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

, a learned Italian mathe. matician, was born at Milan, Nov. 17, 1702. He was educated among the Jesuits, and entered into their order in 1718. He afterwards taught the belles-lettres at Vercelli and Pavia, and was appointed rhetoric- professor in the university of Brera, in Milan. In 1733 the senate of Milan appointed him professor of mathematics at Pavia, and afterwards removed him to the same office at Milan, the duties of which he executed with reputation for twenty years. In F75J) his fame procured him an invitation to Vienna from the empress Maria Teresa, who honoured him with her esteem, and appointed him mathematician to the court, with a pension of 500 florins. What rendered him most celebrated, was the skill he displayed as superintendant and chief director of the processes for measuring the bed of the Reno and other less considerable rivers belonging to Bologna, Ferrara, and Ravenna. On this he was employed for six years, under Clement XIII.; and Clement XIV. ordered that these experiments should be continued upon Leccln’s plans. He died August 24, 1776, aged seventy-three years. Fabroni, who has given an excellent personal character of Lecchi, and celebrates his skill in hydraulics, has, contrary to his usual practice, mentioned his works only in a general way; and for the following list we have therefore been obliged to have recourse to a less accurate authority: 1. “Theoria lucis,” Milan, 1739. 2. “Arithmetica universalis Jsaaci Newton, sive de compositione, et resolutione arithmetica perpetuis commentariis illustrata et aucta,” Milan, 1752, 3 vols. 8vo. 3. “Elementa geometrise theoricx et practices,” ibid. 1753, 2 vols. 8vo. 4. “Elementa Trigonometric,” &c. ibid. 1756. 5. “De sectionibus conicis,” ibid. 1758. 6. “Idrostatica csaaiinata,” &c. ibid. 1765, 4 to. 7. “Relazione della visita alle terre dannegiate dalle acque di Bologna, Ferrara, e Ravenna,” &c. Rome, 17G7, 4to. 8. “Memorie idrostatico-storiche delle operazioni esequite nella inalveazione del Reno di Bologna, e degli altri minori torrenti per la linea di primaro al mare dalP anno 1765 al 1772,” Modena, 1775, 2 vols. 4to. 9. “Trattato de' canali navigabili,” Milan, 1776, 4to.

, an eminent Hebrew and Greek scholar and critic, was the son of a poor mechanic at Strasburgh, where he was born July 18, 1672. His parents were so unable to give him education, that he must have been obliged to work at his father’s trade, had he not found an early patron in Froereisen, a learned townsman, who placed him at ten years old in the public school, at his own expence. Lederlin’s extraordinary proficiency rewarded this generous friend, whom, however, he had the misfortune to lose by death in 1690. This would have been irreparable, if his talents had not already recommended him to other patrons, and his school education being finished, he was enabled to pursue his studies at the university with great reputation. He received his master’s degree in 1692, and at the persuasion of Boeder the medical professor, Obrecht, and others, he opened a school for the Hebrew and Greek, of which languages, he was in 1703, constituted professor, and was for many years one of the greatest ornaments of the university of Strasburgh. He died Sept. 3, 1737, leaving various monuments of learning and critical skill. Among those, we may enumerate, i. his edition of Julius Pollux’s “Onomasticon,” 1706, 2 vols. fol. 2. His “Homer’s Iliad,” Amst. 1707, 8 vols. 12mo, Gr. & Lat. Lederlin edited only a part of this edition, which on his death, Mr. Dibdin says, was completed by Bergler. But in this case there must have been an edition posterior to 1737, when Lederlin died. 3. “Vigerus de praecipuis Grsecae dictionis idiotismis,” Strasburgb, 1709, 8vo. 4. “Brissonii de regio Persarum principatu,” ibid. 1710. 5. “Æliani varise historiae,” ibid. 1713, 8vo, which Harles says is superior to Scheffer*s edition, but must yield to that of Perizonius. He published also some critical dissertations on parts of the Greek Testament, on which he was accustomed to lecture.

