for the “Critici Sacri,” forbidding the printing of the “Synopsis” either in whole or in part, without his leave, for the space of fourteen years,

After some farther exchange of altercation, in which the prevailing opinions of the lawyers and others of that day are decidedly against Mr. Bee’s monopoly of biblical criticism, the parties in 1668 agreed to refer to two of his majesty’s privy-council, the marquis of Dorchester and the earl of Anglesey, who determined in favour of Mr. Pool, and, as it would seem, even to the satisfaction of Mr. Bee, whose name appears, as a vender in the title-page of vol. I. published in 1669. Pool had previously obtained his majesty’s patent, expressed in the same terms as that granted to Bee for the “Critici Sacri,” forbidding the printing of the “Synopsis” either in whole or in part, without his leave, for the space of fourteen years, under penalty of confiscation, &c. This is dated Oct. 14, 1667.

, as usually bound, he left it to his subscribers 7 option to receive the fifth without paying more, or, if they pleased, to contribute another sum of ten shillings.

We have said that Mr. Pool intended to have comprized the whole in 3 vols. folio, for which the subscription price was 4l. but he had not proceeded far before he found that he had made a wrong calculation, and that it would be necessary to add a fourth. This appears to have given him great uneasiness, for he considered his first proposals as implying a sacred and inviolable compact. As soon therefore, as he perceived his error, he issued “A Proposition” concerning this fourth volume, plainly showing that it was unavoidably necessary, but at the same time betraying very serious apprehensions as to the fate of it. His subscribers, however, soon dissipated his fears, and the bishops and other divines who had originally recommended the work to the public, being now better acquainted with his merit in executing it, and with the plan he had adopted, again came forward with a new and liberal testimonial in his favour. To the former names of his clerical patrons were now added those of Dr. Mews, Dr. Allestree, Dr. Pocock, Dr. Pearson, &c. The price of this volume to subscribers was 1/, and when it became farther necessary to extend it to the size of two, as usually bound, he left it to his subscribers 7 option to receive the fifth without paying more, or, if they pleased, to contribute another sum of ten shillings. He even hopes that this last will be the case, and trusts that “he shall not be censured by any ingenuous person, as a transgressor of the rules either of justice or modesty.” The number printed, of the whole work was four thousand, and it was so favourably received that before the fifth volume appeared, there were not two hundred copies of the preceding four unsold. And notwithstanding many hindrances of the press, &c. for which Mr. Pool thought it his duty to be frequently apologizing, the other volumes appeared in the following order; vol. I. in 1669, vol. II. in 1671, vol. III. in 1673, vol. IV. in 1674, and vol. V. in 1676, the whole in about seven years, during which, according to his own account, he had very little copy before-hand, but continued supplying two presses with incredible diligence. Calamy informs us, that while employed on this work, “his common rule was to rise very early in the morning, about three or four o'clock; and take a raw egg about eight or nine, and another about twelve, and then continue his studies till the afternoon was pretty far advanced, when he went abroad, and spent the evening at some friend’s house in cheerful conversation;” in which, he observes, “he was very facetious, as well as very true to his friend.” It may be doubted whether the British press of the eighteenth century has produced many works of equal risk and value with Walton’s “Polyglot,” the “Critici Sacri,” and the “Synopsis.” The price of the two latter has within these few years advanced very considerably; but the reputation of the “Synopsis” seems to have been longer preserved abroad than in this country. Notwithstanding the impression extended to four thousand, many of which were probably disposed of on the continent, a second edition was printed at Francfort in 1678, 5 vols. fol. and a third at Utrecht, edited by Leusden, in 1686. A fourth edition was printed at Francfort in 1694, in 5 vols. 4to, in a very small type, and a fifth at the same place in 1709, 6 vols. folio. This last, as well as the former has additions and improvements, criticisms on the Apocrypha, and a defence of the learned author against the censures of father Simon.

ing very interesting in them, unless that they inform us of the price, which was I/. 5s. per volume, or a penny per sheet, which appears to have been the average price

In the midst of this employment Mr. Pool found leisure to testify his zeal against popery, in a treatise concerning the infallibility of the church, printed in 1666, 8vo, which was followed by another the next year, 8vo, entitled, “Dialogues between a Popish priest and an English Protestant, wherein the principal points and arguments of both religions are truly proposed, and fully examined.” Besides these, he published a “Seasonable Apology for Religion,” on Matthew xi. 14, London, 1673, 4to. The first of these pieces was reprinted in 1679 his other works are some sermons, already mentioned, in the “Morning Exercise;” a poem and two epitaphs upon Mr. Jeremy Whitaker; two others upon the death of Mr. Richard Vines; and another on the death of Mr. Jacob Stock; a preface to twenty posthumous Sermons of Mr. Nalton’s, together with a character of him. He also wrote a volume of “'English Annotations on the Holy Scripture;” but was prevented by death from going farther than the 58th chapter of Isaiah. Others undertook to complete that work, whose names Ant. Wood has mistaken. From Calamy we learn that the 59th and 60th chapters of Isaiah were done by Mr. Jackson of Moulsey. The notes on the rest of Isaiah and on Jeremiah and Lamentations were drawn up by Dr. Collinges Ezekiel by Mr. Hurst Daniel by Mr. Cooper the Minor Prophets by Mr. Hurst the four Evangelists by Dr. Collinges the Acts by Mr. Vinke the Epistle to the Romans by Mr. Mayo the two Epistles to the Corinthians, and that to the Galatians, by Dr. Collinges; that to the Ephesians by Mr. Veale the Epistles to the Philippians and Colossians by Mr. Adams the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, by Dr. Collinges; that to the Hebrews by Mr. Obadiah Hughes; the Epistle of St. James, two Epistles of St. Peter, and the Epistle of St. Jude, by Mr. Veale three Epistles of St. John by Mr. Howe and the Book of the Revelations by Dr. Collinges. These Annotations were printed at London 1685, in two volumes in folio, and reprinted in 1700, which is usually called the best edition, although it is far from correct. We have the original proposals for this work also before us; but there is nothing very interesting in them, unless that they inform us of the price, which was I/. 5s. per volume, or a penny per sheet, which appears to have been the average price of folio printing at that timeWhen Oates’s depositions concerning the popish plot were printed in 167,9, Pool found his name in the list of those that were to be cut off; and an incident befel him soon after, which gave him the greatest apprehension of his danger. Having passed an evening at alderman Ashurst’s, he took a Mr. Chorley to bear him company home. When they came to the narrow passage which leads from Clerkenwell to St. John’s-court, there were two men standing at the entrance one of whom, as Pool came along, cried out to the other, “Here he is” ijpon which

, to poetical works. It does not appear that any of the learned professions were pointed out to him, or that his father attempted in any way to direct his studies.

In 1700, when he had attained his twelfth year, he retired with his father to Binfield near Oakingham and for some time was under the care of another priest named Dean, but with so little advantage, that the youth determined to study on a plan of his own, reading all such books as he could procure, but with a decided preference, even at this early age, to poetical works. It does not appear that any of the learned professions were pointed out to him, or that his father attempted in any way to direct his studies. “He was,” says Dr. Warton, “invariably and solely a poet, from the beginning of his life to the end.” Of the poets which he read, Dryden soon became his favourite and model; and we are told that he entreated a friend to carry him to Button’s coffee-house which Dryden. frequented, that he might gratify himself with the hare sight of a man whom he so much admired, and of whom he continued to speak well throughout life.

ture. One story, in a note appended to Dr. Johnson’s life of Pope, is, that her name was Withinbury, or Winbury that she was in love with Pope, and would have married

The “Messiah” appeared first in the Spectator, 1712, with a warm recommendation -. by Steele, and raised the highest expectations of what the author was capable of performing; but he was not so happy in his “Ode on St. Cecilia’s Day.” This was followed by the beautiful little ode, “The Dying Christian to his Soul,” written at Steele’s desire, to-be set to music. In this he owns his obligations to the verses of Adrian, and the fragment of Sappho, but says nothing of Flatman, whose ode he not only imitated, but copied some lines of it verbatim. - The very pathetic “Elegy to the memory of an unfortunate Lady” was probably written about thistime, but who the lady was remains a matter of conjecture. One story, in a note appended to Dr. Johnson’s life of Pope, is, that her name was Withinbury, or Winbury that she was in love with Pope, and would have married him that her guardian, though she was deformed in person, looking upon such a match as beneath her, sent her to a convent, &c. where she committed suicide but all this has been contradicted, and nothing substituted in its room much more worthy of belief.

eat as it is, is Scarcely sufficient to make the reader forget the inherent indelicacy of the story, or its pernicious tendency.

It appears by a letter to Steele, dated Nov. 16, 1712, that he then first communicated to him “The Temple of Fame,” though he had written it two years before. The descriptive powers of Pope, Warton thinks are much more visible and strong in this poem, than in the “Windsor Forest” which followed it in the order of publication, although the first part was published in 1704. The last of his separate publications which appeared about this time was the “Epistle from Eloisa to Abelard,” in which it has been justly said that he excelled every composition of the same kind. Its poetical merit, however, great as it is, is Scarcely sufficient to make the reader forget the inherent indelicacy of the story, or its pernicious tendency.

y likely that he overflowed with Greek but this, it is known, he supplied by the aid of his friends, or by scholars employed, of whom he had no personal knowledge,

Having amply established his fame by so many excellent, and by two incomparable, poems, the “Rape of the J-oc]t” and the “Eloisa,” he now meditated what Warton, somewhat incautiously, calls “a higher effort,” his translation of Homer. A higher effort it certainly was not than the poems just mentioned, but we may allow it was “something that might improve and advance his fortune as well as his fame.” A clamour was raised at the time that he had uot sufficient learning for such an undertaking and Dr. Johnson says, that considering his irregular education, and course of life, it is not very likely that he overflowed with Greek but this, it is known, he supplied by the aid of his friends, or by scholars employed, of whom he had no personal knowledge, as the celebrated Dr. Jortin, who, when a soph at Cambridge, made extracts from Eustathius for his notes. This translation Pope proposed to publish by subscription, in six vols. 4to. at the price of six guineas, and his list of subscribers soon amounted to 575, who engaged for 654 copies. The greatness of the design, and popularity of the author, and the attention of the literary world, naturally raised such expectations of the future sale, that the booksellers made their, offers with great eagerness but the hi-ghest bidder was Bernard Lintot, who became proprietor, on condition of supplying, at his own expence, all the copies which were to be delivered to subseribeYs, 4or pre,­sentecl to friends, and paying 200l. for every volume, so ­that Pope obtained, on the whole, the sum of 5S20J. 4s. Thk money he partly laid out in annuities, particularly one of 200l. a year, or as some say 500l. from the Duke of Buckingham, and partly in the purchase of a house at Twickenham, to which he now removed, having persuaded his father to sell his little property at Binfield.

tended, and that this specimen was published rather to alarm Pope’s vanity than to hurt his interest or his fame.

The publication of the first volume of the “Iliad” was attended by a circumstance which interrupted the friendship that had long subsisted between Pope and Addison. This was the appearance of a translation of the first book of the Iliad under the name of Tickell, which Pope had reason to think, and confidently asserted, was the work of Addison himself, and not of Tickell. In the collection of Pope’s letters, in Johnson’s life, and in the notes to Addison’s life in the “Biographia Britannica,” written by Mr. Justice Blackstone, are many particulars of this unhappy quarrel, the real cause of which is not very clear. Every candid reader will wish that a' charge of disingenuity against so amiable a man as Addison, could be clearly refuted, and Blackstone has made considerable progress in this. Pope’s biographers seem to think that much cannot be learned from the evidence of style, and that this translation of the first book of the Iliad is more likely to have been written by Tickell than by Addison. With his usual frankness and good nature, Steele once endeavoured to reconcile Pope and Addison but, in the interview he procured, they so bitterly upbraided each other with envy, arrogance, and ingratitude, that they parted with increased aversion and ill-will. Pope was chiefly irritated at the calm and contemptuous unconcern with which Addison affected to address him in this conversation, and his mind had been alienated from him long before, owing to a notion that Addison was jealous of his fame. Of TickelPs translation no more appeared than this first book; and if we may be permitted to add one to the many conjectures already offered on this subject, we should say that probably no more was intended, and that this specimen was published rather to alarm Pope’s vanity than to hurt his interest or his fame.

contests. The “Dunciad” indeed seems intended as a general receptacle for all his resentments, just or unjust; and we find that in subsequent editions he altered,

In 1727, Swift, who had long corresponded withhiai, coming to England, joined with Pope in publishing in 4 vols. 8vo, their miscellanies in prose and verse. To these Pope wrote a preface, complaining, among other instances, of the ill usage he had received front booksellers, and of the liberty one of them (Curll) had taken in this same year to publish his juvenile letters, purchased from a Mrs. Thomas, a mistress of his correspondent Mr. Cromwell. Pope had been intimate with this lady in his young days, but was now so seriously hurt at the publication of his letters, although he knew that she did it from distress, that he took a severe revenge in a poem called “Corinna,” and in the “Dunciad,” which appeared in the following year. The object of this celebrated satire was to crush all his adversaries in a mass, by one strong and decisive blow. His own account of this attempt is very minutely related by Pope himself, in a dedication which he wrote to Lord Middlesex, under the name of Savage the poet, who assisted Pope in finding out many particulars of these adversaries. If we may credit this narrative, Pope contemplated his victory over Dunces with great exultation and such, says Dr. Johnson, was his delight in the tumult he had raised, that for a while his natural sensibility was suspended, and he read reproaches and invectives without emotion, considering them only as the necessary effects of that pain which he rejoiced in having given. He would not however have long indulged this reflection, if all the persons he classed among the Dunces had possessed the spirit which animated some of them. Ducket demanded and obtained satisfaction for a scandalous imputation on his moral character and Aaron Hill expostulated with Pope in a manner so much superior to all mean solicitation, that Pope “was reduced to sneak and shuffle, sometimes to deny, and sometimes to apologize: he first endeavours to wound, and is then afraid to own that he meant a blow.” There are likewise some names introduced in this poem with disrespect which could receive no injury from such an attack. His placing the learned Bentley among dunces, could have occurred to Pope only in the moment of his maddest revenge Bentiey had spoken truth of the translation of the Iliad he said it was “a fine poem, but not Homer.” This, which has ever since been the opinion of the learned world, was not to be refuted by the contemptuous lines in which Bentley is mentioned in the “Dunciad.” On the other hand, the real Dunces, who are the majority in this poem, were beneath the notice of a man who now enjoyed higher fame than any poetical contemporary, and greater popularity, and greater favour with men of rank. But it appears’ to have been Pope’s opinion that insignificance should be no protection, that even neutrality should not be safe, and that whoever did not worship the deity he had set up, should be punished. Accordingly we find in this poem contemptuous allusions to persons who had given no open provocation, and were nowise concerned in the author’s literary contests. The “Dunciad” indeed seems intended as a general receptacle for all his resentments, just or unjust; and we find that in subsequent editions he altered, arranged, or added to his stock, as he found, or thought he found new occasion; and the hero of the “Dunciad,” who was at first Theobald, became at last Gibber.

to the Satires,” and then “A Dialogue.” Pope did not always write with a decided preference of form or manner, for his admirable poem pa “The Use of Riches” he called

Few pieces, in Warton’s opinion, can be found that, for depth of thought and penetration into the human mind and heart, excel the Epistle to lord Cobham, which Pope published in 1733, and which produced from his lordship two very sensible letters on the subjects and characters introduced in that epistle. In the same year appeared the first of our author’s Imitations of Horace, and in 1734, the Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot, which was considerably altered. It was first called “A Prologue to the Satires,” and then “A Dialogue.” Pope did not always write with a decided preference of form or manner, for his admirable poem pa “The Use of Riches” he called an epistle to lord Bathurst, although that nobleman is introduced as speaking, and speaking so insignificantly, that, as Warton informs us, he never mentioned the poem without disgust. Pope’s affectionate mention of his mother in this Epistle to Arbuthnot must always be quoted to his honour. Of all his moral qualities, filial affection was most predominant. He then, in 1735, produced the Epistle on the “Characters of Women,” in an advertisement to which he asserted that no one character was drawn from life. Pope had already lost some credit with the public for veracity, and this assertion certainly was not believed, nor perhaps did he wish it to be believed, for in a note he informed his readers that the work was imperfect, because part of his subject was tt Vice too high" to be yet exposed. This is supposed to allude to the character of the first duchess of Marlborough under the name of Atossa, which was inserted after her death, in a subsequent edition, although Pope received £1000 from her to suppress it. This is said to rest on the sole authority of the late Horace Walpole, lord Orford but if told by him as we find it in Warton’s and Bowles’s editions of Pope’s works, it confutes itself. The fact as they relate it is, that Pope received £lOOO. from the duchess, promising on these terms to suppress the character, and that he took the money and then published it. But Pope could not have published it, for it did not appear, according to Warton’s account, until 1746, two years after his death I It might then probably have been found among Mr. Pope’s Mss. and inserted without any great blame by those who knew nothing of the bargain with the duchess, if there was even such a bargain.

d not have long been of service to them. Had they come into office, he must have been either silent, or offensive, for he was both a Jacobite and a papist. Dr. Johnson

Returning to his more original publications, Pope nowissued those two dialogues which were named, from the year in which they appeared, “Seventeen hundred and thirty eight,” and are among the bitterest of satires. Ever/ species of sarcasm and mode of style are here alternately employed ridicule, reasoning, irony, mirth, seriousness, lamentation, laughter, familiar imagery, and high poetical painting. Although many persons in power were highly provoked, he does not appear to have been very directly menaced with a prosecution; but Paul Whitehead, who about this time wrote his “Manners,” and his publisher Dodsley, were called to an account, which was supposed to have been intended rather to intimidate Pope, than to punish Wintehead> and Pope appears to have taken the hint; for he discontinued a Third Dialogue, which he had begun, and never afterwards attempted to join the patriot with the poet. He had been led into this by his connection with the prince of Wales and the opposition, but he could not have long been of service to them. Had they come into office, he must have been either silent, or offensive, for he was both a Jacobite and a papist. Dr. Johnson says very justly that he was entangled in the opposition now, and had forgot the prudence with which he passed, in his earlier years, uninjured and unoffending, through much more violent conflicts of faction.

ther collections of the kind. His last performance shewed either that his own judgment was impaired, or that he yielded too easily to thatot Warburton, who now ad vised

Ceasing therefore from politics, for which he was so unfit, he amused himself, in 1740, in republishing “Selecta Carmina Italorum,” taken, withgut acknowledgement, from the collection called “Anthologia,1684, 12mo, attributed to Atterbury, falsely, as Warton asserts, but justly accorcling to every other opinion. The work however is more imperfect than it would have been had he consulted other collections of the kind. His last performance shewed either that his own judgment was impaired, or that he yielded too easily to thatot Warburton, who now ad vised him to write the fourth book of the “Dunciad” and in 1743 he betrayed a yet greater want of judgment by printing a new edition of the Dunciad, in which he placed Cibber in the room of Theobald, forgetting how opposite their characters were. He had before this introduced Cibber with contemptuous mention in his satires, and Cibber resented both insults in two pamphlets which gave Pope more uneasiness than he was willing to allow.

pe, at the intermission of his deliriousness, was always saying something kind either of his present or absent friends, and that his humanity seemed to have survived

The time was now approaching, however, in which all his contests were to end. About the beginning of 1744 his health and strength began visibly to decline. Besides his constant head achs, and severe rheumatic pains, he had been afflicted, for five years, with an asthma, which was suspected to be occasioned by a dropsy of the breast. In the month of May he became dangerously ill, and on the sixth was all day delirious, which he mentioned four clays afterwards as a sufficient humiliation of the vanity of man fte afterwards complained of seeing things as through a curtain, and in false colours, and one day asked what arm "it was that came out from the wall. He said that his greatest inconvenience was inability to think. Bolingbroke sometimes Wept over him in this state of helpless decay and being told by Spence, that Pope, at the intermission of his deliriousness, was always saying something kind either of his present or absent friends, and that his humanity seemed to have survived his understanding, answered,

o*:“and added,” I never in my life knew a man that had so tender a heart for his particular friends, or more general friendship for mankind.“At another time he said,”

* It has’so*:“and added,” I never in my life knew a man that had so tender a heart for his particular friends, or more general friendship for mankind.“At another time he said,” I have known Pope these thirty years, and value myself more in his friendship than“-his grief then suppressed his voice. Pope expressed undoubting confidence of a future state. Being asked by his friend Mr. Hooke, a papist, whether he would not die like his father and mother, and whether a priest should not be called he answered,” I do not think it is essential, but it will be very right: and I thank you for putting me in mind of it.“In the morning, after the priest had done his office, he said,” There is nothing that is meritorious but virtue and friendship, and indeed friendship itself is only a part of virtue." He died in the evening of May 30, 1744, so placidly, that the attendants did not discern the exact time of his expiration. He was buried at Twickenham, near his father and mother, where a monument was afterwards erected to him by Warburton.

his money. In his letters and in his poems, his gardens and his grotto, his quincunx and his vines, or some hints of his opulence, are always to be found. The great

We have already copied an expression of Dr. Warton’s, that Pope was invariably and solely a poet from the beginning of his life to the end and we may add from the same elegant critic, that his whole life, and every hour of it, in sickness and in health, was devoted with unremitting diligence, to cultivate that one art in which he had determined to excel, and in which he did excel. It is not our intention, however, to expatiate on his merits as a poet. What has been advanced by Dr. Johnson and Dr. Warton must supersede all other efforts; but we may be permitted to regret that he added so little to the dignity of the literary character, and that his passions were vulgar and vulgarly expressed. Never had the genus irritabile a more faithful representative. With abundant professions of philosophy, benevolence, and friendship, he thought no display of petty revenge, and no discharge of acrimony, beneath him and was continually endeavouring to promote his interest by quackish stratagems and idle artifices, often so poorly disguised as to expose him to immediate contempt; and all this at a time when he was confessedly at the head of the poetical list, and when his wealth was so great that he was mean enough to upbraid his adversaries for their want of it. “It would be hard,” says Johnson, “to find a man so well entitled to notice by his wit, that ever delighted so much in talking of his money. In his letters and in his poems, his gardens and his grotto, his quincunx and his vines, or some hints of his opulence, are always to be found. The great topic of his ridicule is poverty; the crimes with which he reproaches his antagonists are their debts, their habitation in the Mint, and their want of a dinner.

onstantly a valetudinarian. His person was deformed, and he was so feeble as not to be able to dress or undress himself without assistance. Such a state of body generally

In constitution he was constantly a valetudinarian. His person was deformed, and he was so feeble as not to be able to dress or undress himself without assistance. Such a state of body generally produces a certain degree of irritability and peevishness, which must naturally be greatly exasperated by a life of literary warfare. This was surely not the proper life for a man who, in his private habits was capricious and offensive, and who expected that every thing should give way to his humour. He was thus provoking contradictions, and risking mortifications, from which he. might have been free, if he could have lived on his own. ample treasures of genius and fame. But if Pope created enemies, he also conciliated friends, and had a pleasure in enumerating the men of high rank with whom he was acquainted, and to gain whose favour he practised no meanness or servility. It is indeed allowed that he never flattered those whom he did not love, or praised those whom he did not esteem. And as, from his infirmities and his capricious habits, he must have been a very disagreeable guest, his frequent reception in the houses and at the tables of men of high rank is a proof that there was much in his character to admire or esteem, and a presumption that some of the failings which have been reported of him may have been exaggerated by his enemies. “A man,” says his ablest biographer, “of such exalted superiority, and so little moderation, would naturally have all his delinquencies observed and aggravated: and those who could not deny that he was excellent, would rejoice to find that he was not perfect.” Unfortunately some of those imperfections were too obvious for concealment. Pope was, among other instances, with all his defects of person, a man of gallantry, and besides his presumptuous and ridiculous love for lady Mary Wortley Montague, carried on an intercourse with the Misses Blount, which certainly was not of the Platonic kind. From the account given by Mr. Bowles, in his recent Life of Pope, and the new Letters published in Mr. Bowles’s edition of his works, no great obscurity now rests on the nature of that connection.

o was then a guest in his own house at Battersea with lord Marchmont, to whom he had lent it for two or three years, his lordship was in great indignation; to appease

Qn th circumstance being made known to lord Bolingbroke, who was then a guest in his own house at Battersea with lord Marchmont, to whom he had lent it for two or three years, his lordship was in great indignation; to appease which, lord Marchmont sent Mr. Grevenkop (a German gentleman who had travelled with him, and was afterwards in the household of lord Chesterfield when lord lieutenant of Ireland,) to bring out the whole edition, of which a bonfire was instantly made on the terrace at Battersea.” This plain unvarnished tale, our readers will probably think, tends very much to strengthen the vindication which Warburton offered for his deceased friend, although he was ignorant of the concern Allen had in the matter; but it will be difficult to find an excuse for Bolingbroke, who, forgetting the honourable mention of him in Pope’s will, a thing quite incompatible with any hostile intention towards him, could employ such a man as Mallet to blast the memory of Pope by telling a tale of "breach of faith/ 1 with every malicious aggravation, and artfully concealing what he must have known, since lord Marchmont knew it, the share Allen had in the edition* of the Patriot King.