, an eminent French surgeon, was born at Paris in 1685, and received his education under his father, Henry Le Dran, who had acquired considerable reputation as an operator, particularly in cancers of the breast. Under his auspices our young surgeon turned his thoughts principally to the operation of lithotomy, which he performed in the lateral method, as practised by Cheselden, and was enabled to make some valuable improvements in the art. These he communicated to the public in his “Paralele des differentes manieres de tirer la Pierre hors de la Vessie,” printed in 1730, 8vo, to which he added a supplement in 1756, containing the result of his later practice. The work was well received, has been frequently reprinted, and translated into most of the modern languages. He published also, 2. “Observations de Chirurgie, auxquelles on a joint plusieurs reflections en faveur des Etudiens,” Paris, 1731, 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “Traite” ou reflections tiroes de la pratique sur les playes d'Armes a feu,“Paris, 1737, 12mo. 4.” Traite“des Operations de Chirurgie,” Paris, 1743, 12mo. To the translation of this work into English, by Gataker, Cheselden made some valuable additions. 5. “Consultations sur la plupart des Maladies qui sont du report de la Chirurgie,” 1765, 8vo a work well calculated for the instruction of students in surgery. The author also sent several observations of considerable merit to the academy of surgeons, which are published in their memoirs. He died, at a very advanced age, in 1770.

, a native of America, of a very enterprising turn, was born at Groton in Connecticut. Having lost his father in his infancy, he was taken undef the care of a relation, who sent him to a grammar-school, and he studied for some time at Dartmouth college, in New Hampshire. Here it appears to have been his intention to apply to theological studies, l>ut the friend who sent him to college being dead, he was obliged to quit it, and by means of a canoe of Ins own const ruction, he found his way to Hartford, and thence to New York, where he went on board ship as a common sailor, and in this capacity arrived at London in 1771. When at college, there were several young Indians there for their education, with whom he used to associate, and learned their manners and hearing of capt. Cook’s intentions to sail on his third voyage, Ledyard engaged himself with him in the situation of a corporal of marines and on his return from that memorable voyage, during which his curiosity was rather excited than gratified, feeling an anxious desire of penetrating from the north-western coast of America, which Cook had partly explored, to the eastern coast, with which he himself was perfectly familiar, he determined to traverse the vast continent from the Pacific to the Atlantic ocean. His first plan for the purpose was that of embarking in a vessel, which was then preparing to sail, on a voyage of commercial adventure, to Nootka sound, on the western coast of America; and with this view he expended in sea-stores the greatest part of the money with which he had been supplied by the liberality of sirJoseph Banks, who has eminently distinguished himself in this way on other occasions for the promotion of every kind of useful science. But this scheme was frustrated by the rapacity of a customhouse officer; and therefore Mr. Ledyard determined to travel over land to Kamtschatka, from whence the passage is extremely short to the opposite coast of America. Accordingly, with no more than ten guineas in his purse, which was all that he had left, he crossed the British channel to Ostend, towards the close of 1786, and by the way of Denmark and the Sound, proceeded to the capital of Sweden. As it was winter, he attempted to traverse the gulf of Bothnia on the ice, in order to reach Kamtschatka by the shortest course; but finding, when he came to the middle of the sea, that the water was not frozen, he returned to Stockholm, and taking his course northward, walked to the Arctic circle, and passing round the head of the gulf, descended on its eastern side to Petersburg, where he arrived in the beginning of March 1787. Here fae was noticed as a person of an extraordinary character; and though he had neither stockings nor shoes, nor means to provide himself with any, he received and accepted an, invitation to dine with the Portuguese ambassador. From him he obtained twenty guineas for a bill, which he took the liberty, without being previously authorized, to draw on sir Joseph Banks, concluding, from his well-known disposition, that he would not be unwilling to pay it. By the interest of the ambassador, as we may conceive to have been probably the case, he obtained permission to accompany a detachment of stores, winch the empress had ordered to be sent to Yakutz, for the use of Mr. Billings, an Englishman, at that time in her service. Thus accommodated, he left Petersburg on the 2 1st of May, and travelling eastward through Siberia, reached Irkutsk in August; and from thence he proceeded to Yakutz, where he was kindly received by Mr. Billings, whom he recollected on board captain Cook’s ship, in the situation of the astronomer’s servant, but who was now entrusted by the empress in accomplishing