He held this office for five years, and during that time was appointed master, or treasurer, of the jswel- house in the Tower. In 1546, the court

He held this office for five years, and during that time was appointed master, or treasurer, of the jswel- house in the Tower. In 1546, the court of augmentations was dissolved, and a new establishment on a more confined plan substituted. In this sir Thomas Pope was nominated master of the woods of the court on this side the river Trent., end was How a member of the privy council. It has been asserted that he was appointed one of the commissioners or Visitors under Cromwell, for dissolving the religions houses; but the only occasion, according to his biographer, in which he acted, was in the case of the Abbey of St. Albans. He was undoubtedly one of those into whose hands the seal of that abbey was surrendered in 1539, and it was to his interest with the king that we owe the preservation of the church now standing. But although there is no proof of his having been one of the visitors employed in the general dissolution, it is certain that his immense fortune arose from “that grand harvest of riches,” and diverted his thoughts from the regular profession of the law. Before 1556, he appears to have been actually possessed of more than thirty manors in the counties of Oxford, Gloucester, Warwick, Derby, Bedford, Hereford, and Kent, besides other considerable estates and several advowsons. Some of these possessions were given him by Henry VIII. but the greatest part was acquired by purchase while he was connected with the court of augmentations, and many of his estates were bought of queen Mary.

e accession of Edward VI. as he was not of the reformed religion, sir Thomas Pope received no favour or office; but when queen Mary succeeded, he was again made a privy

During the reign of Henry VIII. sir Thomas Pope was employed in various services and attendances about court, but in none of more affecting interest than when he was sent by the king to inform his old friend and patron, sir Thomas More, of the hour appointed for his execution. (See More.) On the accession of Edward VI. as he was not of the reformed religion, sir Thomas Pope received no favour or office; but when queen Mary succeeded, he was again made a privy councillor and cofferer to the household, and was often employed in commissions of considerable importance; nor are we surprized to find his name in a commission for the more effectual suppression of heretics, in concert with Bonner and others; but his conduct, when the princess (afterwards queen) Elizabeth was placed under his care in 1555, was far more to his credit. After having been imprisoned in the Tower and at Woodstock, she was permitted by her jealous sister to retire with sir Thomas Pope to Hatfield-house, in Hertfordshire, then a royal palace, where he shewed her every mark of respect that was consistent with the nature of his charge, and more than could have been expected from one of his rigid adherence to the reigning politics. After a residence here of four years, she was raised to the throne on the death of her sister Mary, Nov. 17, 1558, and on this occasion sir Thomas does not appear to have been continued in the privycouncil, nor had he afterwards any concern in political transactions. He did not, indeed, survive the accession of Elizabeth above a year, as he died Jan. 29, 1559, at his house in Clerkenwell, which was part of the dissolved monastery there. No circumstances of his illness or death have been discovered. Mr. Warton is inclined to think that he was carried off by a pestilential fever, which raged with uncommon violence in the autumn of 15p8. He was interred, in great state, in the parish church of St. Stephen’s,Walbrook, where his second wife, Margaret, had been before buried, and his daughter Alice. But in 1567 their bodies were removed to the chapel of Trinity college, and again interred on the north side of the altar under a tomb of gothic workmanship, on which are the recumbent figures of sir Thomas in complete armour, and his third wife Elizabeth, large as the life, in alabaster.

Blount, esq. of Blount’s Hall, in Staffordshire. She was at that time the widow of Anthony Basford, or Beresford, esq. of Bently, in Derbyshire, by whom she had one

Sir Thomas Pope was thrice married. His first wife was Elizabeth Gunston, from whom he was divorced July 11, 1536. His second was Margaret Dodmer, widow, to whom he was married July 17, 1536. Her maiden name was Townsend, a native of Stamford in Lincolnshire, and the relict of Ralph Dodmer, knight, sheriff and lord-mayor of London. By sir Thomas Pope she had only one daughter, Alice, who died very young, but she had two sons by her former husband, whom sir Thomas treated as his own. She died in 1538, after which, in 1540, he married Elizabeth the daughter of Walter Blount, esq. of Blount’s Hall, in Staffordshire. She was at that time the widow of Anthony Basford, or Beresford, esq. of Bently, in Derbyshire, by whom she had one son, but no children by sir Thomas Pope. After Sir Thomas’s death she married sir Hugh Powlett, of Hinton St. George, in Somersetshire, the son of sir Amias Powlett, who was confined in the Temple by the order of cardinal Wolsey. Sir Hugh joined her cordially in her regard and attentions to the college, of which she was now styled the foundress. She died at an advanced age, Oct. 27, 1593, at Tyttenhanger, in Hertfordshire, the favourite seat of sir Thomas Pope, and was interred, in solemn pomp, in the chapel of Trinity college.

as enabled by the opportunities of his situation to enrich himself with their revenues by fraudulent or oppressive practices, he behaved with disinterested integrity;

Mr. Warton’s character of sir Thomas Pope must not be omitted, as it is the result of a careful examination of his public and private conduct. He appears to have been a man eminently qualified for business; and although not employed in the very principal departments of state, he possessed peculiar talents and address for the management and execution of public affairs. His natural abilities were strong, his knowledge of the world deep and extensive, his judgment solid and discerning. His circumspection and prudence in the conduct of negociations entrusted to his charge, were equalled by his fidelity and perseverance. He is a conspicuous instance of one, not bred to the church, who, without the advantages of birth and patrimony, by the force of understanding and industry, raised himself, to opulence and honourable employments. He lived in an age when the peculiar circumstances of the times afforded obvious temptations to the most abject desertion of principle; and few periods of our history can be found which exhibit more numerous examples of occasional compliance with frequent changes. Yet he remained unbiassed and uncorrupted amid the general depravity. Under Henry VIII. when on the dissolution of the monasteries he was enabled by the opportunities of his situation to enrich himself with their revenues by fraudulent or oppressive practices, he behaved with disinterested integrity; nor does a single instance occur upon record which impeaches his honour. In the succeeding reign of Edward VI. a sudden check was given to his career of popularity and prosperity: he retained his original attachment to the catholic religion; and on that account lost those marks of favour or distinction which were so liberally dispensed to the sycophants of Somerset, and which he might have easily secured by a temporary submission to the reigning system. At the accession of Mary he was restored to favour; yet he was never instrumental or active in the tyrannies of that queen which disgrace our annals. He was armed with discretionary powers for the suppression of heretical innovations; yet he forbore to gratify the arbitrary demands of his bigoted mistress to their utmost extent, nor would he participate in forwarding the barbarities of her bloody persecutions. In the guardianship of the princess Elizabeth, the unhappy victim of united superstition, jealousy, revenge, and cruelty, his humanity prevailed over his interest, and he less regarded the displeasure of the vigilant and unforgiving queen, than the claims of injured innocence. If it be his crime to have accumulated riches, let it be remembered, that he consecrated a part of those riches, not amid the terrors of a death-bed, nor in the dreams of old age, but in the prime of life, and the vigour of understanding, to the public service of his country; that he gave them to future generations for the perpetual support of literature and religion.

nues. They were to be elected out of the diocese and places where the college has benefices, manors, or revenues, more particularly in Oxfordshire, Gloucestershire,

The site chosen for his new foundation was at this time occupied by Durham college, which Edward VI. granted to George Owen, of Godstowe, the king’s physician, a man of great learning and eminence, and William Martyn, gentleman, in 1552; and sir Thomas purchased the premises of these gentlemen by indenture dated Feb. 20, 1554. On March 8, and March 28, he obtained from Philip and Mary a royal licence and charter to create and erect a college within the university of Oxford, under the title of Collegium Sanctæ Et Individuæ Trinitatis In Universitate Oxon. Ex Fundatione Thomæ Pope Militis. The society was to consist of a president, a priest, twelve fellows, four of whom should be priests, and eight scholars (afterwards increased to twelve) and the whole to be liberally and amply endowed with certain manors, lands, and revenues. They were to be elected out of the diocese and places where the college has benefices, manors, or revenues, more particularly in Oxfordshire, Gloucestershire, Warwickshire, Derbyshire, Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, and Kent. The same charter empowered him to found and endow a school at Hokenorton, in Oxfordshire, to be called Jesus Scholehouse; and to give statutes both to the college and to the first and second masters of the said school. And by deed, dated March 28, 1555, he declared his actual erection and establishment df the said college, and the same day delivered possession, before a large concourse of witnesses, to the president, fellows, and scholars. In May following he supplied his college with necessaries and implements of every kind, books, furniture for the chapel, of the most costly kind; and next year he transmitted a body of statutes to the society, dated May 1, 1556. These statutes he had submitted to the revision of cardinal Pole, from whom he received some valuable hints. On the 8th of the same month, May, he gave them one hundred pounds as a stock for immediate purposes; and the endowment, by thirty-five manors, thirteen advowsons, besides impropriations and pensions, was completed before, or upon the feast of Annunciation, in the same year; and the first president, fellows and scholars, nominated by himself, were formally admitted within the chapel, May 30, on the eve of Trinity Sunday. During his life-time, the founder nominated the fellows and scholars, and afterwards delegated the power to his widow, dame Elizabeth, of nominating the scholars, and presenting to the advowsons, and this she continued to exercise during her long life, but with some interruptions, and some opposition. On one occasion the college rejected her nomination to a scholarship, and chose another candidate; but on an appeal to the visitor, he decided in her favour. She sometimes also nominated the fellows, and once a president. But both she and her husband, sir Hugh Powlett, were so liberal and punctual in fulfilling the founder’s intentions, and in contributing to the prosperity of the college, that she was in general obeyed with respect and gratitude.

le plate, and made considerable additions to the permanent endowment, by new revenues for five obits or dirges, yearly, to be sung and celebrated ss festivals in his

On St. Swithin’s day, July 15, 1556, the founder visited his college, accompanied by the bishops of Winchester and Ely, Whyte and Thirlby, and other eminent personages, who were entertained sumptuously in the hall, the whole expenses of which were paid by him to the bursar on the same day. Nor was this a singular act of liberality, for it appears that during his life-time he paid all the university expences of degrees, regencies, and determinations, for the fellows and scholars. He also continued to send various articles of rich furniture for the chapel and hall, and a great quantity of valuable plate, and made considerable additions to the permanent endowment, by new revenues for five obits or dirges, yearly, to be sung and celebrated ss festivals in his college. About the same time he founded four additional scholarships, from the endowment of the school intended to have been established at Hokenorton, but which intention he now abandoned, thinking it more beneficial to the public to increase the number of scholars in the university. In December 1557, he announced his intention of building a house at Garsington, near Oxford, to which the society might retire in time of the plague. This was built after his death, pursuant to his will, in a quadrangular form; and it appears from the college books that they took refuge here in 1570-1, and again in 1577. On the former occasion they were visited by sir Hugh Powlett. At this house they performed the same exercises, both of learning and devotion, as when in college. In 1563, before this house was completed, they retired, during a plague, to Woodstock.

ailed by the ladies, our author by this piece of biography endeavoured to cure them of such weakness or affectation, and to direct their esteem to more worthy objects.

Dr. Pope was a man of humour and a satirist, and in both characters had published in 1670 the “Memoirs of Mons. Du Vail, with his last speech and epitaph.” Du Vail was a notorious highwayman, who was hanged in 1669 at Tyburn, and having been much admired and bewailed by the ladies, our author by this piece of biography endeavoured to cure them of such weakness or affectation, and to direct their esteem to more worthy objects. In 1693, he published his well-known song called “The Wish,orThe Old Man’s Wish,” which may be seen in Mr. Nichols’s collection of Miscellany Poems, and perhaps in every collection of English songs. Vincent Bourne wrote a beautiful imitation of it in Latin. This wish seems to have been in some measure accomplished in his own case, for in his life of bishop Ward, published in 1697, he says, “I thank God, I am arriv‘d to a good old age without gout, or stone, with my external senses but little decayed; and my intellectuals, tho’ none of the best, yet as good as ever they were.” In the following year he was involved in a tedious law-suit, which gave him much uneasiness, but what the subject was, his biographer has not discovered. In 1699 he withdrew from the Royal Society, designing Yery probably to retire into the country, and enjoy himself in some respects agreeably to his “Wish.” Accordingly he spent much of his time afterwards at Epsom, but at last settled in Bunhill fields, then a suburb of London, where he died, in a very advanced age, in June 1714, and was buried in the church of St. Giles’s Cripplegate.

t his resentments in writing. Pope wds a man of wit as well as learning, but certainly not a correct or elegant writer. He was a good French and Ita* lian scholar,

He maintained an intimate friendship with two very emifcent and learned men, Mr. Rooke and Dr. Barrow; but his greatest friend and patron, next to his brother bishop Wilkins, was Dr. Seth Ward, bishop of Salisbury, whose life he wrote, and from whom he had a pension of lOOl. a year. His intimacy with this excellent prelate seems to contradict the character Anthony Wood gives of him, that he led “an” Epicurean and heathenish life,“but there was some cause of quarrel between Wood and Dr. Pope, and the former, we know, was too apt to put his resentments in writing. Pope wds a man of wit as well as learning, but certainly not a correct or elegant writer. He was a good French and Ita* lian scholar, and well acquainted also with the Spanish language. In the Philosophical Transactions (April 1665), is by him” Extract of a letter from Venice to Dr. Wilkins, concerning the mines of mercury in Friuli, &c.“and” Observations made at London upon an eclipse of the sun, June 22, 1666.“His other works are,” The Memoirs of Mons. Du Vail,“mentioned above, Lond. 1670, 4to;” Te the Memory of the most rerrowned Du Vail, a Pindaric Ode,“ibid. 1671, 4to, said in the title to be written by Butler, and since printed among his” Remains,“and in his” Works.“Dr. Pope wrote also” The Catholic Ballad,“and other verses, which are inserted in Mr. Nichols’s Col* lection;” Select Novels,“1694, from the Spanish of Cervantes and the Italian of Petrarch;” Moral and Political Fables, ancient and modern,“ibid. 1698, 8vo. But his most useful publication is” The Life of the Right Rev. Seth, Lord Bishop of Salisbury,“a small volume printed at London in 1697, which contains many anecdotes of that prelate’s contemporaries, Wilkins, Barrow, Rooke, Turberville, &c. Dr. Thos. Wood, a civilian, and relation of Ant. Wood, published some severe animadversions on this life in what he entitled” An Appendix to the Life, &c. in a Letter to the Author, &c." 1697, 12mo, but this is much more scarce than the other.

o. While resident at Venice in 1559, he assisted in making a collection of all the Greek historians, or annalists, from whose works he formed the “Collana Storica Graeca;”

, a learned Italian of the sixteenth century, was born at Casliglione Aretino. While resident at Venice in 1559, he assisted in making a collection of all the Greek historians, or annalists, from whose works he formed the “Collana Storica Graeca;or GreekHistorical Necklace, divided into twelve rings, to which were added the jewels, or minor authors, serving to illustrate the greater. Porcacchi was likewise editor or translator of Pomponius Mela, Quintus Curtius, and vftrfptts other authors, and published some original works in poetry, history, antiquities and geography. The most valued of these is his “Funeral i antichi di diversi populi, &c.” Venice, 1574, 4to, the plates of which are Very fine. He died in 1585.

magined that he was. in the early part of his life a Christian, but afterwards, through some disgust or other, deserted that profession, and became its decided enemy;

, a philosopher of great name among the ancients, was born A. D. 233, in the reign of Alexander Severus. He was of Tyre, and had the name of Malchus, in common with his father, who was a Syrophcenician. St. Jerome and St. Augustin' have called him Bataneotes whence Fabricius suspects, that the real place of his nativity was Batanea, a town of Syria and that he was carried thence with a colony to Tyre. His father very early introduced him to the study of literature and philosophy under the Christian preceptor Origen, probably while he was teaching at Caesarea in Palestine. He then went to Athens, where he had the famous Longinus for his master in rhetoric, who changed his Syrian name Malchus, as not very pleasing to Grecian ears, into that of Porphyrius, which answers to it in Greek. It is in a great measure owing to this able teacher, that we find so many proofs of erudition, and so much elegance of style, in the writings of PorphyFrom this time, we have little information concerning him until he proceeded to Rome, where, at thirty years of age, he heard Plo'tinus, whose life he has written, and inserted in it many particulars concerning himself*. Five years after, he went to reside at Lilybseum in Sicily, on which account he is sometimes called Siculus and here, as Eusebius and Jerome relate, he composed those famous books against the Christians, which, for the name and authority of the man, and for the acuteness and learning with, which they were written, were afterwards thought so considerable, as to be suppressed by particular edicts, under the reigns of Constantine and Theodosius. Some have surmised, that these books are still extant, and secretly preserved in the Duke of Tuscany’s library; but there is little doubt that they were destroyed by the mistaken zeal of the Christians. The circumstances of Porphyrius’s life, after his arrival in Sicily, are little known except that he died at Rome, towards the end of Dioclesiari’s reign, about the year 304. Some have imagined that he was. in the early part of his life a Christian, but afterwards, through some disgust or other, deserted that profession, and became its decided enemy; while others have hinted, that he embraced Christianity when he was old, and after he had written with great acrimony against it; but for neither of these opinions is there any good authority.

nd neither the splendour of his diction, nor the variety of his reading, can atone for the credulity or the dishonesty, which fill the narrative parts of his works

phyrius addicted himself,concurred with lity of his mind.“Brucker. his natural propensity towards melanwould have reaped any great benefit from these, since neither his judgment nor his integrity was equal to his learning; and neither the splendour of his diction, nor the variety of his reading, can atone for the credulity or the dishonesty, which fill the narrative parts of his works with so many extravagant tales; or interest the judicious reader in the abstruse subtleties, and mystical flights of his philosophical writings. Of his works which remain, the four following,” De abstinentia ab esu animalium“” De vita Pythagone“” Sententite ad intelligibilia ducentes“” De Antro Nymphorum“with a fragment” De Styge,“preserved by Stobaeus, were printed at Cambridge in 1655, 8vo, with a Latin version, and the Life of Porphyry subjoined, by Lucas Holstenius. The” Life of Pythagoras,“which, however, is but a fragment, has since been published by Kusterus, at Amsterdam, 1707, in 4to, in conjunction with that written by Jamblichus, who was a disciple of this philosopher. It should have been observed, that the above pieces of Pythagoras, printed at Cambridge, were published jointly with Epictetus and Arrian’s Commentary, and the Tabula Cebetis. His treatise” De Antro Nymphorum“was reprinted in Greek and Latin, with notes, by R. M. Van Goens, at Utrecht in 1765, 419; anc1jac.de Rhoer published a new edition of the treatise” De Abstinentia" at the same place in 1767.

he had taught Richard, his eldest son, all the common rules of arithmetic, without the use of a book or slate, pen or pencil, up to the cube root, before he was nine