her schemes of discovery. He returned to Irkutsk, where he spent part of the winter; and in the spring proceeded to Oczakow, on the coast of the Kamtschatkan sea, intending, in the spring, to have passed over to that peninsula, and to have embarked on the eastern side in one of the Russian vessels that trade to the western shores of America; but, finding that the navigation was completely obstructed, he returned to Yakutz, in order to wait for the termination of the winter. But whilst he was amusing himself with these prospects, an express arrived, in January 1788, from the empress, and he was seized, for reasons that have not been explained, by two Russian soldiers, who conveyed him in a sledge through the deserts of Northern Tartary to Moscow, without his clothes, money, and papers. From Moscow he was removed to the city of Moialoff, in White Russia, and from thence to the town of Tolochin, on the frontiers of the Polish dominions. As his conductors parted with him, they informed him, that if he returned to Russia he would be hanged, but that if he chose to go back to England, they wished him a pleasant journey. Distressed by poverty, covered with rags, infested with the usual accompaniments of such clothing, harassed with continual hardships, exhausted by disease, without friends, without credit, unknown, and reduced to the most wretched state, he found his way to Konigsberg. In this hour of deep distress, he resolved once more to have recourse to his former benefactor, and fortunately found a person who was willing to take his draft for five guineas on the president of the royal society. With this assistance he arrived in England, and immediately waited on sir Joseph Banks. Sir Joseph, knowing his disposition, and conceiving, as we may well imagine, that he would be gratified by the information, told him, that he could recommend him, as he believed, to an adventure almost as perilous as that from which he had just returned; and then communicated to him the wishes of the Association for discovering the Inland Countries of Africa. Mr. Ledyard replied, that he had always determined to traverse the continent of Africa, as soon as he had explored the interior of North America, and with a letter of introduction by sir Joseph Banks, he waited on Henry Beaufoy, esq. an active member of the fore-mentioned association. Mr. Beaufoy spread before him a map of Africa, and tracing a line from Cairo to Sennar, and from thence westward in the latitude and supposed direction of the Niger, informed him that this was the route by which he was anxious that Africa might, if possible, be explored. Mr. Ledyard expressed great pleasure in the hope of being employed in this adventure. Being asked when he would set out? “To-morrow morning” was his answer. The committee of the society assigned to him, at his own desire, as an enterprise of obvious peril and of difficult success, the task of traversing from east to west, in the latitude attributed to the Niger, the widest part of the continent of Africa. On the 30th of June 1788, Mr. Ledyard left London; and after a journey of thirty-six days, seven of which were consumed at Paris, and two at Marseilles, he arrived in the city of Alexandria. On die 14th of August, at midnight, he left Alexandria, and sailing up the Nile, arrived at Cairo on the 19th. From Cairo he communicated to the committee of the society all the information which he was able to collect during his stay there: and they were thus sufficiently apprized of the ardent spirit of inquiry, the unwearied attention, the persevering research, and the laborious, indefatigable, anxious zeal, with which he pursued the object of his mission. The next dispatch which they were led to expect, was to be dated at Sennar; the terms of his passage had been settied, and the day of his departure was appointed. The committee, however, after having expected with impatience the description of his journey, received with great concern and grievous disappointment, by letters from Egypt, the melancholy tidings of his death. By a bilious complaint, occasioned probably by vexatious delay at Cairo, and by too free an use of the acid of vitriol and tartar emetic, the termination of his life was hastened. He was decently interred in the neighbourhood of such of the English as had ended their days in the capital of Egypt,

, archbishop of York, was born in 1482, and was the son of Richard Lee, of Lee Magna in Kent, esq. and grandson of sir Richard Lee, km. twice lordmayor of London. He was partly educated in both universities, being admitted of Magdalen college, Oxford, about 1499, where he took his degrees in arts, and then removed to Cambridge, and completed his studies. He was accounted a man of great learning and talents, which recommended him to the court of Henry VIII. in which, among others, he acquired the esteem of sir Thomas More. The king likewise conceived so high an opinion of his political abilities, that he sent him on several embassies to the continent. In 1529 he was made chancellor of Sarum, and in 1531 was incorporated in the degree of D. D. at Oxford, which he had previously taken at some foreign university. The same year he was consecrated archbishop of York, but enjoyed this high station