, a late eminent Greek scholar and most accomplished critic, was born at East Ruston, in Norfolk, Dec. 25, 1759, and was first initiated in knowledge by his father, Mr. Huggin Person, the parish-clerk of East Ruston, who, though in humble life, and without the advantages himself of early education, 'laid the basis of his son’s unparalleled acquirements. From the earliest dawn of intellect, Mr. Person began the task of fixing the attention of his children, three sons and a daughter; and he had taught Richard, his eldest son, all the common rules of arithmetic, without the use of a book or slate, pen or pencil, up to the cube root, before he was nine years of age. The memory was thus incessantly exercised; and by this early habit of solving a question in arithmetic, he acquired such a talent of close and intense thinking, and such a power of arranging every operation that occupied his thought, as in process of time to render the most difficult problems, which to other men required the assistance of written figures, easy to the retentive faculties of his memory. He was initiated in letters by a process equally efficacious, and which somewhat resembled Dr. Bell’s admirable plan. His father taught him to read and write at one and the same time. He drew the form of the letter either with chalk on a board, or with the finger in sand; and Richard was made at once to understand and imitate the impression. As soon as he could speak he could trace the letters; and this exercise delighting his fancy, an ardour of imitating whatever was put before him was excited to such a degree that the walls of the house were covered with characters delineated with great neatness and fidelity. At nine years of age, he and his youngest brother, Thomas, were sent to the village school, kept by a Mr. Summers, a plain but intelligent man, who having had the misfortune in infancy to cripple his left hand, was educated for the purpose of teaching, and he discharged his duties with the most exemplary attention. He professed nothing beyond English, writing, and arithmetic but he was a good accountant, and an excellent writing-master. He perfected Mr. Richard Porson in that delightful talent of writing, in which he so peculiarly excelled but which we are doubtful whether to consider as an advantage, or a detriment to him, in his progress through life. It certainly had a considerable influence on his habits, and made him devote many precious moments in copying, which might have been better employed in composition. It has been the means, however, of enriching his library with annotations, in a text the most beautiful, and with such perfect imitation of the original manuscript or printing, as to embellish every work which his erudition enabled him to elucidate. He continued under Mr. Summers for three years; and every evening during that time he had to repeat by heart to his father the lessons and the tasks of the day; and this not in a loose or desultory manner, but in the rigorous order in which they hadbeen taught; and thus again the process of recollection was cherished and strengthened, so as to become a quality of his mind. It was impossible that such a youth should remain unnoticed, even in a place so thinly peopled, and so obscure, as the parish of East Ruston. The reverend Mr. Hewitt, vicar of the parish, heard of his extraordinary propensities to study, his gift of attention to whatever was taught him, and the wonderful fidelity with which he retained whatever he had acquired. He took him and his brother Thomas under his care, and instructed them in the classics. The progress of both was great, but that of Richard was most extraordinary, and when he had reached his fourteenth year, had engaged the notice of all the gentlemen in the vicinity. Among others, he was mentioned as a prodigy to an opulent and liberal man, the late Mr- Norris, or‘ Grosvenorplace, who, after having put him under an examination of the severest kind, from which an ordinary boy would have shrunk dismayed, sent him to Eton in August 1774, when he was in his 15th year. In that great seminary, he almost, from the commencement of his career, displayed such a superiority of intellect, such facility of acquirement, such quickness of perception, and sucli a talent of bringing forward to his purpose all that he had ever read, that the upper boys took him into their society, and promoted the cultivation of his mind by their lessons, as well, probably, as by imposing upon him the performance of their own exercises . He was courted’ by them as the never-failing resource in every difficulty and in all the playful excursions of the imagination, in their frolics, as well as in their serious tasks, Person was the constant adviser and support. He used to dwell on this lively part of his youth with peculiar complacency, and used to repeat a drama which he wrote for exhibition in their long chamber, and other compositions, both of seriousness and drollery, with a zest that the recollection of his enjoyment at the time never failed to revive in him. A very learned scholar, to whom the public was indebted for “A short account of Mr. Person,” published soon after his death, has the following remarks on his progress at Eton “By his own confession he learnt nothing, or added little to his stock, at school and perhaps for a good reason, since he had every thing that was given him to read, where he was first placed, by heart; that is, he could repeat all the Horace, and all the Virgil, commonly read at Eton, and the Iliad, and extracts from the Odyssey, Cicero, and Livy, with the Ambubaiarum of Horace, the Eclogues and Georgics, and the Culex, Ciris, and Catalecta, which they do not read. But still, though he would not own it, he was much obliged to the collision of a public school for the rapidity with which he increased his knowledge, and the correction of himself by the mistakes of others.

of master of arts but long before the period had elapsed when he must either enter into holy orders or surrender his fellowship, he felt such powerful scruples in

He was entered of Trinity college towards the end of 1777, and, his character having preceded him, he was from the first regarded as a youth whose extraordinary endowments would do honour to that society. Nor did he disappoint the hopes that had been formed of him. In every branch of study to which he applied himself, his course was so rapid as to astonish every competent observer. By circumstances common at Cambridge, he was drawn first to read in mathematics, in which, from his early exercises, he was eminently calculated to shine, but from which he drew no benefit and then, having the prospect of a scholarship, he sat down to the classics, in which he soon acquired undisputed pre-eminence. He got the medal of course, and was elected a -fellow in 1781. In 1785 he took his degree of master of arts but long before the period had elapsed when he must either enter into holy orders or surrender his fellowship, he felt such powerful scruples in his mind with regard to subscription to the articles of the church, that he determined to decline it and, so early as 1788, he had made up his mind to surrender his fellowship, though with an enfeebled constitution he had nothing to depend upon but acquirements that are very unprofitable to their owner. Accordingly, in 1791 his fellowship ceased, but soon after some private friends stept in, and in 1793 he was elected Greek professor of Cambridge, by an unanimous vote of the seven electors. The distinction of this appointment was grateful to him. The salary is but 40l. a-year. It was his earnest wish, however, to have made it an active and efficient office, and it was his determination to give an annual course of lectures in the college, if rooms had been assigned him for the purpose. The importance of such lectures as he could have given has been often revolved in the minds of some of his friends, while others have doubted whether his studies, which had been throughout life desultory, could have been concentrated to one point, and that point requiring unremitting assiduity, and a periodical regularity. No opportunity, however, was afforded for the trial.

ention to publish a new edition of Stanley’s -<Eschylus, in 3 vols. and solicited the aid of English or foreign scholars. His first regular publication, however, was

However mortified Mr. Porson was by the rejection of his proposals respecting Æschylus at Cambridge, he did not wholly forego the idea of publishing that author, and twice announced in Maty’s Review, (vol. III. p. 168, and vol. IV. p. 238,) an intention to publish a new edition of Stanley’s -<Eschylus, in 3 vols. and solicited the aid of English or foreign scholars. His first regular publication, however, was a play of Euripides. In 1797, he published the “Hecuba,” which he intended as the precursor of all the dramas of that author. Accordingly, the next year was published the “Orestes” the year after the “Phcenissae” and, in1801, the “Medea” issued from the press at Cambridge, to which his name was prefixed. In 1802 was published a second edition of the “Hecuba,” with a supplement to the preface, and a very copious addition to the notes.

erary ardour. Whether this disease was a revival of a complaint which had afflicted his early youth, or was engendered by the severe and laborious study which had marked

Mr. Person was in his latter days often afflicted with a spasmodic asthma, which interrupted his studies, and consequently, in a great degree, repressed his literary ardour. Whether this disease was a revival of a complaint which had afflicted his early youth, or was engendered by the severe and laborious study which had marked his middle age, is uncertain. It was probably increased by the latter, and certainly so by his irregularities, and neglect of the common means of health. There were times, however, when few men could display such patient and continued toil. An instance of this is mentioned which strongly marks his character. He had undertaken to make out and copy the almost obliterated manuscript of the invaluable Lexicon of Photius, which he had borrowed from, the library of Trinity college. And this he had wiith unparalleled difficulty just completed, when the beautiful copy, which had cost him ten months of incessant toil, was burned along with the house of Mr. Perry, at Merton. The original, being an unique entrusted to him by the college, he carried with him wheresoever he went, and he was fortunately absent from Merton on the morning of the fire. Unruffled by the loss, he sat down without a murmur, and made a second copy as beautiful as the first, which is now in Trinity-college library.

riably from the rocks against which even the greatest of his critical predecessors have at some time or other split we mean precipitation in determining that to be

The principal qualities,” says one of his biographers, * c in this great man’s mind, were his extraordinary acuteness of discernment, and solidity of judgment; and these, added to his intense application and stupendous memory, made him what the world, perhaps, never saw before, a complete critic, in the most honourable and extended sense of that appellation. His reading was immense: he was an excellent French scholar; but in his native language, in the Latin, and in the Greek, he was most familiarly and profoundly versed. He had, indeed, applied the knowledge which he had gained of the origin and structure of language in general, to all these dialects, if we may so express ourselves, of the universal language; and had not his eminence in classical literature, by its uncommon lustre, obscured other attainments, he would doubtless have been considered as one of the first English scholars. In Greek, however, we have no hesitation in pronouncing him the very first, not merely of his own age, but of every other. In him were conspicuous boundless extent of reading, a most exact and well-ordered memory unwearied patience in unravelling the sense of an author, and exploring the perplexities of a manuscript; perspicacity in discovering the corruptions of a text, and acuteness almost intuitive, in restoring the true reading. All this was tempered with a judgment which preserved him invariably from the rocks against which even the greatest of his critical predecessors have at some time or other split we mean precipitation in determining that to be unsound, which after all had no defect and rashness in applying remedies which only served to increase the disease." On the failings of this eminent man we have but gently touched: there is reason to think they have been exaggerated by vulgar report. Whatever they were, it is to his credit, that they who knew him most intimately, were most disposed to forget them in the splendour of his uncommon talents.

proportions, he produced the sublime figure of St. Marc, which alone fills an ample pannel, and is, or was lately, among the spoils of the Louvre. His St. Sebastian,

, an eminent Florentine artist, whose surname is not known, was called Baccio dellaPorta, from a study which he kept when a youth, near a gate of the city; and this name was afterwards changed to the more celebrated one of Fra Bartolommeo di S. Marco, when he entered the order of that Dominican convent. Sometimes he is only called “il Frate.” He was born in 1469, and studied under Cosimo Roselli but soon grew enamoured of the grand chiaro-scuro of Lionardo da Vinci, and strove to emulate it. His progress was rapid, and he became the instructor of Raphael in colour, who gave him lessons in perspective, and taught him to unite gracefulness with grandeur of form. The composition of his sacred subjects, and he painted little else, is that which adhered to Raphael himself, and was not dismissed by the Florentine school before the epoch of Pontormo; but he disguised its formality by the introduction of architecture and majestic scenery. To repel the invidious charge of incapacity for large proportions, he produced the sublime figure of St. Marc, which alone fills an ample pannel, and is, or was lately, among the spoils of the Louvre. His St. Sebastian, for skill in the naked, and energy of colour, obtained every suffrage of artists and of critics, but being considered as indecent, the monks thought proper to sell and send it to France. In drapery he may be considered as an inventor; no artist of his school formed it with equal breadth or dignity, or so natural and expressive of the limits; and if he were the instructor, he was certainly not the slave, of the layman. One work of his, of prodigious grandeur and beauty, is unnoticed by Mr. Fuseli, whose account we have nearly followed hitherto, viz. the Assumption of the Virgin, at Lucca. Its situation being retired, this picture is little known to travellers, though it is one of the most sublime productions of the pencil. Mr. West, the president of the Royal Academy, has in his possession a considerable part of the Studies mentioned by Vasari as having been left to his scholar, a nun of St. Catharine at Florence; and among them several drawings for this picture and its various parts. They are accompanied by about two hundred drawings of figures, draperies, and limbs, studied from nature with great care and taste; and exhibit the industry and uncommon zeal with which he laid the basis of his justly-acquired fame. He died in 1517.

university, both advantageous and honourable, but not precisely adapted to the character of his mind or habits of his life. He did not therefore long retain it, but

, a late eminent English prelate, was born at York May 8, 1731. He was the youngest but one of nineteen children. His father and mother were natives of Virginia, but retired to this country, much to the injury of their private fortune, solely for the honourable purpose of giving every possible advantage of education to their children. Dr. Porteus received the first rudiments of his education at York and at Ripon, whence at a very early age he became a member of Christ’s college, Cambridge, where he was admitted a sizar. Humble as this station was, his private merits and studious accomplishments advanced him, as might naturally be expected, to a fellowship of his college, and the active exertions of his friends soon afterwards procured him the situation of squire beadle, an office of the university, both advantageous and honourable, but not precisely adapted to the character of his mind or habits of his life. He did not therefore long retain it, but wholly occupied himself with the care of private pupils, among whom was the late lord Grantham, who distinguished himself not only as secretary of state, but as ambassador of Spain. Whilst employed in this meritorious office, he had some difficulty in obtaining a curacy, and has been heard to say, with good humour, that at this time, so limited was his ambition, he thought it an extraordinary piece of good fortune, to receive an invitation to go over every Sunday to the house of sir John Maynard, at Easton, a distance of sixteen miles from Cambridge, to read prayers to the family. In 1757 he was ordained deacon, and soon afterwards priest. His first claim to notice as an author was his becoming a successful candidate for Seaton’s prize for the best English poem on a sacred subject. His subject was “Death,” on which he produced an admirable poem, characterized by extraordinary vigour, warm sensibility, genuine piety, and accurate taste.

4. We know not where, in a short compass, the character of the French philosophy is more ably drawn, or its baneful influence more strikingly developed. He had marked

In 1787, on the death of bishop Lowth, Mr. Pitt recommended Dr. Porteus to his majesty as a fit person to Succeed to the diocese of London, and his majesty having given his entire approbation, he was accordingly installed. The first object which engaged his attention on his promotion to this important see, was the king’s proclamation against immorality and profaneness and the good effects of his exertions on this subject were immediate and important; but his pastoral zeal was displayed to most advantage a few years after, when all moral and religious principle became endangered by the pernicious influence of the French revolution. The object of the authors of that convulsion was to degrade and vilify the truths of revelation, and to propagate in its place a blasphemous and infidel philosophy. The attempt succeeded but too effectually in their own country, and the contagion soon spread to tbis. No efforts were spared, which could tend to contaminate the public mind, and obliterate from it all reverence for our civil and religious establishments; and had it not been for the vigorous measures of that great minister, who was then at the head of thq administration, and to whom, under providence, we owe our preservation, we might have witnessed here the same frightful scenes, which convulsed and desolated a neighbouring kingdom. At a crisis such as this, in which all that is (Tear to us hung suspended on the issue, it was plainly every man’s bounden duty to exert himself to the utmost for the public welfare and, in a situation so responsible as the see of London, comprehending a vast metropolis, where the emissaries of infidelity were most actively occupied in their work of mischief, the bishop felt himself called upon to counteract, as far as in him lay, the licentious principles which were then afloat, and to check, if possible, the progress they had too evidently made in the various ranks of society. The best mode, as he conceived, of doing this, was to rouse the attention of the clergy to what was passing around them; and nothing surely was ever better calculated to produce that effect, than the charge which he addressed to them in 1794. We know not where, in a short compass, the character of the French philosophy is more ably drawn, or its baneful influence more strikingly developed. He had marked its course with an observing eye. He had read all that its advocates could allege in its favour. He had traced the motives which gave it birth, the features by which it was marked, and the real objects which it was designed to accomplish. It was not therefore without much deliberation and a full knowledge of his subject, that he drew up for his second visitation that eloquent and most impressive address, in which he gave such a picture of the infidel school of that day, and of the industry which was then employed to disseminate its principles in this country, as at once carried conviction to the mind, and most powerfully awakened the attention of every serious and thinking man. But it was on the clergy, in an especial manner, that he was anxious to leave a strong and fixed persuasion of the necessity of increased assiduity and vigilance in the discharge of their religious functions. Christianity, attacked as it was on every side,required more than common efforts, and more than ordinary zeal on the part of its natural defenders and he therefore called upon them to repel with vigour and effect all those charges pf fraud, falsehood, and fanaticism, which had been so liberally thrown upon it; at such a perilous crisis to contend with peculiar earnestness for “the faith once delivered to the saints” and to shew that it is not, as our enemies affirm, “a cunningly devised fable,” but “a real revela-> tion from heaven.

gu* ments, and to bring them down to the understandings of the common people.” *' If this,“says he,” or any thing of a similar nature, were thrown into a regular course

In particular he recommended it to them, with the view of stemming more effectually the overwhelming torrent of infidel opinions, “to draw out from the whole body of the Christian evidences the principal and most striking argu* ments, and to bring them down to the understandings of the common people.” *' If this,“says he,or any thing of a similar nature, were thrown into a regular course of sermons or lectures, and delivered in an easy, intelligible, familiar language to your respective congregations, I know nothing that would, in these philosophic times, render a more essential service to religion." And to demonstrate that he was willing himself to take his full share of the burthen which he imposed upon others, he, in 1794, undertook to prepare and deliver at St. James’s church, his justly-celebrated Lent lectures, which were received by the public with enthusiastic gratitude, both from the pulpit, in which they were repeated for some succeeding years, and from the press, where they passed through several editions.

different ranks in the church yet perhaps even, this attack, which could scarcely be deemed prudent or even decent, would have been unnoticed, had he contented himself

This worthy prelate had for some years been subject to ill health, which at length brought on a general debility, and on the 14th of May, 1808, he sunk under the pressure of accumulated disease, being in the 78th year of his age. He left behind him a justly-acquired reputation for propriety of conduct, benevolence to the clergy, and a strict attention to episcopal duties. As a preacher, he obtained the character of an accomplished orator; his language was chaste, his manner always serious, animated, and impressive, and his eloquence captivating. He seemed to speak from conviction, and being fully persuaded himself of the truth of those doctrines which he inculcated, he the more readily persuaded others. In private life he was mild, affable, easy of access, irreproachable in his morals, of a cheerful disposition, and ever ready to listen to and relieve the distresses of his fellow-creatures. In his behaviour towards dissenters from the established church, he discovered great moderation and candour. While he was a sincere believer in the leading doctrines contained in the thirty-nine articles, he could make allowance for those who did not exactly come up to the same standard. Toward the latter part of his life, he was accused of becoming the persecutor of the rev. Francis Stone, a clergyman of his own diocese, against whom he formally pronounced a sentence of deprivation for preaching and publishing a sermon in direct hostility to the doctrines of the church to which he belonged. Mr. Stone had for many years avowed his disbelief of the articles of faith which he had engaged to defend, and for the support of which he had long received a handsome income, but no notice whatever was taken of the unsoundness of his creed. He preached the offensive sermon before many of his brethren of different ranks in the church yet perhaps even, this attack, which could scarcely be deemed prudent or even decent, would have been unnoticed, had he contented himself with promulgating his opinions from the pulpit only but when he made the press the vehicle of disseminating opinions contrary to the articles of his church, the prelate took the part which was highly becoming the high office which he held.

As his works are now printed in a collected form, it is unnecessary to give their titles or dates. The edition was preceded by an excellent life of him,

As his works are now printed in a collected form, it is unnecessary to give their titles or dates. The edition was preceded by an excellent life of him, written by his nephew, the rev. Robert Hodgson, rector of St. George’s Hanover-square. To this we refer for many particulars of Dr. Porteus,which could not be included in the present sketch.

1619, (or as some copies have, Geneva, 1630,) 2 vols. fol. but this is

1619, (or as some copies have, Geneva, 1630,) 2 vols. fol. but this is the same edition. 6. “Aristotelis Ars Rhetorica,” Gr. & Lat. the translation by Æmilius Portus, and the commentary by his father, Spire, 1598, 8vo. 7. “Pindar,1598. Besides these he contributed notes to Leunclavius’s edition of “Xenophon,” translated into Latin Dionysius of Halicarnassus, and published a “Dictionarium Doricum Grseco-Latinum,1603, 8vo, a “Dict. lonicum,” Gr. & Lat. 8vo, lately reprinted at Oxford, and a “Lexicon Pindaricum,” &c. &C.

of the third volume of his voyages“. He appears to have been in some measure a pupil of Hackluyt’s, or at least caught from him a love for cosmography and foreign

, a learned traveller and geographer, was born probably about 1570, and entered of Gonvil and Caius college, Cambridge, in 1587, where he took the degrees in arts. The time of his leaving the university does not appear; but in 1600, we find him mentioned by Hackluyt, with great respect, in the dedication to secretary Cecil, of the third volume of his voyages“. He appears to have been in some measure a pupil of Hackluyt’s, or at least caught from him a love for cosmography and foreign history, and published in the same year, 1600, what he calls the” blossoms of his labours,“namely,” A Geographical History of Africa," translated from Leo Africanus, Lond. 4to. The reputation of his learning, and his skill in the modern languages, not very usual' among the scholars of that age, soon brought him acquainted with his learned contemporaries, and in a visit to Oxford in 1610, he was incorporated M. A. About the same time he appears to have been a member of parliament. In Feb. 1612, he was at Paris, where he delivered to Thuanus, ten books of the ms commentaries of the reign of queen Elizabeth, sent over by sir Robert Cotton for the use of that historian. From his correspondence it appears that he was at various parts of the Continent before 16 19, when he was appointed secretary to the colony of Virginia, in which office he remained until Nov. 1621, when he returned to England. Being however appointed, Oct. 24, 1623, by the privycouncil of England, one of the commissioners to inquire into the state of Virginia, he went thither again in that character, but came back to his own country in the year following, from that time he appears from his letters, to have resided chiefly at London, for the rest of his life, the period of which cannot be exactly ascertained, but must be antecedent to the month of Oct. 1635, as he is mentioned as deceased in a letter of Mr. George Gerrards, of the third of that month. His letters, in the British Museum, addressed to Mr. Joseph Mead, sir Thomas Puckering, and others, will perhaps be thought inferior to none in the historical series, for the variety and extent of the information contained in them, respecting the affairs of Great Britain.

fe; nor have we yet many to communicate. He was bora about the year 1707 but where, of what parents, or how educated, we have not discovered. In the introductory discourse

, a writer of reputation on subjects of trade and commerce, was slightly mentioned in our last edition, but without any particulars of his life; nor have we yet many to communicate. He was bora about the year 1707 but where, of what parents, or how educated, we have not discovered. In the introductory discourse to his work entitled “Great Britain’s true System,” he informs us, that nature having given him a very tender and weak constitution, he studiously declined and avoided, as much as he could, every degree of public life, as being inconsistent with, and indeed destructive of, that small snare of health which he had several years enjoyed, and which his studies had not mended and yet he preferred the studious life, as being more independent, He complains, however, of want of encouragement; and “humbly hopes that some people will be candid and ingenuous enough to think that he has a right to be treated upon a footing something different from that of an upstart idle schemist or projector, who has never given proof of any talents that might deserve the public regard and attention.” Whether this complaint was redressed, we know not. He died Sept. 17, 1767, and probably not in very opulent circumstances, as he was buried in Old-street church-yard. The coffin, at his own request, was filled with unslacked lime. His death was sudden, as he always wished it might be.

ures of the Skull, Concussions of the Brain,” &c. 1760, 8vo. 6. “Practical Remarks on the Hydrocele, or Watery Rupture, and some other Diseases of the Testicle, its