a very short time, dying at York, Sept. 13, 1544. He was buried in the cathedral. He lived to witness the dawn of the reformation, but adhered to the popish system in all its plenitude, except, says his popish biographer, that he “was carried away with the stream as to the article of the king’s supremacy.” He was a zealous opponent of Luther, and had a controversy with Erasmus, respecting his annotations on the New Testament. This somewhat displeased sir Thomas More, who was greatly attached to Erasmus, but it did not lessen his friendship for Lee Wood says, “he was a very great divine, and very well seen in all kinds of learning, famous as well for his wisdom as virtue, and holiness of life; a continual preacher of the gospel, a man very liberal to the poor, and exceedingly beloved by all sorts of men.” His works were, 1. “Comment, in universum Pentateuchum,” ms. 2. “Apologia contra quorundam calumnias, 11 Lovan, 1520, 4to. 3.” Index annotationum prioris libri,“ibid. 1520. 4.” Epistola nuncupatoriaad Desid. Erasmum,“ibid. 1520. 3.” Annot. lib. duo in annotationes Novi Test. Erasmi.“6.” Epistola apologetica, qua respondet D. Erasmi epistolis.“7.” Epistolae sexcenta;.' 8. “Epiceuia clarorum virorum.” The two last articles are in ms. or partially printed. Some of his Mss. are in the Harleian, and some in the Cotton library."

, an English dramatic poet, was the son of Dr. Richard Lee, who had the living of Hatfield, in Hertfordshire, where he died in 1684. He was bred at Westminster-school under Dr. Busby, whence he removed to Trinity-college, in Cambridge, and became scholar upon that foundation in 1668. He proceeded B. A. the same year; but, not succeeding to a fellowship, quitted the university, and came to London, where be made an unsuccessful attempt to become an actor in 1672. The part he performed was Duncan in sir William Davenant’s alteration of Macbeth. Cibber says that Lee “was so pathetic a reader of his own scenes, that I have been informed by an actor who was present, that while Lee was reading to major Mohun at a rehearsal, Mohun, in the warmth of his admiration, threw down his part, and said, Unless I were able to play it as well as you read it, to what purpose, should I undertake it! And yet (continues the laureat) this very author, whose elocution raised such admiration in so capital an actor, when he attempted to he an actor himself, soon quitted the stage in an honest despair of ever making any profitable figure there.” Failing, therefore, in this design, he had recourse to his pen for support; and composed a tragedy, called “Nero Emperor of Rome,” in 1675; which being well received, he produced nine plays, besides two in conjunction with Dryden, between, that period and 1684, when his habits of dissipation, aided probably by a hereditary taint, brought on insanity, and in November he was taken into Bedlam, where he continued four years under care of the physicians. In April 1688, he was discharged, being so much recovered as to be able to return to his occupation of writing for the stage; and he produced two plays afterwards, “The Princess of Cleve,” in 1689, and The Massacre of Paris,“in 1690, but, notwithstanding the profits arising from these performances, he was this year reduced to so low an ebb, that a weekly stipend of ten shillings from the theatre royal was his chief dependence. Nor was he so free from his phrenzy as not to suffer some temporary relapses; and perhaps his untimely end might be occasioned by one. He died in 1691 or 1692, in consequence of a drunken frolic, by night, in the street; and was interred in the parish of Clement Danes, near Temple-Bar. He is the author of eleven plays, all acted with applause, and printed as soon as finished, with dedications of most of them to the earls of Dorset, Mulgrave, Pembroke, the duchesses of Portsmouth and Richmond, as his patrons. Addison declares, that among our modern English poets there was none better turned for tragedy than Lee, if, instead of favouring his impetuosity of genius, he had restrained and kept it within proper bounds. His thoughts are wonderfully suited to tragedy, but frequently lost in such a cloud of words, that it is hard to see the beauty of them. There is infinite fire in his works, but so involved in smoke, that it does not appear in half its lustre. He frequently succeeds in the passionate parts of the tragedy, but more particularly where he slackens his efforts, and eases the style of those epithets and metaphors with which he so much abounds. His” Rival Queens“and” Theodosius“still keep possession of the stage. None ever felt the passion of love pore truly; nor could any one describe it with more tenderness; and for this reason he has been compared to Ovid among the ancients, and to Otway among the moderns. Dryden prefixed a copy of commendatory verses to the” Rival Queens“and Lee joined with that laureat in writing the tragedies of” The duke of Guise“and” CEdipus.“Notwithstanding Lee’s imprudence and eccentricities, no man could be more respected by his contemporaries. In Spence’s” Anecdotes" we are told that ViU liers, duke of Buckingham, brought him up to town, where he never did any thing for him; and this is said to have contributed to bring on insanity.