The genius of Mr. Pott was certainly of the first order. As an author, his language is correct, strong, and animated. There are few instances, if any, of such classical elegance united with so much practical knowledge and acuteness. His reading was by no means confined to professional works, but was various and extensive and his memory suffered nothing to escape. As a teacher he acquired the faculty of speaking readily, with great point and energy, and with a most harmonious and expressive elocution. As a practitioner in surgery, he had all the essential qualifications; sound judgment, cool determination, and great manual dexterity. The following is a list of his works: 1. “An Account of Tumours which soften the Bones,” Philos. Trans. 1741, No. 459. 2. “A Treatise on Ruptures,1756, 8vo, second edition, 1763. 3. “An Account of a particular kind of Rupture, frequently attendant upon new-born Children, and sometimes met with in Adults,1756, 8vo. 4. “Observations on that Disorder of the corner of the Eye commonly called Fistula Lachrytnalis,1758, 8vo. 5. “Observations on the Nature and Consequences of Wounds and Contusions of the Head, Fractures of the Skull, Concussions of the Brain,” &c. 1760, 8vo. 6. “Practical Remarks on the Hydrocele, or Watery Rupture, and some other Diseases of the Testicle, its Coats and Vessels. Being a Supplement to the Treatise on Ruptures, 1762,” 8vo. 7. “An Account of an Hernia of the Urinary Bladder including a Stone,” Philos. Transact, vol. LIV., 1764. 8. “Remarks on the Disease commonly caled a Fistula in Ano,1765, 8vo. 9. “Observations on the Nature and Consequences of those Injuries to which the Head is liable from external Violence. To which are added, some few general Remarks on Fractures and Dislocations,” 8vo, 1768. This is properly a second edition of No. 5. 10. “An Account of the Method of obtaining a perfect or radical Cure of the Hydrocele, or Watry Rupture, by means of a seton,1772, 8vo. 11. “Chirurgical Observations relative to the Cataract, the Polypus of the Nose, the Cancer of the Scrotum, the different kinds of Ruptures, and the Mortification of the Toes and Feet,1775, 8vo. 12. “Remarks on that kind of Palsy of the lower Limbs, which is frequently found to accompany a Curvature of the Spine, and is supposed to be caused by it; together with its Method of Cure,1779, 8vo. 13. “Further Remarks on the useless State of the lower Limbs in consequence of a Curvature of the Spine” being a supplement to the former treatise, 1783, 8vo. These works were published collectively by himself, in quarto and since his death, in 3 vols. 8vo, by his son-in-law, Mr. (now sir) James, Earle, with occasional notes and observations, and the last corrections of the author. This edition was published in 1790; and Mr. Earle has prefixed a life of Mr. Pott, from which the present account is taken.

fession, he never suffered his attention to its avocations to interfere with the duties of a husband or a father but though he was pleasing as a companion, his professional

We are assured, that Mr. Pott was no less amiable in private life than eminent in his profession. While his mother lived, he declined matrimonial engagement but, in 1746, soon after her death, he married the daughter of Robert Outtenden, esq. by whom he had four sons and as many daughters. Diligent as he was in tiis profession, he never suffered his attention to its avocations to interfere with the duties of a husband or a father but though he was pleasing as a companion, his professional manners had much of the roughness of the old school of surgery. In his person he was rather lower than the middle size, with an expressive and animated countenance. For the chief part of his life his labours were without relaxation but latterly he had a villa at Neasden, and usually passed about a month at Bath, or near the sea.

the church of England, was born within the barony of Kendall, in the county of Westmoreland, in 1578 or 1579. In his fifteenth year he entered Queen’s college, Oxford,

, a pious prelate of the church of England, was born within the barony of Kendall, in the county of Westmoreland, in 1578 or 1579. In his fifteenth year he entered Queen’s college, Oxford, as a poor student, or tabarder, but made such progress in his studies, that he took, his degrees with great reputation; and when master of arts, was chosen fellow of his college. During his fellowship he became tutor to the sons of several gentlemen of rank and worth, whom he assiduously trained in learning and religion. After taking orders, he was for some time lecturer at Abington, and at Totness in Devonshire, where he was highly respected as an affecting preacher, and was, according to Wood, much followed by the puritans. In 1610 he was chosen principal of Edmund Hall, but resigned, and was never admitted into that office. In 1615 he completed his degrees in divinity; and being presented the following year to a pastoral charge, by sir Edward Giles of Devonshire, hemarried the daughter of that gentleman, and intended to settle in that country. Such, however, was the character he had left behind him at Oxford, that on the death of Dr. Airay, the same year, he vvas unanimously elected provost of Queen’s college, entirely without his knowledge. This station he retained about ten years and being then one of the king’s chaplains, resigned the provostship in favour of his nephew, the subject of our next article. He was now again about to settle in Devonshire when king Charles, passing by, as we are told, many solicitations in favour of others, peremptorily nominated him bishop of Carlisle in 1628. Wood adds, that in this promotion he had the interest of bishop Laud, “although a thorough-paced Calvinist.” He continued, however, a frequent and favourite preacher; and, says Fuller, “was commonly called the puritanical bishop; and they would say of him, in the time of king James, that organs would blow him out of the church which I do not believe the rather, because he was loving of and skilful in vocal music, and could bear his own part therein.

8vo, with this title: “Want of Charitie justly charged on all such Romanists as dare (without truth or modesty) affirme, that Protestancie destroy eth Salvation; or,

, nephew to the preceding, was born also within the barony of Kendal in Westmorland, about 1591, and became clerk of Queen’s college, Oxford, in the beginning of 1606. On April 30, 1610, he took the degree of B.A.and July 8, 1613, that of M.A.; and the same year was chosen chaplain of the college, and afterwards fellow of it. He was then a great admirer of Dr. Henry Airay, provost of that college, some of whose works he published, and who was a zealous puritan, and a lecturer at Abingdon in Berks, where he was much resorted to for his preaching. 'On March the 9th, 1620, he took the degree of bachelor of divinity, and February 17, 1626-7, that of doctor, having succeeded his uncle Dr. Barnabas Potter in the provostship of his college on the 17th of June, 1626. “Soon after,” says Mr. Wood, “when Dr. Laud became a rising favourite at court, he, after a great deal of seeking, was made his creature, and therefore by the precise party he was esteemed an Arminian.” On March the 15th, 1628, he preached a Sermon on John xxi. 17. at the consecration of his uncle to the bishopric of Carlisle at Ely House in Hoiborn which was printed at London, 1629, in 8vo, and involved him in a short controversy with Mr. Vicars, a friend of his, who blamed him for a leaning towards Arminianism. In 1633 he published his “Answer to a late Popish Pamphlet, entitled, Charity mistaken.” The cause was this A Jesuit who went by the name of Edward Knott, but whose true name was Matthias Wilson, had published in 1630, a little book in 8vo, called “Charity mistaken, with the want whereof Catholicks are unjustly charged, for affirming, as they do with grief, that Protestancy un repented destroies Salvation.” Dr. Potter published an answer to this at Oxford, 1633, in 8vo, with this title: “Want of Charitie justly charged on all such Romanists as dare (without truth or modesty) affirme, that Protestancie destroy eth Salvation; or, an Answer to a late Popish pamphlet, intituled, Charity mistaken, &c.” The second edition revised and enlarged, was printed at London, 1634, in 8vo. Prynne observes, that bishop Laud, having perused the first edition, caused some things to be omitted in the second. It is dedicated to King Charles I. and in the dedication Dr. Potter observes, that it was “undertaken in obedience to his majesty’s particular commandment.

made against it.” Prefixed to it is the following opinion of the learned Joseph Mede “This discourse or tract of the number of the beast is the happiest that ever yet

, a learned English divine, son of Mr. Richard Potter, a native of Oxfordshire, and vicar of Meyre in Wiltshire, was born in the vicarage house there on Trinity Sunday 1594, and educated in grammar learning in the king’s school at Worcester under Mr. Henry Bright. He became a commoner of Trinity college, in Oxford, under his elder brother Hannibal Potter, in the latter end of the year 1609. On July 8, 1613, he took the degree of B. A. June 26, 1615, that of M. A. and July 8, 1625, that of B. D. He continued a close student in his college till the death of his father, in 1637 and then succeeded him in the rectory of Kilmington, left the university, and retired to his living, where he lived in a very retired manner till his death. In 1642 he published at Oxford in 4to, a treatise entitled “An Interpretation of the number 666. Wherein not onely the manner how this number ought to be interpreted is clearly proved and demonstrated but it is also shewed, that this number is an exquisite and perfect character, truly, exactly, and essentially describing that state of government, to which all other notes of Antichrist do agree. With all knowne objections solidly and fully answered, that can be materially made against it.” Prefixed to it is the following opinion of the learned Joseph Mede “This discourse or tract of the number of the beast is the happiest that ever yet came into the world, and such as cannot be read (save of those that perhaps will not beleeve it) without much admiration. The ground hath been harped on before, namely, that that number was to be explicated by some avrirrotxla to the number of the Virgin-company and new Hierusalem, which type the true and Apostolical Church, whose number is always derived from XII. But never did any worke this principal to such a wonderfull discovery, as this author hath done, namely, to make this number not onely to shew the manner and property of that state, which was to be that beast, but to designe the city wherein he should reigne; the figure and compasse thereof; the number of gates, cardinall titles or churches, St. Peter’s altar, and I know not how many more the like. I read the book at first with as much prejudice against the numerical speculation as might be, and almost against my will, having met with so much vanitie formerly in that kinde. But by the time I had done, it left me possest with as much admiration, as I came to it with prejudice.

ated into French, Dutch, and Latin. The Latin version was made by several hands. One edition was all or most translated by Mr. Thomas Gilbert, of Edmund Hall, in Oxford,

This treatise was afterwards translated into French, Dutch, and Latin. The Latin version was made by several hands. One edition was all or most translated by Mr. Thomas Gilbert, of Edmund Hall, in Oxford, and printed at Amsterdam 1677, in 8vo; part of the Latin translation is inserted in the second part of the fourth volume of Pool’s “Synopsis Criticorum.” Our author’s treatise was attacked by Mr. Lambert Morehouse, minister of Prestwood, near Kilmington, who asserts, that 25 is not the true, but propinque root of 666. Mr. Potter wrote a Reply to him. Mr. Morehouse gave a manuscript copy of this dispute to Dr. Seth Ward, bishop of Sarum, in 1668. Our author, while he was very young, had a good talent at drawing and painting, and the founder’s picture in the hall of Trinity college is of his copying. He had likewise an excellent genius for mechanics, and made several inventions for raising of water, and water-engines; which being communicated to the Royal Society, about the time of its first establishment, were highly approved of, and he was admitted a member of that society. Mr. Wood likewise observes, that about 1640, “he entertained the notion of curing diseases by transfusion of blood out of one man into another; the hint whereof came into his head from Ovid’s story of Medea and Jason; which matter he communicating to the Royal Society about the time of its first erection, it was entered into their books. But this way of transfusion having (as it is said) been mentioned long before by Andr. Libavius, our author Potter (vfrho I dare say never saw that writer) is not to be the first inventor of that notion, nor Dr. Richard Lewen, but rather an advancer.” He became blind before his death, and died at Kilmington about April 1678, and was buried in the chancel of the church there. His memory was preserved in Trinity college until 1670 by a dial, which he constructed and placed on the north side of the old quadrangle, but there is now another in its room. There are many anecdotes of him in the Aubrey Mss. but none perhaps more worth transcribing than the following. “The last time I saw him,” says Aubrey, “I asked him why he did not get some cousin or kinsman to be with him, and look to him now in his great age? He answered me, that he had tried that way, and found it not so well; for they did begrudge what he spent, that it was too much, and went from them, whereas his servants (strangers) were kind to him, and took care of him.” Aubrey adds, that in the “troublesome times it was his happiness never to be sequestered. He was once maliciously informed against to the committee a* Wells (a thing very common in those times); but when he came before them, one of them (I have forgot his name) gave him a pint of wine, and gave him great praise, and bade him go home, and fear nothing.” He seems to have wanted only opportunities of conversing more frequently with his learned contemporaries to have made a distinguished figure in the infancy of the Royal Society.

n this very obscure poem. In the same year he printed the first volume of his “Archaeologia Graeca,” or Antiquities of Greece, and in the following year, 1698, the

In 1694 he was chosen fellow of Lincoln college, and proceeding M. A. in October of the same year, he took pupils and went into orders. Still pursuing his private studies, he produced, in 1697, his beautiful edition of Lycophron’s “Alexandra,” fol. the second edition of which, in 1702, Dr. Harwood pronounces “an everlasting monument of the learning of the illustrious editor.” It is no inconsiderable proof of his having distinguished himself in the republic of letters, that we find him already corresponding with many eminent scholars on the continent, and among Dr. Mead’s letters are some from Mr. Potter to Graevius, from whom he received the Basil edition of Lycophron, 1546, collated with ancient vellum Mss. and by this assistance he was enabled to correct and enlarge the commentaries of Tzetzes in no less than two hundred places, and throw much additional light on this very obscure poem. In the same year he printed the first volume of his “Archaeologia Graeca,or Antiquities of Greece, and in the following year, 1698, the second volume. Several improvements were introduced by him in the subsequent editions of this valuable work, which has hitherto been unrivalled, and he lived to see at least five editions printed. It still continues a standard book for Greek students. It was incorporated in Gronovius’s Thesaurus. In the preface to the fifth edition he speaks of a Latin edition printed in Holland, the publisher of which pretended it was corrected by the author; but he assures us that “he never saw it till it was all printed, and therefore the many errors in it must not be imputed to him.

, an excellent classical scholar and translator, was born in 1721; but where, or of what family, we have not discovered. He was educated at Emmanuel

, an excellent classical scholar and translator, was born in 1721; but where, or of what family, we have not discovered. He was educated at Emmanuel college, Cambridge, and took his bachelor’s degree in 1741, but that of master not until 1788, according to the published list of Cambridge graduates, probably owing to his being then made a dignitary in Norwich cathedral. His first preferment was the vicarage of Seaming in Norfolk, in the gift of the Warner family; and, until he completed his translation of Sophocles, he held no higher preferment. In 1774, he published, in octavo, a volume of poems, some of which had appeared before separately: they consist of, “A Birth-day Thought;” “Cynthia;” “Verses to the same;” “Retirement, an epistle to Dr. Hurd” “A Fragment” “Verses to the painter of Mrs. Longe’s picture at Spixworth” “An Ode to Philoclea” “Verses to the same, exemplifying the absurdity of an affected alliteration in poetry” “Two Pieces in imitation of Spenser” “Holkham, inscribed to the earl of Leicester” “Kymber, to Sir A. Woodhouse” and a chorus from the “Hecuba” of Euripides, his intended translation of whose tragedies he announces in an advertisement. In most of these poems, particularly the “Holkham,” and “Kymber,” he shews himself a successful imitator of Pope. In the following year he published a very judicious tract, entitled “Observations on the Poor Laws, on the present state of the Poor, and on houses of Industry,” in which his principal object was, to recommend houses of industry, upon the plan of those already established in some parts of Norfolk and. Suffolk, particularly that at Bulcamp.

im into Italy Poussin had before made two vain attempts to undertake that journey, yet by some means or other was hindered from accepting this opportunity. He promised,

, an eminent French painter, was born at Andely, a little town in Normandy, in 1594. His family, however, were originally of Soissons in which city there were some of his relations officers in the Presidial court. John Poussin, his father, was of noble extraction, but born to a very small estate. His son, seeing the narrowness of his circumstances, determined to support himself as soon as possible, and chose painting for his profession, having naturally a strong inclination to that art. At eighteen, he went to Paris, to learn the rudiments of it. A Poictevin lord, who had taken a liking to him, placed him with Ferdinand, a portrait-painter, whom Poussin left in three months to place himself with Lalleraant, with whom he staid but a month he saw he should never learn any thing from such masters, and he resolved not to lose his time with them; believing he should profit more by studying the works of great masters, than by the discipline of ordinary painters. He worked a while in distemper, and performed it with extraordinary facility. The Italian poet Marino being at that time in Paris, and perceiving Poussin’s genius to be superior to the small performances on which he was employed, persuaded him to go with him into Italy Poussin had before made two vain attempts to undertake that journey, yet by some means or other was hindered from accepting this opportunity. He promised, however, to follow in a short time; which he did, though not till he had painted several other pictures in Paris, among which was the Death of the Virgin, for the church of Ndtre-Dame. Having finished his business, he set out for Rome in his thirtieth year.

uld, recommended him to cardinal Barberini, who desired to be acquainted with him. Yet by some means or other, he did not emerge, and could scarcely maintain, himself.

He there met with his friend, the cavalier Marino, who rejoiced to see him and that he might be as serviceable as he could, recommended him to cardinal Barberini, who desired to be acquainted with him. Yet by some means or other, he did not emerge, and could scarcely maintain, himself. He was forced to give away his works for sums that would hardly pay for his colours. His courage, however, did not fail he prosecuted his studies assiduously, resolving, at all events, to make himself master of his profession. He had little money to spend, and therefore the more leisure to retire by himself, and design the beautiful objects in Rome, as well antiquities as the works of the famous Roman painters. It is said, that he at first copied some of Titian’s pieces, with whose colouring, and the touches of whose landscapes, he was infinitely pleased. It is observable, indeed, that his first pieces are painted in a better style of colouring than his last. But he soon shewed, by his performances, that, generally speaking, he did not much value the part of colouring; or thought he knew enough of it, to make his pictures as perfect as he intended. He had studied the beauties of the antique, the elegance, the grand gusto, the correctness, the variety of proportions, the adjustments, the order of the draperies, the nobleness, the fine air and boldness of the heads the manners, customs of times and places, and every thing that is beautiful in the remains of ancient sculpture, to such a degree, that one can never enough admire the exactness with which he has enriched his painting in all those particulars.

affairs and fetch his wife; but when he was there, whether he found himself in his proper situation, or was quite put off from any thought of returning to by tae deaths

Louis XIII. and de Noyers, minister of state and superintendant of the buildings, wrote to him at Rome to oblige him to return to France to which he consented with great reluctance. He had a pension assigned him, and a lodging ready furnished at the Thuilleries. He drew the picture o “The Lord’s Supper,” for the chapel of the castle of St. Germain, and that which is in the Jesuit’s noviciate at Paris. He began “The Labours of Hercules,” in the gallery of the Louvre; but Vouet’s school railing at him and his works, put him out of humour with his own country. He was also weary of the tumultuous way of living at Paris, which never agreed with him. For these reasons he secretly resolved to return to Rome, pretending he went to settle his domestic affairs and fetch his wife; but when he was there, whether he found himself in his proper situation, or was quite put off from any thought of returning to by tae deaths of Richelieu and the king, which happened about that time, he never afterwards left Italy. He continued working on his easel-pieces, and sent them from Rome to Paris the French buying them very eagerly, whenever they could be obtained, and valuing his productions as much as Raphael’s.

nd took his degrees in arts the year following. In 1576, he took orders, and became vicar of Ruabon, or Rhiw-Abon, in Denbighshire, and rector of Llanfyllin, which

, a learned Welsh divine, was born in Denbighshire, about 1552. In 1568, he was sent to Oxford, but to what college is uncertain. When Jesus-college was founded, in 1571, he removed thither; and took his degrees in arts the year following. In 1576, he took orders, and became vicar of Ruabon, or Rhiw-Abon, in Denbighshire, and rector of Llanfyllin, which last he resigned in 1579. About the end of the same year he was instituted to the vicarage of Mivod in Montgomeryshire, and in 1588 he had the sinecure rectory of Llansanfraid, in Mechain. He held also some dignity in the church of St. Asaph. He proceeded to his degrees in divinity in 1582, and the subsequent year, and was afterwards chaplain to sir Henry Sidney, then president of Wales. He died in 1598, and tvas buried in his own church of Ruabon. The works published by him were, 1. “Caradoc’s History of Cambria, with annotations,1584, 4to. This history had been translated from the Latin, by Humphrey Lloyd, but was left by him unfinished at his death. Powel corrected and augmented the manuscript, and published it with notes. 2. “Annotationes in itinerarium Cambrirc, scriptum per Silvium Geraldum Cambrensem,” London, 1585. 3. “Annotationes in Cambriae descriptionem, per Ger. Cambr.” 4. “De Britannica historia recte intelligenda, epistola ad Gul. Fleetwoodum civ. Lond. recordatorem.” This and the former are printed with the annotations on the itinerary. 5. “Pontici Virunnii Historia Britannica,” London, 1585, 8vo. Wood says, that he took great pains in compiling a Welsh Dictionary, but died before it was completed.

ied in 1611. His works enumerated by Wood are chiefly controversial, against the papists, except one or two in defence of the silenced puritans. Several of them, being

He left a very learned son, Gabriel Powell, who was born at Ruabon, in 1575, and educated at Jesus college, Oxford, after which he became master of the free-school at Ruthen, in his native county. Not however finding his situation here convenient for the studies to which he was addicted, ecclesiastical history, and the writings of the fathers, he returned to Oxford, and took up his abode in St. Mary Hall. Here principally he wrote those works which procured him great reputation, especially among the puritans. Dr. Vaughan, bishop of London, invited him to the metropolis, and made him his domestic chaplain, and would have given him higher preferment had he lived. It was probably Vaughan’s successor who gave him the prebend of Portpoole, in 1609, and the vicarage of Northall, in Middlesex, in 1610. He died in 1611. His works enumerated by Wood are chiefly controversial, against the papists, except one or two in defence of the silenced puritans. Several of them, being adapted to the circumstances of the times, went through numerous editions, but are now little known. Wood says he was esteemed a prodigy of learning, though he died when a little more than thirty years old (thirty-six), and had he lived to a greater maturity of years, it is “thought he would have exceeded the famous Dr. John Rainolds, or any of the learned heroes of the age.” Wood adds that he “was a zealot, and a stiff puritan.” By one of his works, entitled “The unlawfulness and danger of Toleration of divers religions, and connivance to contrary worship in one monarchy or kingdom,” it would appear that he wrote against toleration while he was claiming it for himself and his puritan brethren.

hip, was chosen principal in 1613 being then, says Wood, “accounted by all a most noted philosopher, or subtle disputant, and one that acted and drudged much as a tutor,

, principal of Jesus college, Oxford, was born at Lansawell in Carmarthenshire, in 1561, and entered a commoner of Jesus college in 1581, and after taking his degrees, and obtaining a fellowship, was chosen principal in 1613 being then, says Wood, “accounted by all a most noted philosopher, or subtle disputant, and one that acted and drudged much as a tutor, moderator and adviser in studies among the juniors.” He died June 28, 1620, and was buried in St. Michael’s church. By will he left all his estate, amounting to between six and seven hundred pounds, to the college, with which a fellowship was founded. He wrote “Analysis Analyticorum posteriorum, seu librorum Aristotelis de Demonstratione, cum scholiis,” Oxon. 1594, 8vo,and “Analysis libri Aristotelis deSophisticis Elenchis,” ibid. 1594, reprinted 1598 and 1664. Concerning these two works, a wit of the day made the following lines:

ch he immediately subscribed. On all such occasions, where the honour and reputation of his college, or the university, was concerned, no one displayed his liberality