, a learned Scotch divine, was born at Dolphinston, in Lanerkshire, in 1706. He received his academical education at the university of Edinburgh, where he distinguished himself by his great proficiency in different branches of learning. He began his theological studies in 1724, and in 1727 he undertook the education of a young gentleman at Caldwell, in Renfrewshire, where he resided in the summer months, but during the remainder of the year he lived at Glasgow, and was honoured with the friendship of professors Hutcheson and Dunlop. About the beginning of 1731 he was licensed as a preacher, but it was not till 1736 that he was ordained minister of Beith, on which charge he continued seven years. In 1740 he was elected moderator of a meeting of the synod at Irvine, and opened the assembly at Glasgow on the 7th of April 1741, with a sermon to the clergy “On the temper, character, and duty, of a minister of the gospel,” which has passed through many editions, and is still in high reputation. In 1743 he published a much longer discourse on “The nature, reasonableness, and advantages of Prayer; with an attempt to answer the objections against it.” This, likewise, added much to his reputation, and has been frequently reprinted. He was shortly after elected to the professorship of theology at the university of Glasgow; an honour which he obtained only by the casting vote of the president, owing to some suspicions entertained of the orthodoxy of his sentiments, founded on his sermon on prayer, in which he v.a thought to have laid too little stress on the atonement and intercession of Christ. A prosecution for heresy was the consequence, which was ultimately decided in his favour by the synod, the members of which almost unanimously determined, that there was no reason to charge him with any unsoundness in the passages of the sermon complained against. After this the prejudices against him appear to have subsided, and his character became very generally and highly respected, even by some who had thought it their duty to promote the prosecution. Soon after he had been established in the professorship, he took the degree of doctor in divinity; and continued in the theological chair seventeen years, vindicating and establishing the grand truths of natural and revealed religion, in answer to the principal objections made to them by Mr. Hume, lord Bolingbroke, and other sceptical writers. He had, in his lectures, a remarkable talent of selecting what was most important and striking on every subject that he handled: his arguments were solid, founded on indisputable facts; and they were urged with a degree of warmth which carried his auditors along with him; for they were addressed equally to the judgment and the heart. Dr. Leechman’s fame extended far and wide, the divinity-hall at Glasgow was crowded, in his time, with a greater number of scholars than any other in Scotland: and his numerous scholars, however they might differ in their sentiments on speculative theology and church government, were all cordially united in their affection and veneration for their master. In 1761, Dr. Leechman was raised to the office of principal of the university of Glasgow by a presentation from the king. He had previously to this been in a very bad state of health, and this change in his avocations was probably the means of prolonging his life; yet, though released from the more fatiguing part of his duties, he gave a lecture, for some time, once a week, to the students in divinity, and weekly lectures to the whole university. Dr. Leechman’s faculties remained in full vigour amidst the increasing infirmities of old age, and his taste for knowledge continued as acute as ever. In September and October 1785, he experienced two violent paralytic strokes, from which he partially recovered; but a third attack carried him off on the 3d of December, 1785, when he was almost eighty years of age. Dr. Leechman committed nothing to the press, except nine sermons, which went through several editions during his life-time. These were republished, with others, forming together two volumes, in 1789. To the first of these volumes is prefixed an account of the author, by Dr. Wodrow, from which the preceding particulars are taken.

, baron of Dartmouth, an eminent naval commander, was the eldest son of colonel William Legge, groom of the bed-chamber to king Charles I. and brought up under the brave admiral sir Edward Spragge. He entered the navy at seventeen years of age, and, before he was twenty, his gallant behaviour recommended him so effectually to king Charles II. that in 1667, he promoted him to the command of the Pembroke. In 1671, he was appointed captain of the Fairfax, and the next year removed to the Royal Catharine, in which ship he obtained high reputation, by beating off the Dutch after they had boarded her, though the ship seemed on the point of sinking; and then finding the means of stopping her leaks, he carried her safe into port. In 1673, he was made governor of Portsmouth, master of the horse, and gentleman to the duke of York. Several other posts were successively conferred upon him, and in December 1682, he was created baron of Dartmouth. The port of Tangier having been attended with great expence to keep the fortifications in repair, and to maintain in it a numerous garrison to protect it from the Moors, who watched every opportunity of seizing it, the king determined to demolish the fortifications, and bring the garrison to England; but the difficulty was to perform it without the Moors having any suspicion of the design. Lord Dartmouth was appointed to manage this difficult affair, and, for that purpose, was, in 1683, made governor of Tangier, general of his majesty’s forces in Africa, and admiral of the fleet. At his arrival he prepared every thing necessary for putting his design in execution, blew up all the fortifications, and returned to England with the garrison; soon after which, the king made him a present of ten thousand pounds. When James II. ascended the throne, his lordship was created master of the horse, general of the ordnance, constable of the tower of London, captain of an independent company of foot, and one of the privy-council. That monarch placed the highest confidence in his friendship; and, on his being thoroughly convinced that the prince of Orange intended to land in England, he appointed him commander of the fleet; and, had he not been prevented by the wind and other accidents from coming up with the prince of Orange, a bloody engagement would doubtless have ensued.

After the prince landed, lord Dartmouth returned to Spithead, in November, with forty-three ships of war, the rest of the fleet being put into other ports. Yet, notwithstanding he brought the fleet safe home, and had acted by order of king James when in power, he was deprived of all his employments at the revolution; and in 1691 committed prisoner to the Tower of London, where, after three months imprisonment, he died suddenly of an apoplexy, Oct. 25 of that year, in the forty-fourth year of his age. When he was dead, lord Lucas, who was constable of the Tower, made some difficulty of permitting his body to be removed without order; on which, application being made to king William, he was pleased to direct that the same respect should be paid at his funeral, that would have been due to him if he had died possessed of all his employments in that place; and accordingly, the Towerguns were fired when he was carried out to be interred near his father, in the vault of the church in the Minories, where a monument of white marble is erected to his memory.