The office of master of the college, says Mr. Cole, he maintained with the greatest reputation and honour to himself, and credit and advantage to the society. Some years before he attained this office, a relation with whom he had very little acquaintance, and less expectation from, Charles Reynolds, of Peldon Hall, esq. left him the estate and manor of Peldon Hall in Essex, together with other estates at Little Bentley in the same county and, adds Mr. Cole, to do him justice he well deserved it, for he was both hospitable and generous, and being a single man had ample means to exercise his generosity. In Feb. 1773, when St. John’s college had agreed to undertake two very expensive works, the new casing the first court with stone, and laying out their gardens under the direction of the celebrated Mr. Brown, who told them that his plan would cost them at least 800l. the master recommended an application to those opulent persons who had formerly been members of the college, and told the fellows that if they thought proper to make such application, and open a subscription, he would begin it with a donation of 500l. which he immediately subscribed. On all such occasions, where the honour and reputation of his college, or the university, was concerned, no one displayed his liberality more in the sumptuousness and elegance of his entertainments, but in other cases he was frugal and ceconomical.

rofessorships for Architecture, Painting, and Sculpture,” 1786. 14. “Answer to a Letter on the Jutae or Viti.” 15. “Notices and Descriptions of Antiquities of the Provincia

He had a vigorous and comprehensive mind which by a liberal education, and constant cultivation during along series of years, was furnished with an uncommon fund of various knowledge, both as a politician and antiquary but not, in both characters, without some singular opinions. His works were very numerous. The first, and most popular, which went through several editions, was his “Ad ministration of the Colonies.” 2. Observations on a Bread Bill, which he introduced in parliament and, 3< “Of the Laws and Commissions of Sewers” both printed, but not published. 4. An ironical pamphlet, entitled “Considerations on the indignity suffered by the Crown, and dishonour brought upon the Nation, by the Marriage of his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland with an English subject,1772, 4to. 5. A pamphlet on “The high price of Bread,” &c. 1774, 8vo. 6. “A Topographical Description of such parts of North America as are contained in the annexed map of the middle British Colonies, &c. in North America,1776, folio. 7. “A Letter to Adam Smith, LL.D. F. R. S.” respecting his “Wealth of Nations,1776, 4to. 8. “Drainage and Navigation, but one united work,1776, 8vo. 9. “A Treatise on the study of Antiquities,1782, 8vo. 10. “A Memorial addressed to the Sovereigns of America,1782 *. 11. “Two Memorials, with an explanatory Preface.” 12. “Memorial addressed to the Sovereigns of Europe and the Atlantic,1783. 13. “Proposal for founding University Professorships for Architecture, Painting, and Sculpture,1786. 14. “Answer to a Letter on the Jutae or Viti.” 15. “Notices and Descriptions of Antiquities of the Provincia Romana of Gaul, now Provence, Languedoc, and Dauphiny: with Dissertations on the subjects of which those are exemplars and an Appendix, describing the Roman Baths and Thermae, discovered in 1784, at Badenweiler,1787, 4to. 16. “An Antiquarian Romance, endeavouring to mark a line by which the most ancient people, and the processions of the earliest inhabitancy of Europe, may be investigated, 11 1795, 8vo. 17.” Descriptions and Explanations of the Remains of some Roman Antiquities dug up in the city of Bath in 1790, with an Engraving from Drawings made on the spot,“1795, 4to. 18.” Considerations on the Scarcity and high Prices of Bread Corn,“&c, 1796. He contributed also many papers to the Archaeologia of the Society of Antiquaries, of which he was chosen a fellow in 1772, He was elected F. R.S. in 1765. He is also said to have been the author of” The Right, Interest, and Duty, of Governments, as concerned in the affair of the East Indies,“1781, 8vo.” Intellectual Physics, an Essay concerning the nature of Being,“4to, 1803 and a” Treatise on Old Age."

Besides the “Catechism” already mentioned, bishop Poynet was the author of: 1. “A Tragedie or Dialoge of the unjust usurped primacie of the bishop of Rome,”

Besides the “Catechism” already mentioned, bishop Poynet was the author of: 1. “A Tragedie or Dialoge of the unjust usurped primacie of the bishop of Rome,” translated from Bernard Ochinus,“1549, 8vo. 2.” A notable Sermon concerning the ryght use of the Lordes Supper,“&c. preached before the king at Westminster,” 1550, 8vo. When abroad, he wrote, which was published the year after his death, a treatise on the same subject, entitled :t Dialecticon viri boni et literati de veritate, natura, atque substautia corporis et sanguinis Christi in Eucharistia“in which, Bayle says, he endeavoured to reconcile the therans and Zuinglians. 3.” A short Treatise of Politique Power, and of the true obedience which subjectes owe to kynges and other civile governours, with an exhortacion to all true naturall Englishe men, compyled by D. I. P. B. R. V.V. i.e. Dr. John Poynet, bishop of Rochester and Winchester,“1556, 8vo. The contents of this may be seen in Oldys’s Catalogue of Pamphlets in the Harleian Library, No. 409. It was reprinted in 1639 and 1642 which gave a suspicion that it contained sentiments respecting queen Mary, which at this time were thought applicable to a far milder sovereign. Dr. Poynet wrote” A Defence for Marriage of Priests,“1549, 8vo; and has been thought the author of an answer to the popish Dr. Martin on the same subject, entitled” An Apologie, fully aunswering, by Scriptures and anceant doctors, a blasphemose book, gathered by D. Stephen Gardiner," &c. &c. But Wharton, in his observations on Strype’s Memorials of Cranmer, assigns very sufficient reasons why it could not be Poynet’s.

al proceedings, between the printers of the “North Briton” and others concerned in that publication, or in apprehending the authors, was so acceptable to the nation,

His lordship had the reputation of having presided in that court with a dignity, weight, and impartiality, never exceeded by any of his predecessors and when the celebrated John Wilkes was seized and committed to the Tower, upon a general warrant, his lordship granted him an Habeas Corpus; and when Wilkes was brought before the court of Common Pleas, discharged him from his confinement in the Tower, on May 6, 1763, after stating the case, in a speech which did him great honour. His wise and spirited behaviour upon this occasion, and in the consequent judicial proceedings, between the printers of the “North Briton” and others concerned in that publication, or in apprehending the authors, was so acceptable to the nation, that the lord mayor, aldermen, and common-council of the city of London, presented him with the freedom of their corporation in a gold box, an,d desired him to sit for his picture, which was put up in the Guildhall in 1764, with a suitable inscription at the bottom of the frame. The guild of merchants of the city of Dublin, also voted him the freedom of their guild, in a gold box the corporation of barber- surgeons of that city voted him his freedom thereof; and the sheriffs and commons of Dublin presented him their thanks “for the distinguished zeal and loyalty which he has shewn in asserting and maintaining the rights and liberties of the subject, in the high station whichhe now fills, with remarkable dignity and for his particular services to this kingdom, in the office of attorney-general.” Other towns sent him testimonies of their regard, and his popularity was now at its height. In 1765 he was created a peer of Great Britain by the title of lord Camclen, baron Camden in the county of Kent and on July 30, 1766, his majesty, upon the resignation of lord Northington, delivered the great seal to his lordship, as lord high chancellor of Great Britain. It was the Rockingham administration who promoted his lordship’s advancement to the peerage; but they did not thereby obtain his entire support in parliament for when the declaratory bill, asserting the right of parliament to make laws, binding the colonies in all cases whatever, was brought into the House of Lords, he opposed it with the greatest vigour. Lord Camden, whatever might be thought of his opinions, was uniformly independent, and incurred a portion of popular odium for supporting the suspension of the law, in order to prevent the exportation of corn at a time when scarcity was impending. On this occasion he happened to make a sarcastic reply to lord Temple, which drew upon him the wrath of Junius; but for this he had as little regard as for the more sober invectives of party. As a lord chancellor, he appears to have conciliated the good opinion of all parties. His acuteness and judgment, and the perspicuity with w'hich he delivered his opinions, and his general politeness, mixed with a becoming regard to the dignity of his office, all produced the highest respect and confidence in his decisions. But as he still adhered to his opinion against the taxation of the Americans, which he strongly and publicly opposed on every occasion, he was removed from his high office in 1770.

erused as they successively appeared. His “Shenstone Green,” “Emma Corbett,” “The Pupil of Pleasure, or the New System (Lord Chesterfield’s) illustrated,” had likewise

, a poet and miscellaneous writer, is said to have been born of a good family, at St. Ives, in Huntingdonshire, Dec. 25, 1749. He was ed located at Felstead, in Essex, and was originally brought up to the church. This, however, he appears to have quitted for the stage, which he attempted in London, in 1774, with very little success. After his failure in this attempt, he subsisted chiefly by writing. He also was for some time a bookseller at Bath, where, and at other places, he occasionally delivered lectures on the English language. For many years after his appearance on the stage, he assumed the name of Courtney Melmoth, which likewise is prefixed to most of his publications. As. an author, he was very prolific. The first of his productions which attracted the notice of the public, was “The Tears of Genius, occasioned by the Death of Dr. Goldsmith, 1774,” whose poetical works he endeavoured, and not always unsuccessfully, to make the model of his own. His poem of “Sympathy” was perhaps his best, and has passed through many editions, and is characterized by feeling, energy, and beauty. His first novel, entitled “Liberal Opinions upon Animals, Man, and Providence,1775, &c was published in detached volumes, which were eagerly perused as they successively appeared. His “Shenstone Green,” “Emma Corbett,” “The Pupil of Pleasure, or the New System (Lord Chesterfield’s) illustrated,” had likewise a temporary popularity. His other novel of any note was entitled “Family Secrets,1797, 5 vols. 12mo, but had not the success of the former. His dramatic productions were, a tragedy, “The Fair Circassian,” taken from Hawkesworth’s “Almoran and Harriet,” which required all the support of himself and friends, in the newspapers, to render it palatable for a few nights. His other dramatic pieces, enumerated in the Biog. Dram, were so little successful as to be soon forgot.

h of Benevolence,” a poem, occasioned by the design of erecting a Monument to Mr. Howard. “Humanity, or the Rights of Nature,” a poem, 1788. “An Ode on his Majesty’s

Other works by Mr. Pratt, not noticed in the above account, are “The Sublime and Beautiful of Scripture. Being Essays on select Passages of Sacred Compositions,1777. “An Apology for the Life and Writings of David Hume,1777. “Travels of the Heart, written in France,” 17 78,. 2 vols. “Observations on Young’s Night Thoughts,” 8vo. “Landscapes in Verse, taken in Spring,1785. “Miscellanies,1786, 4 vols. which included the most popular of the preceding pieces. “Triumph of Benevolence,” a poem, occasioned by the design of erecting a Monument to Mr. Howard. “Humanity, or the Rights of Nature,” a poem, 1788. “An Ode on his Majesty’s Recovery.” “A Letter to the Tars of Old England,” and “A Letter to the British Soldiers,1797. “John and Dame or, The Loyal Cottagers,” a poem, 1803. “Harvest Home, consisting of Supplementary Gleanings, Original Dramas and Poems, Contributions of Literary Friends, and Select Republications, including Sympathy, a poem, revised, corrected, and enlarged, from the eighth edition,1805, 3 vols. 8vo. “The Cabinet of Poetry, containing the best entire pieces which are to be found in the Works of the British Poets, from Milton to Beattie. The Works of each Poet prefaced by an Account of his Life and Character, by Mr. Pratt;” 6 vols. 1808. “The Contrast, a Poem, including Comparative Views of Britain, Spain, and France,1808. “The Lower World, a poem, in four books, with notes,1810. “A Description of Leamington Spa,” a retreat of Mr. Pratt’s, &c. To these we may add his “Gleanings,or Travels Abroad and in England, in which there is some amusement, but so much mixture of fiction, that very little reliance can be placed on them for matters of fact. Mr. Pratt died Oct. 4, 1814, at his apartments in Colmore-row, Birmingham. He was unquestionably a man of genius, and a selection might be made from his works which would establish his reputation as a poet but his necessities seldom gave him time to polish and correct, and his vanity prompted him so often to become his own reviewer and his own panegyrist, that for some years before his death he sunk in respect with the public. There are no marks of learning in any of his performances and from the time he devoted himself to represent fiction on the stage, his general conduct was that of a man playing a part, or led through the adventures of a novel. It was to his praise, however, that in his latter days his works contained a more pure morality than some he had published at an earlier period of his life.

d haughty, which created him so many enemies, that he quitted France for Bale, where he staid a year or two; and having wandered for some time in various cities of

, of the academy of sciences at Berlin, was born at Charenton Feb. 16, 1716. His attachment to the mathematics was so strong, that he opened a school at Paris, in 1740, where he taught them gratuitously, and formed several excellent scholars. But his temper was acrimonious and haughty, which created him so many enemies, that he quitted France for Bale, where he staid a year or two; and having wandered for some time in various cities of Germany, he finally settled at Berlin where, though he did not escape quarrels, he was Altogether successful, and became an author. He died at Berlin in 1767, at the age of fifty-one. His works are neither numerous nor very valuable. The best is, 1. His “Préservatifs cpntre la corruption de la langue Françoise en Allernagne.” He wrote also, 2. “La Monogamie, ou l'unité en Mariage,1751, 3 yols. 8vo a work of learning, but whimsical and tiresome. 3. “Le Diogene de l'Alembert;” not so singular as the preceding, but not better written, with some tendency to modern sophistry. 4. Several memoirs in the volumes of the academy at Berlin. He appears to have been in a great degree unsettled in his religious opinions; inclining at times to Socinianism, and the doctrines of fortuitous creation; at others producing strong suggestions in favour of religion.

re sick, he sometimes took the liberty to alter the physicians’ prescriptions. Botany and astronomy, or rather astrology, also engrossed some part of his attention.

, a celebrated divine in the beginning of the seventeenth century, descended from the Prestons, of Preston in Lancashire, was born at Heyford, in Northamptonshire, in Oct. 1587. An uncle on the mother’s side, who resided at Northampton, undertook the care of his education, and placed him at first at the free-school of that town, and afterwards under a Mr. Guest, an able Greek scholar, who resided in Bedfordshire. With him he remained until 1584, when he was admitted of King’s college, Cambridge. Here he applied to what his biographer tells us was at that time the genius of the college, viz. music, studied its theory, and practised on the lute but thinking this a waste of time, he would have applied himself to matters of more importance, could he have remained here, but as not coming from Eton school, he could not be upon the foundation. Being therefore incapable of preferment, he removed to Queen’s college, and by the instructions of Oliver Bowles, an able tutor, he soon became distinguished for his proficiency, especially in the philosophy of Aristotle, and took his degrees with uncommon reputation. Bowles leaving college for a living, his next tutor was Dr. Porter, who, astonished at his talents, recommended him to the notice of the master, Dr. Tyndal, dean of Ely, by whose influence ie was chosen fellow in 1609. This he appears to have thought rather convenient than honourable, for at this time his mind was much set on public life, and on rising at court. He continued, however, to pursue his studies, to which he now added that of medicine; and, although he did this probably without any view to it as a profession, we are told that when any of his pupils were sick, he sometimes took the liberty to alter the physicians’ prescriptions. Botany and astronomy, or rather astrology, also engrossed some part of his attention. But from all these pursuits he was at once diverted by a sermon preached at St. Mary’s by Mr. Cotton, which made such an impression on him, that he immediately resolved on the study of divinity, and began, as was then usual, by perusing the schoolmen. “There was nothing,” says his biographer, “that ever Scotus or Occam wrote, but he had weighed and examined; he delighted much to read them in the first and oldest editions that could be got. I have still a Scotus in a very old print, and a paper not inferior to parchment, that hath his hand and notes upon it throughout yet he continued longer in Aquinas whose sums he would sometimes read as the barber cut his hair, and when it fell upon the place be read, he would not lay down his book, but blow it off,

"His (Mr. Preston’s) great and first care was to bring his argument unto a head, without affronts or interruptions from the answerer, and so made all his major

"His (Mr. Preston’s) great and first care was to bring his argument unto a head, without affronts or interruptions from the answerer, and so made all his major propositions plausible and firm, that his adversary might neither be willing nor able to enter there, and the minor still was backed by other syllogisms, and so the argument went on unto the issue which fell out well for master Prestbn for in disputations of consequence, the answerers are many times so fearful of the event, that they slur and trouble the opponents all they can, and deny things evident, which had been the case in all the former acts there was such wrangling about their syllogisms, that sullied and clouded the dt bates extremely, and put the king’s acumen into straits but when master Preston still cleared his way, and nothing was denied, but what was ready to be proved, the king was greatly satisfied, and gave good heed, which he might well do, because the question was tempered and fitted unto his content namely, Whether dogs could make syllogisms

stanced in an hound who had the major proposition in his mind, namely, ‘the hare is gone either this or that way’ smells out the minor with his nose, namely, ‘she is

"The opponent urged that they could an Enthymeme (said he) is a lawful and real syllogism, but dogs can make them he instanced in an hound who had the major proposition in his mind, namely, ‘the hare is gone either this or that way’ smells out the minor with his nose, namely, ‘she is not gone that way,’ and follows the conclusion, ‘Ergo, this way with open mouth.’ The instance suited the auditory, and was applauded and put the answerer to his distinctions, that dogs might have sagacity but not sapience, in things especially of prey, and that did concern their belly, might be nasutuli, but not logici had much in their mouths, little in their minds, unless it had relation to their mouths that their lips were larger than their understandings which the opponent, still endeavouring to wipe off with another syllogism, and put the dogs upon a fresh scent, the moderator, Dr. Reade, began to be afraid, and to think how troublesome a pack of hounds, well followed and applauded, at last might prove, and so came to the answerer’s aid, and told the opponent that his dogs, he did believe, were very weary, and desired him to take them off, and start some other argument and when the opponent would not yield, but halloed still and put them on, he interposed his authority, and silenced him. The king in his conceit was all the while upon Newmarket heath, and iiked the sport, and therefore stands up, and tells the moderator plainly he was not satisfied in all that had been answered, but did believe an hound had more in him than was imagined. I had myself (said he) a dog, that straggling far from all his fellows, had light upon a very fresh scent, but considering he was all alone, and had none to second and assist him in it, observes the place, and goes away unto his fellows, and by such yelling arguments as they best understand, prevailed with a party of them to go along with him, and bringing them unto the place, pursued it into an open view. Now the king desired for to know how this could be contrived and carried on without the use and exercise of understanding, or what the moderator could have done in that case better; and desired him that either he would think better of his dogs, or not so highly of himself.

men, that a complaint was at length made to the vice-chancellor, and an order given that no townsmen or scholars of other colleges should be permitted to attend. His

Mr. Preston’s part in this singular disputation might have led to favour at court, if he had been desirous of it and sir Futk Greville, afterwards lord Brook, was so pleased with his performance that he settled 50l. per ann. upon him, and was his friend ever after; but he was now seriously intent on the office of a preacher of the gospel, and having studied Calvin, and adopted his religious opinions, he became suspected of puritanism, which was then much discouraged at court. In the mean time his reputation for learning induced many persons of eminence to place their sons under his tuition and Fuller tells us, he was “the greatest pupil- monger ever known in England, having sixteen fellow-commons admitted into Queen’s college in one year,” while he continued himself so assiduous in his studies as considerably to impair his health. When it came to his turn to be dean and catechistof his college, he began such a course of divinity -lectures as might direct the juniors in that study; and these being of the popular kind, were so much frequented, not only by the members of other colleges, but by the townsmen, that a complaint was at length made to the vice-chancellor, and an order given that no townsmen or scholars of other colleges should be permitted to attend. His character for puritanism seems now to have been generally established, and he was brought into trouble by preaching at St. Botolph’s church, although prohibited by Dr. Newcomb, commissary to the chancellor of Ely, who informed the bishop and the king, then at Newmarket, of this irregularity. On the part of Newcomb, this appears to have been the consequence of a private pique; but whatever might be his motive, the matter came to be heard at court, and the issue was, that Mr. Preston was desired to give his sentiments on the 1U turgy at St. Botolph’s church by way of recantation. He accordingly handled the subject in such a manner as cleared himself from any suspicion of disliking the forms of the liturgy, and soon after it came to his turn to preach before the king when at Hinchingbrook. The court that day, a Tuesday, was very thin, the prince and the duke of Buckingham being both absent. After dinner, which Mr. Preston had the honour of partaking at his majesty’s table, he was so much complimented by the king, that when he retired, the marquis of Hamilton recommended him to his majesty to be one of his chaplains, as a man “who had substance and matter in him.” The king assented to this, but remembering his late conduct at Cambridge, declined giving him the appointment.

sure “This Medoro,” says he, speaking of himself, “so favoured by the fair, is a man of thirty-seven or thirty-eight years, who bears in his countenance and in his

, was born at Hesdin, a small town in the province of Artois, in 1697. He studied with the Jesuits, but soon relinquished that society for the army, into which he entered as a volunteer, but being disappointed in his views of promotion, he returned to the Jesuits. Still, however, his attachment to the military service seems to have been predominant for he soon left the college again, and a second time became a soldier. As an officer he acquired distinction, and some years passed away in the bustle and dissipation of a military life. At length, the unhappy consequence of an amour induced him to return to France, and seek retirement among the Benedictines of St. Maur, in the monastery of St. Germain des Pres, where he continued a few years. Study, and a monastic life, could not, however, entirely subdue his passions. Recollection of former pleasures probably inspired a desire again to enjoy them in the world. He took occasion, from a trifling disagreement, to leave the monastery, to break his vows, and renounce his habit. Having retired to Holland in 1729, he sought resources in his talents, with success. In the monastery at St. Germain, he had written the two first parts of his “Memoires d'un Homme de Qualite.” The work was soon finished, and, when it was published, contributed no less to his emolument than his reputation. A connexion which he had formed at the Hague with an agreeable woman, and which was thought to have exceeded the boundaries of friendship, furnished a subject of pleasantry to the abbe Lenglet, the Zoilus of his time. In his journal entitled “Pour & Centre,” Prevot thus obviates the censure “This Medoro,” says he, speaking of himself, “so favoured by the fair, is a man of thirty-seven or thirty-eight years, who bears in his countenance and in his humour the traces of his former chagrin who passes whole weeks without going out of his closet, and who every day employs seven or eight hours in study; who seldom seeks occasions for enjoyment, who even rejects those that are offered, and prefers an hour’s conversation with a sensible friend, to all those amusements which are called pleasures of the world, and agreeable recreation. He is, indeed, civil, in consequence of a good education, but little addicted to gallantry of a mild but melancholy temper; in fine, sober, and regular in his conduct.