His views being at this time chiefly fixed upon the law, he commenced bachelor in that faculty in 1665, and the year after supplicated for his doctor’s degree; but was denied, as not being of sufficient standing, that is, not quite twenty; but the real cause of the demur was his rejecting the principles of Aristotle and the schoolmen, against the received doctrine of that time. Resenting the affront, he went to Altorf, where he maintained a thesis, “De Casibus perplexis,” with so much reputation, that he not only obtained his doctor’s degree, but had an offer of being made professor of law extraordinary. This, however, was declined; and he went from Altorf to Nuremberg, to visit the learned in that university. He had heard of some literati there who were engaged in the pursuit of the philosopher’s stone; and his curiosity was raised to be initiated into their mysteries. For this purpose he drew up a letter full of abstruse terms, extracted out of books of chemistry; and, unintelligible as it was to himself, addressed it to the director of that society, desiring to be admitted a member. They were satisfied of his merit, from the proofs given in his letter; and not only admitted him into their laboratory, but even requested him to accept the secretaryship, with a stipend. His office was, to register their processes and experiments, and to extract from the books of the best chemists such things as might be of use to them in their pursuits. About this time, baron Boinebourg, first minister of the elector of Mentz, passing through Nuremberg, met Leibnitz at a common entertainment; and conceived so great an opinion of his parts and learning from his conversation, that he advised him to apply himself wholly to law and history; giving him at the same time the strongest assurances, that he would engage the elector, John Philip of Schonborn, to send for him to his court. Leibnitz accepted the kindness, promising to do his utmost to render himself worthy of such a patronage; and, to be more within the reach of its happy effects, he repaired to Francfort upon the Maine, in the neighbourhood of Mentz. In 1668, John Casimir, king of Poland, resigning his crown, the elector palatine, among others, became a competitor for that dignity; and, while baron Boinebourg went into Poland to manage the elector’s interests, Leibnitz wrote a treatise to shew that the Polonnois could not make choice of a better person for their king. With this piece the elector palatine was extremely pleased, and invited our author to his court. But baron Boinebourg, resolving to provide for him at the court of Mentz, would not suffer him to accept this last offer from the palatine; and immediately obtained for him the post of counsellor of the chamber of review to the elector of Mentz. Baron Boinebourg had some connexions at the French court; and as his son, who was at Paris, was not of years to be trusted with the management of his affairs, he begged Mr. Leibnitz to undertake that charge.

Leibnitz, charmed with this opportunity of shewing bit gratitude to so zealous a patron, set out for Paris in 1672. He also proposed several other advantages to himself in this tour, and his views were not disappointed. He saw all the literati in that metropolis, made an acquaintance with the greatest part of them, and, besides, applied himself with vigour to the mathematics, in which study he had not yet made any considerable progress. He tells us himself, that he owed his advancement in it principally to the works of Pascal, Gregory, St. Vincent, and above all, to the excellent treatise of Huygens “De Horologio oscillatorio.” In this course, having observed the imperfection of Pascal’s arithmetical machine, which, however, Pascal did not live to finish, he invented a new one, as he called it; the use of which he explained to Mr. Colbert, who was extremely pleased with it and, the invention being approved likewise by the Academy of sciences, he was offered a seat there as pensionary member. With sucli encouragement he might have settled very advantageously at Paris if he would have turned Roman catholic; but he chose to adhere to the Lutheran religion, in which he was born. In 1673, he lost his patron, M. de Boim-bourg; and, being at liberty by his death, took a tour to England, where he became acquainted with Oldenburg, the secretary, and John Collins, fellow of the royal society, from whom he received some hints of the invention of the method of fluxions, which had been discovered in 1664 or 1665, by Mr. (afterwards) sir Isaac Newton .

While he was in England he received an account of the death of the elector of Mentz, by which he lost his pension. He then returned to France, whence be wrote to the duke of Brunswick Lunenburg, to inform him of his circumstances. That prince sent him a very gracious answer, assuring him of his favour, and, for the present, appointed him counsellor of his court, with a salary; but gave him leave to stay at Paris, in order to complete his arithmetical machine, which, however, was not completed until after his death. In 1674 be went again to England, whence he passed, through Holland, to Hanover, and from his first arrival there made it his business to enrich the library of that prince with the best books of all kinds. That duke dying in 1679, his successor, Ernest Augustus, then bishop of Osnabrug, afterwards George I. extended the same patronage to Leibnitz, and directed him to write the history of the house of Brunswick. Leibnitz undertook the task; and, travelling through Germany and Italy to collect materials, returned to Hanover in 1690, with an ample store. While he was in Italy he met with a singular instance of bigotry, which, but for his happy presence of mind, might have proved fatal. Passing in a small bark from Venice to Mesola, a storm arose, during which the pilot, imagining he was not understood by a German, whom being a heretic he looked on as the cause of the tempest, proposed to strip him of his cloaths and money, and throw him overboard. Leibnitz hearing this, without discovering the least emotion, pulled out a set of beads, and turned them over with a seeming devotion. The artifice succeeded; one of the sailors observing to the pilot, that, since the man was no heretic, it would be of no use to drown him. In 1700 he was admitted a member of the royal academy of sciences at Paris. The same year the elector of Brandenburg, afterwards king of Prussia, founded an academy at Berlin, by the advice of Leibnitz, who was appointed perpetual president of it; and, though his other affairs did not permit him to reside constantly upon the spot, yet he made ample amends by the treasures with which he enriched their memoirs, in several dissertations upon geometry, polite learning, natural philosophy, and physic. He also projected to establish at Dresden another academy like that at Berlin. He communicated his design to the king of Poland in 1703, who was inclined to promote it; but the troubles which arose shortly after in that kingdom, hindered it from being carried into execution.