Whether the accusations of his enemies were true or not, there were reasons which obliged him to pass over into

Whether the accusations of his enemies were true or not, there were reasons which obliged him to pass over into England at the end of 1733, and the lady followed him. There, according to Palissot, he wrote the first volumes of “Cleveland.” The first part of his “Pour & Contre,” was published this year, a journal which brought down upon him the resentment of many authors whose works he had censured. His faults were canvassed, and perhaps exaggerated; all his adventures were brought to the public view, and related, probably, not without much misrepresentation. His works, however, having established his reputation, procured him protectors in France. He solicited and obtained permission to return. Returning to Paris in the autumn of 1734, he assumed the habit of an abbé. Palissot dates this period as the epoch in which his literary fame commenced but it is certain, that three of his most popular romances had been published before that time. He now lived in tranquillity under the protection of the prince of Conti, who gave him the title of his almoner and secretary, with an establishment that enabled him to pursue his studies. By the desire of chancellor d'Aguesseau, he undertook a general history of voyages, of which the first volume appeared in 1745. The success of his works, the favour of the great, the subsiding of the passions, a calm retreat, and literary leisure, seemed to promise a serene and peaceful old age. But a dreadful accident put an end to this tranquillity, and the fair prospect which had opened before him was closed by the hand of death. To pass the evening of his days in peace, and to finish in retirement three great works which he had undertaken, he had chosen and prepared an agreeable recess at Firmin near Chantilly. On the 23d of Nov. 1763, he was discovered by some peasants in an apoplectic fit, in the forest of Chantilly. A magistrate was called in, who unfortunately ordered a surgeon immediately to open the body, which was apparently dead. A loud shriek from the victim of this culpable precipitation, convinced the spectators of their error. The instrument was withdrawn, but not before it had touched the vital parts. The unfortunate abbé opened his eyes, and expired.

ence at Hackney was much more numerous than in either of the above places, yet during the first four or five years of his ministry, it increased very slowly “and,”

Having officiated near fourteen years at Newington Green without any hope of ever becoming extensively useful in that situation, he was the more easily induced to accept an invitation to succeed Mr. Law, as morning preacher at the Gravel-Pit meeting-house in Hackney, but consented to officiate as afternoon preacher at Newington Green, and in consequence resigned that service at Poor Jewry-lane. Although his audience at Hackney was much more numerous than in either of the above places, yet during the first four or five years of his ministry, it increased very slowly “and,” says his biographer, “it is probable that neither the excellence of his discourses, nor the impressive manner in which they were delivered, would have made any great addition to his hearers, had not other causes of a very different nature concurred to render him popular.

e university of Glasgow, conferred on him the degree of doctor of divinity, without any solicitation or knowledge on his own part, but, as his biographer candidly

Mr. Price had hitherto confined his studies almost exclusively to moral and religious subjects, and had long considered his profession as excluding him from taking any part in the temporal affairs of this world but from this opinion he now began gradually to depart, and first bestowed a share of his attention on philosophical studies, which produced many valuable papers inserted in the “Philosophical Transactions” of the Royal Society of London, of which he had been chosen a fellow in 1765. So intent was his mind in one of his investigations, that we are told, the colour of his hair, which was naturally black, became changed in different parts of his head into spots of perfect white. In 1769 he published his valuable “Treatise on Reversionary Payments,” which contained, among a variety of other matters, the solution of many questions in the doctrine of annuities; schemes for establishing societies for the benefit of age and widows on just principles; and an exposure of the inadequacy of the societies of this kind which were continually forming in London and other parts of the kingdom. Altogether this was perhaps his most useful performance. About the end of 1769, the university of Glasgow, conferred on him the degree of doctor of divinity, without any solicitation or knowledge on his own part, but, as his biographer candidly acknowledges, in consequence of the application of some of his clerical friends in Londo.n, who paid the usual fees, and left him to suppose that the honour was entirely gratuitous.

pon which alone the supreme legislative authority of Great Britain over her Colonies could be justly or beneficially maintained and for holding forth those public objects

This work was followed in 1772 by his <c Appeal to the public on the National Debt, 77 the principal object of which was to restore the sinking fund which had been extinguished in 1733; and although the proposition then met with much opposition, we have lived to see it adopted by parliament, and become one of the chief bulwarks of our public credit. We have also lived to see that the view he took of public affairs, and his dread of a lessened population, which he represented in the most gloomy colours, were not founded on facts, nor have been confirmed by experience. The same opinions, with others of a more general kind, led him to oppose the measures which ended in a war with America. In 1775 he published “Observations on Civil Liberty and the Justice and Policy of the War with America, 77 which was followed, in the same spirit, in 1777, by another pamphlet entitled” Observations on the Nature of Civil Government. 77 The principles of both these works encountered a variety of opinions, being both extravagantly praised and censured: by some esteemed without fault; while by others they are deemed visionary and chimerical, mischievous in their theory, and tending in their effect to the unhinging of all government That their influence was very great, cannot be denied but that their author was firmly persuaded of their usefulness, seems to be generally believed by those who have had the best opportunities of knowing his sentiments. For writing this last pamphlet, he had the honour to receive the thanks of the Court of common-council the 14th of March, 1776, as having laid down those principles upon which alone the supreme legislative authority of Great Britain over her Colonies could be justly or beneficially maintained and for holding forth those public objects without which it must be totally indifferent to the kingdom who were in or who were out of power. At the same time he also received a gold box of the value of fifty pounds.

r reducing the public debt, which was established in 1786, and has contributed, more than any other, or all other measures, to raise the credit of his administration.

When, after the war ended, lord Shelburne came into administration, in consequence of the death of the marquis of Rockingham, his lordship very gravely offered Dr. Price the place of private secretary but, his biographer adds, “his lordship surely could not be in earnest in making such an offer. It was no doubt meant as a compliment, and the simplicity of Dr. Price considered it in that light, though, as a friend observed, the minister might as well have proposed to make him master of the horse.” During the time, however, that lord Shelburne was in office, he sought the assistance of Dr. Price in forming a scheme for paying off the national debt, and moved an introductory resolution on that subject in the House of Lords; but, upon his leaving administration, the scheme was abandoned. It was, howeVer, communicated to the public by Dr Price in a treatise, entitled “The State of the public Debts and Finances, at signing the preliminary Articles of Peace in January 1783; with a plan for raising Money by public Loans, and for redeeming the public Debts.” After this, when Mr. Pitt determined to introduce a bill into parliament for liquidating the national debt, he applied to Dr. Price for his advice on the subject, and received from him three separate plans one of which now forms the foundation of that act for reducing the public debt, which was established in 1786, and has contributed, more than any other, or all other measures, to raise the credit of his administration. The friends of Dr. Price, however, offer two objections on this subject; the one that the plan Mr. Pitt adopted was the least efficient of the three; the other, that he did not publicly acknowledge his obligations to Dr. Price.

public character. His manners were peculiarly amiable, and whoever was admitted to his conversation, or even perused his works, could not avoid being struck by contrasting

* To read any of the invectives presses himself in terms of contempt against Mr. Burke, one would suppose in regard to the French revolution he was the only human being who and after asking rather too severely looked with an evil eye on the French what good was to be expected from a Revolution. But Dr. Price’s biogra- nation of atheists, he concludes with pher has found another among Dr. foretelling the destruction of a million Price’s intimate correspondents, and of human beings as a probable conno less a pereonage than John Adams, sequence of it. Such a letter, in our the late American ambassador. In opinion, outweighs an hundred of those a loug letter which he wrote to Dr. which Dr. Price received at this time Price at this- time, so far from congra- from his enlightened friends in France, tulating him on the occasion, he exsevere and very painful disorder, by which he had been many years threatened. This he bore with fortitude and resignation, though occasionally his spirits and strength were entirely exhausted by the agonies which he endured. He died on the nineteenth of March, 1791, in the sixtyeighth year of his age, and was interred in Bunhill-fields burying-ground, the funeral being followed by a great concourse of his friends and admirers, to whom he had long been endeared by his private as well as public character. His manners were peculiarly amiable, and whoever was admitted to his conversation, or even perused his works, could not avoid being struck by contrasting his mild and placid temper with that of some of the controversial writers with whom he generally co-operated. He was for many years one of the trustees to the estates of the late Dr. Daniel Williams, which is the most important concern belonging to the London Dissenters. During the applications of the dissenting ministers to parliament, from 1772 to 1779, for relief from subscription to the articles of the church of England, required by the act of Toleration, he was chosen one of the committee appointed to concert and pursue the necessary measures for obtaining that object; but when he found that it could not be obtained without a declaration of faith in the Holy Scriptures, which he contended the civil magistrate had no right to demand, he divided with a small minority of his brethren against the rest of the committee, refusing an enlargement of religious liberty on terms which, according to their views of things, and according to the true principles of dissent, implied submission to the authority of the civil magistrate in matters of conscience, to whom, in matters of this kind, they owed no obedience whatever. In 1783 the degree of LL. D. was conferred upon him by Yale college, in Connecticut, and he was afterwards elected a fellow of the American Philosophical Societies at Philadelphia and Boston. In 1786, when a new academical institution among the dissenters was established at Hackney, Dr. Price was appointed tutor in the higher branches of the mathematics but soon found himself incapable of attending to the duties, of this office, and therefore resigned it the second year. He approved the plan, however, and, says his biographer, “from the circumstance of his having bequeathed a small legacy towards its support, died inconscious of the ignorance and folly which were accelerating its destruction.” Among Dr. Price’s numerous correspondents were, the marquis of Lansdowne, the earls Chatham and Stanhope the bishops of Carlisle, St. Asaph, and Llandaff; Mr. Harris, the author of Philosophical Arrangements, &c. Mr. Howard, Dr. Franklin, the duke de Rochefoucault, the celebrated Turgot, and several of the most distinguished members of the first national assembly.

ice, says our predecessor in this work, men will estimate differently, as they happen to be infected or not by those principles, which, by exaggerating the true and

The value of the political and religious works of Dr. Price, says our predecessor in this work, men will estimate differently, as they happen to be infected or not by those principles, which, by exaggerating the true and excellent doctrines of liberty, have proved, in the present age, the bane of Christianity, and the scourge of human nature. That he was sincere and well-intentioned in his adoption and recommendation of them, there is not any reason to doubt. As a calculator on political questions, when he did not take up his data from partial documents, which flattered his preconceived opinions, he was acute, profound, and able.

th Wales and town-clerk of Gloucester. In resentment for this affront, as his biographer insinuates, or from a more patriotic motive, he opposed king William’s grant

, an eminent lawyer and judge, was the son of Thomas Price, esq of Geeler in Denbighshire, and born in the parish of Kerigy Druidion, Jan. 14, 1653. After an education at the grammar-school of Wrexham, he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge; but, as usual with gentlemen destined for his profession, left the university without taking a degree, and entered himself a student of Lincoln’s Inn about 1673. In 1677 he made what was called the grand tour, in company with the earl of Lexington, and lady and sir John Meers. When at Florence, we are told that he was apprehended, and some law-books taken from him; and his copy of “Coke upon Littleton” being supposed, by some ignorant officer, to be an English heretical Bible, Mr. Price was carried before the pope where he not only satisfied his holiness as to this work, but made "him a present of it, and the pope ordered it to be deposited in the Vatican library. In 1679 he returned, and married a lady of fortune; from whom, after some years’ cohabitation, he found it necessary to be separated, on account of the violence of her temper. In 1682 he was chosen member of parliament for Weobly in Herefordshire, and gave nis hote against the bill of exclusion. The same year he was made attorney-general for South Wales, elected an alderman for the city of Hereford, and the year following was chosen recorder of Radnor. His high reputation for knowledge and integrity procured him the office of steward to the queen dowager (relict of Charles II.) in 1684; he was also chosen townclerk of the city of Gloucester; and, in 1686, king’s counsel at Ludlow. Being supposed to have a leaning towards the exiled family, he was, after the revolution, removed from tn*e offices of attorney-general for South Wales and town-clerk of Gloucester. In resentment for this affront, as his biographer insinuates, or from a more patriotic motive, he opposed king William’s grant of certain lands in Wales to his favourite, earl of Portland, and made a memorable speech on this occasion in the House of Commons; the consequence of which was, that the grant was rejected.

ughout the four years that he lived there, unless when keeping his two months’ residence at Norwich, or, visiting his archdeaconry, which he did constantly twice a

After this he quitted Norwich, and resided at his parsonage at Sahara, in which church he officiated every morning and afternoon throughout the four years that he lived there, unless when keeping his two months’ residence at Norwich, or, visiting his archdeaconry, which he did constantly twice a year, until unable to bear the journey in consequence of the stone, a disorder he had already contracted, and which at last proved fatal to him. A favourite topic in his visitations was the duty of private prayer in the families of the clergy, which he urged by every argument and told them, that when visiting, if there was any house where the dwellers refused to hear them perform family-worship, that was no house for a clergyman to make his abode in.

duced by one of the peers and its object was, to make it felony in the minister who should solemnize or officiate at such marriage. This matter being warmly debated,

In the first session of parliament after the new bishops (appointed in the room of those who refused to take the oaths to government) made their appearance, two bills were brought into the House of Lords, relating to the church, in both of which Dr. Prideaux was concerned the first was to take away pluralities of benefices, the other to prevent clandestine marriages. Bishop Burnet intended to introduce the first, but submitted it previously to Dr, Prideaux, who drew up a bill, which all the prelates friendly to the measure thought would be less liable to objection, and therefore it was brought into the House, but rejected the other, to prevent clandestine marriages, was introduced by one of the peers and its object was, to make it felony in the minister who should solemnize or officiate at such marriage. This matter being warmly debated, Dr. Kidder, then bishop of Bath and Wells, wrote to Dr. Prideaux, desiring his opinion on it. The doctor, in a very long letter, proved that the ecclesiastical laws were already sufficient to prevent clandestine marriages, if only carried into execution and stated, by what means, all the precautions provided in these laws had been evaded by the avarice of chancellors, comnjissaries, and registrars. He added that, as the bill stood, it could have no other effect than to subject the clergy to be tried for their lives every marriage they solemnized. Kidder, who had made vise of this paper in the debate which ended in withdrawing the bill, immediately. sent it to the press; and the week following, to Dr. Prideaux’s great surprize, he received a printed copy of it from the bishop, who however had not put his name to it.

.” As after the act of toleration, many people imagined themselves at liberty either to go to church or stay at home, as they thought proper, by which means the churches

In 1691, on the death of Dr. Pocock, his professorship (of Hebrew) was offered to Dr. Prideaux but he declined it, says his biographer, “for several reasons, which at that time made it inconvenient to him to accept it, but afterwards it proved much to his detriment that he did not.” As after the act of toleration, many people imagined themselves at liberty either to go to church or stay at home, as they thought proper, by which means the churches were much deserted, Dr. Prideaux drew up a circular letter, directed to the ministers of his archdeaconry, which was afterwards published, in 1701, at the end of his “Directions to Churchwardens.” In 1694, rinding his health impaired by the aguish air of Saham, he determined to return again with his family to Norwich but, instead of putting in a curate at Saham, he thought it his duty to give up both benefice and office, which he accordingly did, into the hands of the bishop of the diocese, and informed the warden and fellows of New college, Oxford, the patrons of the living, of his resignation. On his return to Norwich, the care of the cathedral affairs again devolved upon him, in the absence of the dean (Dr. Fairfax), who resided mostly in London. In 1696, the dean and chapter presented him to the vicarage of Trowse, worth about 40l. and situated a mile from Norwich. Here he officiated with the same assiduity and regularity as at Saham, and that purely for the love of duty for, in addition to his other preferments, he had a private fortune, which rendered this last vicarage of no consequence in a pecuniary view.

ipline which he had before paid and although this made him obnoxious to the persons whom he censured or dismissed, the benefit to the general body was too obvious not

In 1697 he published his “Life of Mahomet ,” 8vo, of which three editions were printed the first year. He intended to have written a history of the Saracen empire, and with it the decay and fall of the Christian religion but he gave up this design for reasons stated in the preface to the Life of Mahomet. This valuable work was followed by his useful little treatise called “Directions to Churchwardens,” whose negligence he had very much experienced in his archdeaconry this has gone through many editions. In 1702, on the death of the dean of Norwich, Dr. Henry Fairfax, Dr. Prideaux was installed as his successor on June 8th of that year, and a more proper person could not be found. He now continued, with better effect, if possible, that attention to regularity and discipline which he had before paid and although this made him obnoxious to the persons whom he censured or dismissed, the benefit to the general body was too obvious not to be approved. In December 1702, on a public thanksgivingday for the success of the expedition to Vigo, he preached a sermon on the subject, which we notice as the only one he ever printed and, had it been left to his own inclination, would never have been thought of by himself for that purpose. In 1703 he published a tract in vindication of the ecclesiastical law, which gives the successor in any ecclesiastical benefice or promotion, all the profits, from the day of the avoidance. This was occasioned by an alteration in the law which bishop Burnet was about to have introduced; but our author’s arguments carried such weight, that the design was given up.

ith the greatest approbation, and went through eight editions in 4 vols. 8vo, at London, besides two or three at Dublin, before the end of 1720, since which it has

Being enabled, however, to return to his studies, after improving a new edition of his “Directions to Church Wardens,” in 1712> he proceeded with that greater work, on which his reputation with posterity principally depends. It was entitled “The Connection of the History of the Old and New Testament;” the first part of which was published in 1715, -the second in 17 1, foL Both parts were received with the greatest approbation, and went through eight editions in 4 vols. 8vo, at London, besides two or three at Dublin, before the end of 1720, since which it has been often reprinted, and is indeed accounted a standard book in every theological library. This history takes in the affairs of Egypt, Assyria, and all the other eastern nations, as well as the Jews and likewise those of Greece and Rome, as far as was necessary to give a distinct view of the completion of the prophecies which relate to the times comprehended in the history. The author has also set in the clearest light some passages of prophane history, which before lay dispersed and buried in confusion and there appears throughout the whole work such an amiable spirit of sincerity and candour, as sufficiently atones for the few mistakes which escaped his diligence. Gordon, the author of “Cato’s Letters,” had certainly no prejudices in favour of Prideaux, or of his work yet he styles it “a body of universal history, written with such capacity, accuracy, industry, and honesty, as make it one of the best books that ever came into the world, and shew him to be one of the greatest men in it. No book was ever more universally read and approved it is, indeed, a great public service done to mankind, and entities the author to the highest public gratitude and honour. But though I never saw any great work, to which 1 found fewer objections, yet as a memorable proof how inseparably mistakes and prejudices cleave to the mind of man, the great and candid Dr. Prideaux is not without them. I therefore do not upbraid him with them, but rather admire him for having so few. There are, however, some of his theological observations, which seem to me not only ill-grounded, but to have a tendency to create in his readers wrong notions of the Deity, and to encourage them to mistake the common accidents of life, and the common events of nature, for judgments 4 and to apply them superstitiously as such.” There are letters between the dean, and his cousin Mr. Moyie, concerning some passages in this “Connection,” &c. printed in the “Miscellaneous Works” of the latter, and in Dr. Prideaux’s life. No man could be more willing to listen to reasonable objections, or to correct what could be proved to be wrong. Candour was the distinguishing feature of Dean Prideaux’s character.

excellent: as a writer he is clear, strong, intelligent, and learned, without any pomp of language, or ostentation of eloquence. His conversation resembled his style,

Dr. Prideaux was naturally of a very strong, robust constitution; which enabled him to pursue his studies with great assiduity; and notwithstanding his close application, and sedentary manner of life, enjoyed great vigour both of body and mind for many years together, till afflicted by the stone. Although we have few particulars of his course of study at Oxford, it is evident that he must have been an early and hard student, and had accumulated a great fund of Oriental learning, and an intimate acquaintance with ecclesiastical history. His parts were very good, rather solid than lively: his judgment excellent: as a writer he is clear, strong, intelligent, and learned, without any pomp of language, or ostentation of eloquence. His conversation resembled his style, being learned and instructive, but with a conciseness of expression on many occasions, which, to those who were not well acquainted with him, had sometimes the appearance of rusticity. In his manner of life, he was regular and temperate, being seldom out of his bed after ten at night, and he generally rose to his studies before five in the morning. His disposition was sincere and candid. He generally spoke his mind with freedom and boldness, and was not easily diverted from pursuing what he thought right. To those who differed from him in opinion, he always behaved with great candour. In party principles he was rather inclined to what was called Low-church; but in his adherence to the establishment, in performing all the duties annexed to liis preferments, in enjoining a like attention upon all vvith whom he had influence, and in his dislike of schism and schismatics, no man was more inflexible. He had at one time flattered himself that a few alterations in the liturgy might tend to bring back the dissenters to the church; but he lived to see, what we have lived to see more clearly, that a few alterations would not answer the purpose. For most of these particulars we are indebted to an excellent Life of Dr. Prideaux, which appeared in October 1748, “with several tracts and letters of his upon various subjects, never before published.

in authority at court, a faction thereupon grew up in the university between those called Puritans, or Calvinists, on the one side, and the Remonstrants, commonly

, a learned English bishop, was born at Stowford, in the parish of Harford, near Ivy-bridge in Devonshire, Sept. 17, 1578, and was the fourth of seven sons of his father, who being in mean circumstances, with so large a family, our author, after he had learned to write and read, having a good voice, stood candidate for the place of parish-clerk of the church of Ugborow near Harford. Mr. Price informs us, that “he had a competitor for the office, who had made great interest in the parish for him* self, and was likely to carry the place from him. The parishioners being divided in thematter, did at length agree in this, being unwilling to disoblige either party, that the Lord’s-day following should be the day of trial; the one should tune the Psalm in the forenoon, the other in the afternoon; and he that did best please the people, should have the place. Which accordingly was done, and Prideaux lost it, to his very great grief and trouble. Upon, which, after he became advanced to one of the first dignities of the church, he would frequently make this reflection, saying,” If I could but have been clerk of Ugborow, I had never been bishop of Worcester.“Disappointed in this office, a lady of the parish, mother of sir Edmund Towel, maintained him at school till he had gained some knowledge of the Latin tongue, when he travelled to Oxford, and at first lived in a very mean station in Exetercollege, doing servile offices in the kitchen, and prosecuting his studies at his leisure hours, till at last he was taken notice of in the college, and admitted a member of it in act-term 1596, under the tuition of Mr. William Helme, B. D. On January the 31st, 1599, he took the degree of Bachelor of Arts, and in 1602 was chosen probationer fellow of his college. On May the 11th, 1603, he proceeded Master of Arts, and soon after entered into holy orders. On May the 6th, 1611, he took the degree of Bachelor of Divinity; and the year following was elected rector of his college in the room of Dr. Holland; and June the 10th, the same year, proceeded Doctor of Divinity. In 1615, upon the advancement of Dr. Robert Abbot to the bishopric of Sarum, he was made regius professor of divinity, and consequently became canon of Christ-church, and rector of Ewelme in Oxfordshire; and afterwards discharged the office of vice-chancellor of the university for several years. In the rectorship of his college he behaved himself in such a manner, that it flourished more than any other in the university; more foreigners coming thither for the benefit of his instruction than ever was known; and in his professorship, says Wood,” he behaved himself very plausible to the generality, especially for this reason, that in his lectures, disputes, and moderatings (which were always frequented by many auditors), he shewed himself a stout champion against Socinus and Arminius. Which being disrelished by some who were then rising, and in authority at court, a faction thereupon grew up in the university between those called Puritans, or Calvinists, on the one side, and the Remonstrants, commonly called Arminians, on the other: which, with other matters of the like nature, being not only fomented in the university, but throughout the nation, all things thereupon were brought into confusion.“In 1641, after he had been twenty- six years professor, he was one of those persons of unblemished reputation, whom his majesty made bishops, on the application of the marquis of Hamilton, who had been one of his pupils. Accordingly, in November of that year, he was elected to the bishopric of Worcester, to which he was consecrated December the 19th following; but the rebellion was at that time so far advanced, that he received little or no profit from it, to his great impoverishment. For adhering stedfastly to his majesty’s cause, and pronouncing all those of his diocese, who took up arms against him, excommunicate, he was plundered, and reduced to such straits, that he was obliged to sell his excellent library. Dr. Gauden said of him, that he now became literally a helluo librorum, being obliged to turn his books >nto bread for his children. He seems to have borne this barbarous usage with patience, and even good humour. On -one occasion, when a friend came to see bim, and asked him how he did? he answered,” Never better in my life, only I have too great a stomach, for 1 have eaten the little plate which the sequestrators left me; I have eaten a great library of excellent books; I have eaten a great deal of linen, much of my brass, some of my pewter, and now am come to eat my iron, and what will come next I know not." So great was his poverty about this time that he would have attended the conferences with the king at the Isle of Wight, but could not afford the means of travelling. Such was the treatment of this great and good man, one of the best scholars and ablest promoters of learning in the kingdom, at the hands of men who professed to contend for liberty and toleration.

ticed, in the name of his son Matthias Prideaux. 20. “Histories of Successions in States, Countries, or Families,” &c. Oxford, 1653. 21. “Euchologia or, The Doctrines

Dr.Prideaux’s works were, 1. “Tabulae ad Grammaticam Groecam Introductorioe,” Oxford, 1608, 4to. 2. “Tirocinium ad Syllogismum cohtexendum.” 3. “Heptades Logicae, siveMonitaadamplioresTractatus introductoria.” These two last pieces were printed with the “Tabulae ad Grammaticam Graecam,” &c. Mr. David Lloyd observes, that our author’s Greek Grammar and Logick were both but a fortnight’s work. 4. “Castigatio cujusdam Circulatoris, qui R. P. Andream EudsBmon-Johannem Cydonium soc. Jesu seipsum nuncupat, opposita ipsius calumniis, in Epistola Isaaci Casauboni ad Frontonem Ducaeum,” Oxford, 1614, 8vo. 5. “Alloquium sereniss. Reg. Jacobo Woodstochio habitum, 24 Aug. 1624,” in one sheet, 4to. 6. “Orationes novem inaugurates de totidem Theologiae apicibus, prout in promotione Doctorum Oxoniae publice proponebantur in Comitiis,” Oxford, 1626, 4to. 7. “Lectiones decem de totidem Religionis Capitibus, praecipue hoc tempore controversis, prout publice habebantur Oxoiiiae in Vesperiis,” Oxford, 1625, 4to. 8. “Lectiones 22, Orationes 13, Conciones 6, et O ratio ad Jacobum Regem,” Oxford, 1648, folio. Among which are contained the preceding lectures, orations, and speeches to king James at Woodstock. 9. “Concio ad Artium Baccalaureos pro more habita in Ecclesia B. Marias Oxon. in die Cinerum in Act. ii. 22. Ann. 1616.” 10. “Fasciculus Controversiarum ad Juniorum aut occupatorum captum colligatus,” &c. Oxford, 1649, 1651, 4to. 11. “Theologiaa Scholasticae Syntagma Mnemonicum,” Oxford, 1651. I2.“Conciiiorum Synopsis,” printed with the “Fasciculus.” 13. “Epistola de Episcopatu,” folio. 14. “Manuductio ad Theologiam Polemicam,” Oxford, 1657, 8vo, published by Mr. Thomas Barlow, afterwards bishop of Lincoln, with a Latin Epistle before it in the name of the printer. 15. “Hypomnemata Logica, Rhetorica, Physica, Metaphysica,” &c. Oxford, 8vo. 16. Several Sermons, as, l.“A Sermon at the consecration of Exeter-college Chapel,” on. Luke xix. 46, Oxford, 1625, 4to. 2nd, “Perez Uzzah, A Sermon before the king at Woodstock,” on 1 Samuel vi. 6, 7, Oxford, 1625, 4to. Both these sermons are printed with another volume, entitled, 17. “Twenty Sermons,” Oxford, 1636, 4to. The two first are entitled, “Christ’s Counsel for ending Law-cases,” dedicated to his kinsman Edmund Prideaux, esq. 18. “Nine Sermons on several occasions,” Oxford, 1641, 4to. 19. “A Synopsis of the Councils,” subjoined to “An easy and compendious Introduction to History,” published, as we have just noticed, in the name of his son Matthias Prideaux. 20. “Histories of Successions in States, Countries, or Families,” &c. Oxford, 1653. 21. “Euchologia or, The Doctrines of Practical Praying being a Legacy left to his daughters in private, directing them to such manifold uses of our Common Prayer Book, as may satisfy upon all occasions, without looking after new lights from extemporal flashes,” dedicated to his daughters, Sarah Hodges and Elizabeth Sutton, London, 1655, 8vo. 22. “The doctrine of Conscience, framed according to the form in the Common Prayer;” left as a legacy to his wife, containing many cases of conscience, and dedicated to Mrs. Mary Prideaux, relict of the Right Reverend Father in God John, late Lord Bishop of Worcester, by T. N.; London, 1656, 8vo. 23. “Sacred Eloquence or, The Art of Rhetoric, as it is laid down in Scripture,” London, 1659, 8vo.

at the same time announced the discovery of nitrous air, and its application as a test of the purity or fitness for respiration of airs generally. About this time,

In the same year in which his History of Electricity appeared, he left Warrington, and settled at Leeds as minister, and instantly resumed his theological studies, which produced a number of publications, in which he announced the opinions he had adopted. From an Arian he was now become a Socinian, and not content with enjoying the changes which he was at perfect liberty to make, he began to contend with great zeal against the authority of the established religion. It was, however, during his residence here, that his attention was more usefully turned to the properties f fixed air. He had commenced experiments on this subject in 1768, and the first of his publications appeared in 1772, in which he announced a method of impregnating water with fixed air. In the paper read to the royal society in 1772, which obtained the Copley medal, he gave an account of his discoveries and at the same time announced the discovery of nitrous air, and its application as a test of the purity or fitness for respiration of airs generally. About this time, also, he shewed the use of the burning lens in pneumatic experiments; he related the discovery and properties of muriatic acid air; added much to what was known of the airs generated by putrefactive processes, and by vegetable fermentation; and he determined many facts relative to the diminution and deterioration of air, by the combustion of charcoal, and the calcination of metal. In 1774, he made a full discovery of dephlogisticated air, which he procured from the oxyds of silver and lead. This hitherto secret source of animal life and animal heat, of which Mayow had a faint glimpse, was unquestionably first exhibited by Dr. Priestley, though it was discovered about the same time by Mr. Scheele, of Sweden. In 1776, his observations on respiration were read before the royal society, in which he discovered that the common air inspired was diminished in quantity, and deteriorated, in quality, by the action of the blood on it, through the blood-vessels of the Jungs; and that the florid red colour of arterial blood was communicated by the contact of air through the containing vessels. In 1778 Dr. Priestley pursued his experiments on the properties of vegetables growing in the light to correct impure air, and the use of vegetation in this part of the (economy of nature and it seems certain that Dr. Priestley made his discoveries on the subject previously to those of Dr. Ingenhouz, then engaged in similar researches. From this period Dr. Priestley seems to have attended to his pneumatic experiments as an occupation, devoting to them a regular portion of his time. To this attention, among a prodigious variety of facts, tending to shew the various substances from which gases may be procured, the methods of producing them, their influence on each other, and their probable composition, we owe the discovery of vitriolic acid air, of ajkaline air, and of dephlogisticated nitrous air or, as it has since been denominated, the gaseous oxyd of azote, the subject of so many curious and interesting experiments by sir Humphrey Davy. To these may be added the production of various kinds of inflammable air, by numerous processes that had escaped the observation of Mr. Cavendish. To Dr. Priestley we are indebted for that fine experiment of reviving metallic calces in inflammable air and he first ascertained the necessity for water to be present in the formation of the gases, and the endless production of gases from water itself. His experiments on this subject, viz. the generation of air from water, opened a new field for reflection, and deserve particular notice. It had been already remarked that water was necessary to the generation of every species of gas but the unceasing product of air from water had been observed by no one before.

ge. They all own that most of their discoveries are due either to the repetition of his discoveries, or to the hints scattered through his works.”

To enumerate,” says Mr. Kirwan, “Dr. Priestley’s discoveries, would in fact be to enter into a detail of most of those that have been made within the last fifteen years. How many invisible fluids, whose existence evaded the sagacity of foregoing ages, has he made known to us The very air we breathe he has taught us to analyse, to examine, to improve a substance so little known, that even the precise effect of respiration was an enigma, until he explained it. He first made known to us the proper food of vegetables, and in what the difference between these and animal substances consisted. To him pharmacy is indebted for the method of making artificial mineral waters, as well as for a shorter method of preparing other medicines metallurgy for more powerful and cheap solvents; and chemistry for such a variety of discoveries as it would be tedious to recite discoveries which have new-modelled that science, and drawn to it, and to this country, the attention of all Europe. It is certain, that, since the year 1773, the eyes and regards of all the learned bodies in Europe have been, directed to this country by his means. In every philosophical treatise his name is to be found, and in almost every page. They all own that most of their discoveries are due either to the repetition of his discoveries, or to the hints scattered through his works.

number of names given in as subscribers it has been said, not one-third part of the number paid for, or demanded the book when it was published. One of his biographers

The success of his “History of Electricity” induced him to adopt the design of treating on other sciences, in the same historical manner and at Leeds he occupied himself in preparing “The History and present state of Discoveries relating to Vision, Light, and Colours.” The expences necessary in composing such a work obliged him to issue proposals for publishing it by subscription and it appeared in 1772, in one very large volume 4to. The sale of this work by no means corresponded with the expectations formal from the number of names given in as subscribers it has been said, not one-third part of the number paid for, or demanded the book when it was published. One of his biographers says that it failed, chiefly because it was impossible to give adequate notions of many parts of the theory of optics without a more accurate acquaintance with mathematics than common readers can be supposed to possess. Perhaps too, the writer himself was scarcely competent to explain the abstruser parts of this science.

in, and an annuity for life of 150l. in the event of their being separated by his lordship’s dying, or changing his mind. He accordingly fixed his family in a house

After a residence at Leeds for six years, Dr. Priestley accepted the offer of the earl of Shelburne, afterwards marquis of Lansdowne, to reside with his lordship in the nominal capacity of librarian, but really as his literary companion. The terms were 2501. per annum, with a house for his family to live in, and an annuity for life of 150l. in the event of their being separated by his lordship’s dying, or changing his mind. He accordingly fixed his family in a house at Calne, in Wiltshire, near his lordship’s seat; and during seven years attended upon the noble earl in his winter’s residences at London, and occasionally in his excursions, one of which, in 1774, was a tour to the continent. This situation was useful, as affording Dr. Priestley advantages in improving his knowledge of the world, and in pursuing his scientific researches; and as he was perfectly free from restraint, this was the period of some of those exertions which increased his reputation as a philosopher, and some of those which brought the greatest obloquy upon him as a divine. In 1775, he published his “Examination of the doctrine of Common Sense, as held by Drs. Reid, Beattie, and Oswald,” in which he treated those gentlemen with a contemptuous arrogance, of which, we are told, he was afterwards ashamed. In his manner of treating his opponents, he always exhibited a striking contrast to the mild and placid temper of his friend Dr. Price. After this he became the illustrator of the Hartleian theory of the human mind. He had, previously to this, declared himself a believer in the doctrine of philosophical necessity and in a dissertation prefixed to his edition of Hartley, he expressed some doubts of the immateriality of the soul. The charge which these induced against him of infidelity and atheism, seems only to have provoked him to a more open avowal of the same obnoxious sentiments; and in 1777 he published “Disquisitions on Matter and Spirit,” in which he gave a history of the doctrines concerning the soul, and openly supported the system which, upon due investigation, he had adopted. It was followed by “A Defence of Unitarianism, or the simple Humanity of Christ, in opposition to his Pre-existence and of the Doctrine of Necessity.” It seems not improbable that these works produced a coolness in the behaviour of his noble patron, which about this time he began to remark, and which terminated in a separation, after a connection of seven years, without any alledged complaint. That the marquis of Lansdowne had changed his sentiments of Dr. Priestley appears from the evidence of the latter, who informs us, that when he came to London, he proposed to call on the noble lord; but the latter declined receiving his visits. Dr. Priestley adds, that during his connection with his lordship, he never once aided him in his political views, nor ever wrote a single political paragraph. The friends of both parties seem to think that there was no bond of union between them, and his lordship’s attention became gradually so much engaged by politics, that every other object of study lost its hold. According, however, to the articles of agreement, Dr. Priestley retained his annuity for life of 150l. which was honourably paid to the last; and it has been said, that when the bond securing to him this annuity was burnt at the riots of Birmingham, his lordship in the handsomest manner presented him with another.

account which the reader will consider with profound attention. It is unnecessary to point them out, or to attempt a lengthened character of Dr. Priestley. It has been

There are many circumstances in this account which the reader will consider with profound attention. It is unnecessary to point them out, or to attempt a lengthened character of Dr. Priestley. It has been said with truth that of his abilities, none can hesitate to pronounce that they are of first-rate excellence. His philosophical inquiries and publications claim the greatest distinction, and have materially contributed to the advancement of science. As an experimental philosopher, he was among the first of his age. As a divine, had he proved as diligent in propagating truth as in disseminating error, in establishing the gospel in the minds of men, instead of shaking their belief in the doctrines of revelation, perhaps few characters of the last century would have ranked higher as learned men, or have been held in greater estimation. Such, however, was not the character of his theological writings, which, as Dr. Johnson said, were calculated to unsettle every thing, but to settle nothing. All this accords with the sentiments of the great majority of the nation, with respect to Dr. Priestley as a divine, although we are aware that the epithet of bigot will be applied to him who records the fact. On the other hand, in dwelling on Dr. Priestley’s character as a philosopher, his friends may take the most effectual method of reconciling all parties, and handing down his fame undiminished to the latest posterity. We have enumerated his principal works in the preceding sketch, but the whole amount to about 70 volumes, or tracts, in 8vo. An analysis of them is given in the “Life,” to which we are principally indebted for the above particulars.

emed in France, that nothing of any consequence was done without him, which had relation to painting or building; and he even directed the preparations for all festivals,

, an eminent Italian painter, was descended from a noble family in Bologna, where he was born in 1490. His friends, perceiving that he had a strong inclination for design, permitted him to go to Mantua, where he was six years a disciple of Julio Romano, who was then ornamenting the apartments of the palace del Te. In this time he became so skilful, that he represented battles in stucco and basso relievo, better than any of the young painters at Mantua, who were Julio’s pupils. He assisted Julio in executing his designs and Francis I. of France sending to Rome for a man that understood working in stucco, Primaticcio was the person chosen for this service, and he adorned Fontainbleau, and most of the palaces in France, with his compositions. The king put such confidence in him, that he sent him to Rome to buy antiques, in 1540; on which occasion he brought back one hundred and fourscore statues, with a great number of busts. He had moulds made by Giacomo Baroccio di Vignola, of the statues of Venus, Laocoon, Commodus, the Tiber, the Nile, the Cleopatra at Belvidere, and Trajan’s Pillar, in order to have them cast in brass. After the death of Rosso-, who was his rival, he succeeded him in the place of superintendant of the buildings; and in a little time finished the gallery which his predecessor had begun. He brought so many statues of marble and brass to Fontainbleau, that it seemed another Rome, as well for the number of the antiques as for his own works in painting and in stucco. He was so much esteemed in France, that nothing of any consequence was done without him, which had relation to painting or building; and he even directed the preparations for all festivals, tournaments, and masquerades. He was made abbot of St. Martin at Troyes, and lived with such splendour, that he was respected as a courtier as well as a painter. He and Rosso taught the French a good style for, before their time, what they had done in the arts was very inconsiderable, and had something of the Gothic in it. He died in 1570, at the age of eighty, after having been favoured and caressed in four reigns.

ess the duke of Cumberland. In 1750 he published, in a letter to Dr. Mead, “Observations on the Gaol or Hospital Fever.” This work, which passed through two editions,

But though Dr. Pringle was thus deprived of the immediate protection of a nobleman who knew and esteemed his worth, his conduct in the duties of his station procured him effectual support. He attended the army in Flanders, through the campaign of 1744, and so powerfully recommended himself to the duke of Cumberland, that, in the spring following, March 11, he had a commission from his royal highness, appointing him physician general to his majesty’s forces in the Low Countries, and parts beyond the seas; and on the next day he received a second commission from the duke, by which he was constituted physician to the royal hospitals in the same countries. On March 5, he resigned his professorship in consequence of these promotions. In 1745 he was with the army in Flanders, but was recalled from that country in the latter end of the year, to attend the forces which were to be sent against the rebels in Scotland. At this time he had the honour of being chosen F. R. S. Dr. Pringle, at the beginning of 1746, in his official capacity, accompanied the duke of Cumberland in his expedition against the rebels, and remained with the forces, after the battle of Culloden, till their return to England, in the middle of August. We do not find that he was in Flanders during any part of that year. In 1747 and 1748, he again attended the army abroad and in the autumn of 1748 he embarked with the forces for England, upon the conclusion of the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle. From that time he principally resided in London, where, from his known skill and experience, and the reputation he had acquired, he might reasonably expect to succeed as a physician. In April 1749, Drt Pringle was appointed physician in ordinary to his royal highness the duke of Cumberland. In 1750 he published, in a letter to Dr. Mead, “Observations on the Gaol or Hospital Fever.” This work, which passed through two editions, and was occasioned by the gaol-distemper that broke out at that time in the city of London, was well received by the medical world, though he himself afterwards considered it as having been hastily written. After supplying some things that were omitted, and rectifying a few mistakes that were made in it, he included it in his grand work on the “Diseases of the Army,” where it constitutes the seventh chapter of the third part of that treatise. It was in the same year that Dr. Pringle began to communicate to the Royal Society his famous “Experiments upon Septic and Antiseptic substances, with remarks relating to their use in the theory of Medicine” These experiments, which comprehended several papers, were read at different meetings of the society the first in June, and the two next in the November following three more in the course of 1751 and the last in Feb. 1752. Only the three first numbers were printed in the “Philosophical Transactions,” as Dr. Pringle had subjoined the whole, by way of appendix, to his “Observations on the Diseases of the Army.” These experiments upon septic and antiseptic substances, which have accompanied every subsequent edition of the treatise just mentioned, procured for him the honour of sir Godfrey Copley’s gold medal. Besides this, they gained him a high and just reputation, as an experimental philosopher. In February 1753, he presented to the Royal Society “An Account of several Persons seized with the Gaol Fever by working in Newgate and of the manner by which the Infection was communicated to one entire family.” This is a very curious paper and was deemed of such importance by the excellent Dr. Stephen Hales, that he requested the author’s permission to have it published, for the common good of the kingdom, in the “Gentleman’s Magazine;” where it was accordingly printed, previous to its appearance in the Transactions. Dr. Pringle’s next communication was, “A remarkable Case of Fragility, Flexibility, and Dissolution of the Bones.” In the 49th volume of the “Transactions,” we meet with accounts which he had given of an earthquake felt at Brussels; of another at Glasgow and Dunbarton and of the agitation of the waters, Nov. 1, 1756, in Scotland and at Hamburgh. The 50th volume contains, Observations by him on the case of lord Walpole, of Woolterton; and a relation of the virtues of Soap in dissolving the Stone, as experienced by the reverend Mr. Matthew Simson. The next volume is enriched with two of the doctor’s articles, of considerable length, as well as value. In the first, he has collected, digested, and related the different accounts that had been given of a very extraordinary fiery meteor, which appeared on Sunday the 26th of November, 1758, between eight and nine at night; and, in the second, he has made a variety of remarks upon the whole, in which no small degree of philosophical sagacity is displayed. It would be tedious to mention the various papers, which, both before and after he became president of the Royal Society, were transmitted through his hands. Besides his communications in the Philosophical Transactions, he wrote, in the Edinburgh Medical Essays, volume the fifth, an “Account of the success of the Vitrum ceratum Antimonii.

of his majesty’s ship the Resolution, during her voyage round the world. Whether this was the case, or whether the method pursued by the captain to attain so salutary

On Nov. 30, in that year, in consequence of the death of James West, esq. he was elected president of that illustrious and learned body. His election to this high station, though he had so respectable an opponent as the late sir James Porter, was carried by a very considerable majority. This was undoubtedly the highest honour that sir John Pringle ever received; an honour with which his other literary distinctions could not be compared. It was at a very auspicious time that sir John Pringle was called upon to preside over the Royal Society. A wonderful ardour for philosophical science, and for the advancement of natural knowledge, had of late years displayed itself through Europe, and had appeared with particular advantage in our own country. He endeavoured to cherish it by all the methods that were in his power; and he happily struck upon a new way to distinction and usefulness, by the discourses which were delivered by him on the annual assignment of sir Godfrey Copley’s medal. This gentleman had originally bequeathed five guineas, to be given at each anniversary meeting of the Royal Society, by the determination of the president and council, to the person who had been the author of the best paper of experimental observations for the year past. In process of time, this pecuniary reward, which could never be an important consideration to a man of an enlarged and philosophical mind, however narrow his circumstances might be, was changed into the more liberal form of a gold medal; in which form it is become a truly honourable mark of distinction, and a just and laudable object of ambition. It was, no doubt, always usual with the president, on the delivery of the medal to pay some compliment to the gentleman on whom it was bestowed but the custom of making a set speech on the occasion, and of entering into the history of that part of philosophy to which the experiments related, was first introduced by Mr. Martin B'olkes. The discourses, however, which he and his successors delivered were very >hort, and were only inserted in the minute-books of the society. None of them had ever been printed before sir John Pringle was raised to the chair. The first speech that was made by him being much more elaborate and extended than usual, the publication of it was desired and with this request, it is said, he was the more ready to comply, as an absurd account of what he had delivered had appeared in a newspaper. Sir John Pringle was very happy in the subject of his primary discourse. The discoveries in magnetism and electricity had been succeeded by the inquiries into the various species of air. In these enquiries Dr. Priestley, who had already greatly distinguished himself by his electrical experiments, and his other philosophical pursuits and labours, took the principal lead. A paper of his, entitled “Observations on different kinds of Air,” having been read before the society in March 1772, was adjudged to be deserving of the gold medal; and sir John Pringle embraced with pleasure the occasion of celebrating the important communications of his friend, and of relating with accuracy and fidelity what had previously been discovered upon the subject. At the close of the speech, he earnestly requested Dr. Priestley to continue his liberal and valuable inquiries; and we have recently said how well he fulfilled this request. It was not, we believe, intended, when sir John Pringle’s first speech was printed, that the example should be followed but the second discourse was so well received by the Royal Society, that the publication of it was unanimously requested. Both the discourse itself, and the subject on which it was delivered, merited such a distinction. The composition of the second speech is evidently superior to that of the former; sir John having probably being animated by the favourable reception of his first effort. His account of the torpedo, and of Mr. Walsh’s ingenious and admirable experiments relative to the electrical properties of that extraordinary fish, is singularly curious. The whole discourse abounds with ancient and modern learning, and exhibits sir John Pringle’s knowledge in natural history, as well as in medicine, to great advantage. The third time that he was called upon to display his abilities at the delivery of sir Godfrey’s medal, was on an eminently important occasion. This was no less than Mr. (the late Dr.) Maskelyne’s successful attempt completely to establish sir Isaac Newton’s system of the universe, by his “Observations made on the mountain Schehallien, for finding its at-; traction.” Sir John Pringle took advantage of this opportunity, to give a perspicuous and accurate relation of the several hypotheses of the ancients, with regard to the revolutions of the heavenly bodies, and of the noble discoveries with which Copernicus enriched the astronomical worldHe then traced the progress of the grand principle of gravitation down to sir Isaac’s illustrious confirmation of it to which he added a concise narrative of Messrs. Bouguer’s and Condamine’s experiment at Chimboraco, and of Mr. Maskelyne’s at Schehallien. If any doubts yet remained with respect to the truth of the Newtonian system, they were now totally removed. Sir John Pringle had reason to be peculiarly satisfied with the subject of his fourth discourse; that subject being perfectly congenial to his disposition and studies. His own life had been much employed in pointing out the means which tended not only to cure, but to prevent, the diseases of mankind and it is probable, from his intimate friendship with capt. Cook, that he might suggest to that sagacious commander some of the rules which he followed, in order to preserve the health of the crew of his majesty’s ship the Resolution, during her voyage round the world. Whether this was the case, or whether the method pursued by the captain to attain so salutary an end, was the result alone of his own. reflections, the success of it was astonishing and this famous voyager seemed well entitled to every honour which could be bestowed. To him the society assigned their gold medal, but he was not present to receive the honour. He was gone out upon that voyage from which he never returned. In this last voyage he continued equally successful in maintaining the health of his men.

ccount it was justly esteemed a most eminent mark of distinction; and we believe there have been few or no instances wherein it has been conferred on any other than

Sir John Pringle, in his next annual dissertation, had an opportunity of displaying his knowledge in a way in which it had not hitherto appeared. The discourse took its rise from, the prize medaPs being adjudged to Mr. Mudge an eminent surgeon at Plymouth, upon account of his valu* able paper, containing “Directions for making the best composition for the metals of Reflecting Telescopes, together with a description of the process for grinding, polishing, and giving the great speculum the true parabolic form.” Sir John has accurately related a variety of parti* culars, concerning the invention of reflecting telescopes, the subsequent improvements of these instruments, and the state in which Mr. Mudge found them, when he first set about working them to a greater perfection, till he had truly realized the expectation of sir Isaac Newton, who, above an hundred years ago, presaged that the public would one day possess a parabolic speculum, not accomplished by mathematical rules, but by mechanical devices. Sir John Pnngle’s sixth discourse, to which he was led by the assignment of the gold medal to Mr. (now Dr.) Hutton, on account of his curious paper, entitled “The Force of fired Gunpowder, and the initial Velocity of Cannon-balls, determined by experiments,” was the theory of gunnery. Though sir John had so long attended the army, this was probably a subject to which he had heretofore paid very little attention. We cannot, however, help admiring with what perspicuity and judgment he has stated the progress that was made, from time to time, in the knowledge of projectiles, and the scientific perfection to which his friend Mr. Hutton had carried this knowledge. Sir John Pringle was not one of those who delighted in war, and in the shedding of human blood; he was happy in being able to shew that even the study of artillery might be useful to mankind; and, therefore, this is a topic which he has not forgotten to mention. Here ended his discourses upon the delivery of sir Godfrey Copley’s medal. If he had continued to preside in the chair of the Royal Society, he would, no doubt, have found other occasions of displaying his acquaintance with the history of philosophy. But the opportunities which he had of signalizing himself in this respect were important in themselves, happily varied, and sufficient to gain him a solid and lasting reputation. Several marks of literary distinction, as we have already seen, had been conferred upon sir John Pringle, before he was raised to the president’s chair; but after that event, they were bestowed upon him with great abundance and, not again to resume the subject, we shall here collect them together. Previously, however, to these honours (excepting his having been chosen a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries of London), he received the last promotion that was given him in his medical capacity, which was, his being appointed, Nov. 4, 1774, physician extraordinary to his majesty. In the year 1776 he was enrolled in the list of the members of no less than four learned bodies. These were, the Royal Academy of Sciences at Madrid the Society of Amsterdam, for the promotion of Agriculture the Royal Academy of Medical Correspondence at Paris and the Imperial Academy of Sciences at St. Petersburg. In July 1777, sir John Pringle was nominated, by his serene highness the landgrave of Hesse, an honorary member of the Society of Antiquaries at Cassel. In 1778 he succeeded the celebrated Linnæus, as one of the foreign members of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris. This honour was then extended, by that illustrious body, only to eight persons, on which account it was justly esteemed a most eminent mark of distinction; and we believe there have been few or no instances wherein it has been conferred on any other than men of gceat and acknowledge/1 abilities and reputation. In October in the same year, our author was chosen a member of the Medical Society at Hanau. In the succeeding year, March 29, he was elected a foreign member of the Royal Academy of Sciences and Belles Lettres at Naples. The last testimony of respect which was, in this way, bestowed upon sir John Pringle, was his being admitted, in 1781, into the number of the fellows of the newly-erected Society of Antiquaries at Edinburgh, the particular design of which is to investigate the history and antiquities of Scotland.

was much hurt by the disputes introduced into the society, concerning the question, whether pointed or blunted electrical conductors are the most efficacious in preserving

It was at a late period of life, when sir John Pringle was in the sixty-sixth year of his age, that he was chosen to be president of the Royal Society. Considering, therefore, the extreme attention that was paid by him to the various and important duties of his office, and the great pains he took in the preparation of his discourses, it was natural to expect that the burden of his honourable station should grow heavy upon him in a course of time. This burden was increased not only by the weight of years, but by the accfdent of a fall in the area in the back part of his house, from which he received considerable hurt, and which, in its consequences, affected his health and weakened his spirits. Such being the state of his body and mind, he began to entertain thoughts of resigning the president’s icbair. It has been said likewise, and believed, that he was much hurt by the disputes introduced into the society, concerning the question, whether pointed or blunted electrical conductors are the most efficacious in preserving buildings frcm the pernicious effects of lightning. Perhaps sir John Pringle’s declining years, and the general state of his health, will form sufficient reasons for his resignation. His intention, however, was disagreeable to many of his friends, and to many distinguished members of the Royal Society. Accordingly, they earnestly solicited him to continue in the chair; but, his resolution being fixed, he resigned it at the anniversary meeting in 1773. Joseph Banks, esq. (now sir Joseph Banks) was unanimously elected president in his room, a gentleman whose life, and the services he has rendered to science, will hereafter form an important article in biographical works. Though sir John Pringle quitted his particular relation to the Royal Society, and did not attend its meetings so constantly as he had formerly done, he still retained his literary connexions in general. His bouse continued to be the resort of ingenious and philosophical men, whether of his own country or from abroad and he was frequent in his visits to his friends. He was held in particular esteem by eminent and learned foreigners, none of whom came to England without waiting upon him, and paying him the greatest respect. He treated them, in return, with distinguished civility and regard. When a number of gentlemen met at his table, foreigners were usually a part of the company. Sir John Pringle’s infirmities increasing, he hoped that he might receive an advantage from an excursion to Scotland, and spending the summer there; which he did in 1780, principally at Edinburgh. He had probably then formed some design of fixing his residence in that city. However this may have been, he was so well pleased with a place to which he had been habituated in his younger days, and with the respect shewn him by his friends, that he purchased a house there, whither he intended to return in the following spring. When he came back to London, in the autumn of the year above mentioned, he began to prepare for putting his scheme into execution. Accordingly, having first disposed of the greatest part of his library, he sold his house in Pall-mall, in April 1781, and some few days after removed to Edinburgh. In this city he was treated, by persons of all ranks, with every mark of distinction. But Edinburgh was not now to him what it had been in early life. The vivacity of spirits, which in the days of youth spreads such a charm on the objects that surround us, was, fled. Many, if not most, of sir John Pringle’s old friends and contemporaries, were dead; and though some of them remained, they could not meet together with the same strength of constitution, the same ardour of pursuit, the same animation of hope, which they had formerly possessed. Th younger men of eminence paid him the sincerest testimonies of esteem and regard; but it was too late in life for him to form new habits of close and intimate friendship. He found, likewise, the air of Edinburgh too sharp and cold for his frame, which had, long been peculiarly sensible to the severities of weather. These evils were exaggerated ;by his increasing infirmities, and perhaps by that restlessness of mind, which, in the midst of bodily complaints, is’ still hoping to derive some benefit from a change of place. He determined, therefore, to return once more to London, where he arrived in the beginning of September. Before sir John Pringle entirely quitted Edinburgh, he requested his friend, Dr. John Hope, to present ten volumes folio x of “Medical and Physical Observations,” in manuscript, to the Royal College of Physicians in that city. This benefaction was conferred on two conditions first, that the observations should not be published and secondly, that they should not be lent out of the library on any pretence whatever. A meeting of the college being summoned upon the occasion, sir John’s donation was accepted with, much gratitude, and a resolution passed to comply with the terms on which it was bestowed. He was, at the same time, preparing two other volumes to be given to the university, containing the formulas referred to in his annotations.

rve in his behaviour, when he was not perfectly pleased with the persons who were introduced to him, or who happened to be in his company. His sense of integrity and

Sir John Pringle had not much fondness for poetry. He had not even any distinguished relish for the immortal Shakspeare at least, he seemed too- highly sensible of the defects of that illustrious bard, to give him the proper degree of estimation. Sir John Pringle had not, in his youth, been neglectful of philological inquiries; and, after having omitted them for a time, he returned to them again; so far, at least, as to endeavour to obtain a more exact knowledge of the Greek language, probably with a view to a better understanding of the New Testament. He paid a great attention to the French language and it is said that he was fond of Voltaire’s critical writings. Among all his other pursuits, sir John Pringle never forgot the study of the English language. This he regarded as a matter of so much consequence, that he took uncommon pains with respect to the style of his compositions and it cannot be denied that he excels in perspicuity, correctness, and propriety of expression. Though he slighted poetry, he was very fond of music. He was even a performer on the violoncello, at a weekly concert given by a society of gentlemen at Edinburgh. Besides a close application to medical and philosophical science, sir John Pringle, during the latter part of his life, devoted much time to the study of divinity this was, with him, a very favourite and interesting object. He corresponded frequently with Mishaelis on theological subjects and that celebrated professor addressed to him some letters on “Daniel’s Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks,” which sir John thought worthy of being published in this country. He was accordingly at considerable pains, and some expence, in the publication, which appeared in 1773,under the following title “Joannis Davidis Michaelis, Prof. Ordin. Philos. et oc. Reg. Scient. Goettingensis Collegae, Epistolae, de LXX flebdomadibus Danielis, ad D. Joannem Pringle, baronetturn: primo privatim miss, nunc vero utriusque consensus publice editae,” 8vo. Sir John Pringle was likewise a diligent and frequent reader of sermons, which form so valuable a part of English literature. If, from the intellectual, we pass on to the moral character of sir John Pringle, we shall find that the ruling feature of it was integrity. 3y this principle he was uniformly actuated in the whole of his behaviour. All his acquaintance with one voice agreed that there never was a man of greater integrity. He was equally distinguished for his sobriety. He told Mr. Boswell, that he had never in his life been intoxicated with liquor. In his friendships, sir John Pringle was ardent and steady. The intimacies which were formed by him, in the early part of his life, at Edinburgh, continued unbroken to the decease of the gentlemen with whom they were made; and were sustained by a regular correspondence, and by all the good offices that lay in his power. With relation to sir John Pringle' s external manner of deportment, he paid a very respectful attention to those whom he esteemed; but he had a kind of reserve in his behaviour, when he was not perfectly pleased with the persons who were introduced to him, or who happened to be in his company. His sense of integrity and dignity would not permit him to adopt that false and superficial politeness, which treats all men alike, however different in point of real estimation and merit. He was above assuming the professions, without the reality of respect. On the religious character of sir John Pringle it is more particularly important to enlarge. The principles of piety ajid virtue, which were early instilled into him by a strict education, do not appear ever to have lost their influence uppn the general conduct, of his life. Nevertheless, when he travelled abroad in the world, his belief of the Christian revelation was so far unsettled, that he became at least a sceptic on that subject. But it was not the disposition of sir John Priugle to rest satisfied in his doubts and difficulties, with respect to a matter of such high importance. He was too great, a lover of truth, not to make religion the object of his serious inquiry. As he scorned to be an implicit believer, he was equally averse to the being an implicit unbeliever; which is the case of large numbers who reject Christianity with as little knowledge, and as little examination, as the most determined bigots embrace their systems. The result of this investigation was, a full conviction of the divine original and authority of the Gospel. The evidence of revelation appeared to him to be solid and invincible, and the nature of it to be siich as must demand the most grateful acceptance. Such having been the character and eminence of sirJohn Pringle, it was highly proper that a tribute to his merit should be placed in Westminster abbey. Accordingly, under the direction and at the expence of his nephew and heir, a monument with an English inscription was erected, of which Mr. Nollekens was the sculptor.

study. It was at this time, and to divert his melancholy, that he wrote, without the least flattery or partiality, his “History of France,” in Latin. It has gone through

, in Latin Priolus, author of an History of France from the death of Louis XIII. in 1643 to 1664, was born in 1602. He was descended from the Prioli, an illustrious family, some of whom had been doges of Venice. He underwent some difficulties from losing his father and mother, when young; but these did not abate his passion for learning, which he indulged day and night. He studied first at Orthez, next at Montauban, and afterwards at Leyden in which last city he profited by the lectures of Heinsius and Vossius. He went to Paris, for the sake of seeing and consulting Grotius and afterwards to Padua, where he learned the opinions of Aristotle and other ancient philosophers, under Cremoninus and Licetus. After returning to France, he went again into Italy, in order to be recognized by the house of Prioli, as one of their relations. He devoted himself to the duke of Rohan, then in the Venetian service, and became one of his most intimate confidents; but, uncertain what his fate would be after this duke’s death, he retired to Geneva, having married, three months before, a lady of a very noble family. The duke de Longueville drew him from this retirement, upon his being appointed plenipotentiary from the court of France for the treaty of Munster, as a person whose talents might be of service to him and Priolo resided with him a year at Munster, where he contracted a very intimate friendship with Chigi the nuncio, % who was afterwards pope Alexander VII. From Munster he returned to Geneva; whence he went to France, in order to settle at Paris. He stayed six months in Lyons, and there had frequent conferences with cardinal Francis Barberini the effect of which was, that himself and his whole family abjured the Protestant religion, and immediately received the communion from the hands of the cardinal. He was not, however, long easy at Paris for, the civil war breaking out soon after, he joined with the malecontents, which proved the ruin of his fortune. He was obliged to retire to Flanders, his estate was confiscated, and his family banished. Being afterwards restored to the favour of his sovereign, he resolved to lead a private life, and to devote himself to study. It was at this time, and to divert his melancholy, that he wrote, without the least flattery or partiality, his “History of France,” in Latin. It has gone through several impressions but the best edition is that of Leipsic, 1686, 8vo. He was again employed in negociations; and set out, in 1667, upon a secret affair to Venice; but did not arrive at the end of his journey, being seized with an apoplectic fit, of which he died in the archbishop’s palace at Lyons. He left seven children; who, by virtue of his name, and their own accomplishments and merit, rose to very flourishing circumstances.

sex; by himself, next day, Matthew Prior of Dorsetshire; in which county, not in Middlesex, Winborn, or Winborne as it stands in the Villare, is found. When he stood

, an English poet of considerable eminence, was born July 21, 1664, but there is some difficulty in settling his birth-place. In the register of his college he is called, at his admission by the president, Matthew Prior, of Winburn in Middlesex; by himself, next day, Matthew Prior of Dorsetshire; in which county, not in Middlesex, Winborn, or Winborne as it stands in the Villare, is found. When he stood candidate for his fellowship, five years afterwards, he was registered again by himself as of Middlesex. The last record (says Dr. Johnson) ought to be preferred, because it was made upon oath yet there is much reason for thinking that he was actually of Wimborn in Dorsetshire, and that his county was concealed, in order to entitle him to a fellowship. (See Gent. Mag. LXII. p. 02.)

ss’s music, and his lines on the famous picture of Seneca, afford reason to suppose that he was more or less conversant in that family.

Lord Dorset, exceedingly struck with his ingenuity and learning, from that moment determined to remove him“from the station he was in, to one more suitable to his talents and genius and accordingly procured him to be sent, in 1682, to St. John’s coiiege in Cambridge, where he proceeded B. A. in 1686, and was shortly after chosen fellow. In 1688, he wrote a poem called” The Deity." It is the established practice of that college, to send every year to the earl of Exeter some poems upon sacred subjects, in acknowledgment of a benefaction enjoyed by them from the bounty of his ancestor: on this occasion were those verses written; which, though nothing is said of their success, seem to have recommended him to some notice; for his praise of the countess’s music, and his lines on the famous picture of Seneca, afford reason to suppose that he was more or less conversant in that family.

however, never published any satire but this, and one on “The modern Poets,” which he wrote in 1687 or 1688. From his “Heads of a Treatise upon Learning,” a manuscript

Prior had been the enemy of Dryden some years before the revolution, and had the hardihood to represent that great writer as a miserable poetaster, in an anonymous satire on which, probably, says Malone, he did not reflect with much satisfaction, when he became a tory. Prior, however, never published any satire but this, and one on “The modern Poets,” which he wrote in 1687 or 1688. From his “Heads of a Treatise upon Learning,” a manuscript formerly in the possession of the duchess dowager of Portland, it appears, that he abstained from this dangerous exercise of his talents, on prudential considerations. In this same ms. he thus speaks of himself: “As to my own part, I felt this (poetical) impulse very soon, and shall continue to feel it as long as I can think. I remember nothing farther in life, than that I made verses. I chose Guy of Warwick for my first hero and killed Colborn, the giant, before I was big enough for Westminster. But I had two accidents in youth which hindered me from being quite possessed with the muse. I was bred in a college where prose was more in fashion than verse and as soon as I had taken my first degree, was sent the king’s secretary to the Hague. There I had enough to do in studying my French and Dutch, and altering my Terentian and original style into that of articles and conventions. So that poetry, which by the bent of my mind might have become the business of my life, was, by the happiness of my education, only the amusement of it; and in this, too, from the prospect of some little fortune to be made, and friendship to be cultivated with the great men, I did not launch much into satire; which, however agreeable at present to the writers or encouragers of it, does in time do neither of them good: considering the uncertainty of fortune, and the various changes of ministry, and that every man, as he resents, may punish in his turn of greatness; and that in England a man is less safe as to politics, than he is in a bark upon the coast, in regard to the change of the wind, and the danger of shipwreck.” By these prudential maxims, Prior appears to have been guided through the greater part of his life.

written by Prior, and answered by Addison, who appears to have known the author either by conjecture or intelligence.

Upon the success of the war with France, after the accession of queen Anne, Prior exerted his poetical talent in honour of his country first, in his “Letter to Boileau, on the victory at Blenheim, in 1704;” and again, in his Ode on the glorious success of her majesty’s arms in 1706, at the battle of Ramilies and Dr. Johnson thinrks this is the only composition produced by that event which is now remembered. About this time Prior published a volume of his poems, with the encomiastic character of his deceased patron, the earl of Dorset. It began with the “College Exercise,” and ended with the “Nut-brown Maid.” Prior now, whatever were his reasons, began to join the party who were for bringing the war to a conclusion, who were to expatiate on past abuses, the waste of, public money, the unreasonable “Conduct of the Allies,” the avarice of generals, and other topics, which might render the war and the conductors of it unpopular. Among other writings, the “Examiner” was published by the wits of this party, particularly Swift. One paper, in ridicule of* Garth’s verses to Godolphin upon the loss of his place, was written by Prior, and answered by Addison, who appears to have known the author either by conjecture or intelligence.

Walpole moved an impeachment against him, which, however, ended in his being released without trial or punishment. During his confinement he wrote his “Alma.”

On the first of August, 1714, ensued the downfall of the tories, and the degradation of Prior. He was recalled but was not able 'to return, being detained by the debts which he had found it necessary to contract, and which were not discharged before March, though his old friend Montague was now at the head of the treasury. On his return he was welcomed, March 25, 1715, by a warrant, and examined, before a committee of the privy council, of which Mr. (afterwards sir Robert) Walpole was chairman, with great strictness and severity. He was then confined for some time, and on June 10, 1715, Mr. Walpole moved an impeachment against him, which, however, ended in his being released without trial or punishment. During his confinement he wrote his “Alma.

Previous Page

Next Page