Besides these projects to promote learning, there is another still behind of a more extensive view, both in its nature and use; he set himself to invent a language so easy and so perspicuous, as to become the common language of all nations of the world. This is what is called “The Universal Language,” and the design occupied the thoughts of our philosopher a long time. The thing had been attempted before by d'Algarme, and Dr. Wilkins, bishop of Chester; but Leibnitz did not approve of their method, and therefore attempted a new one. His predecessors in his opinion had not reached the point; they might indeed enable nations who did not understand each othe,r, to correspond easily together; but they had not attained the true real characters, which would be the beat instruments of the human mind, and extremely assist both the reason and memory. These characters, he thought, ought to resemble as much as possible those of algebra, which are simple and expressive, and never superfluous and equivocal, but whose varieties are grounded on reason. In order to hasten the execution of this vast project, he employed a young person to put into a regular order the definitions of all things whatsoever; but, though he laboured in it from 1703, yet his life did not prove sufficient to complete it*. In the meantime, his name became famous over Europe; and his merit was rewarded by other princes, besides the elector of Hanover. In 1711, he was made aulic counsellor to the emperor; and the czar of Moscovy appointed him privy-counsellor of justice, with a pension of a thousand ducats f. Leibnitz undertook at the same time to establish an academy of sciences at Vienna; but that project miscarried a disappointment which some have ascribed to the plague. However that be, it is certain he only had the honour of attempting it, and the emperor rewarded him for it with a pension of 2000 florins, promising him to double the sum, if he would come and reside at Vienna, which his death prevented. In the mean time, the History of Brunswick being interrupted by other works which he wrote occasionally, he found at his return to Hanover, in 1714, that the elector had appointed Mr. Eckard for his colleague in that history. The elector was then raised to the throne of Great Britain; and soon after his arrival, the electoral princess, then princess of Wales, and afterwards queen Caroline, engaged Leibnitz in a dispute with Dr. Samuel Clarke upon the subject of free-will, the reality of space, and other philosophical subjects. This controversy was carried on by letters which passed through her royal' high ness’s bands, and ended only with the death of Leibnitz, Nov. 14, 1716, occasioned by the gout and stone, at the age of seventy.

universal language. him by cardinal Casanata, while hf Leibnitz was in person of a middle stature, and of a thin habit. He had a studious air, and a sweet aspect, though short-sighted. He was indefatigably industrious, and so continued to the end of his life. He ate and drank little. Hunger alone marked the time of his meals, and his diet was plain and strong. He loved travelling, and different climates never affected his health. In order to impress upon his memory what he had a mind to remember, he wrote it down, and never read it afterwards. His temper was naturally choleric, but on most occasions he had th art to restrain it. As he had the honour of passing for one of the greatest men in Europe, he was sufficiency sensible of it. He was solicitous in procuring the favour of princes, which he turned to his own advantage, as well as to the service of learning. He was affable and polite in conversation, and averse to disputes. He was thought to love money, and is said to have left sixty thousand crowns, yet no more than fifteen or twenty thousand out at interest; the rest being found in crown-pieces and other specie, hoarded in corn-sacks. He always professed himself a Lutheran, but never joined in public worship; and in his last sickness, being desired by his coachman, who was his favourite servant, to send for a minister, he would not hear of it, saying he had no occasion for one. He was never married, and never attempted it but once, when he was about fifty years old; and the lady desiring time to consider of it, gave him an opportunity of doing the same; which produced this conclusion, “that marriage was a good thing, but a wise man ought to consider of it all his life.” Mr. Lcefler, son of his sister, was his sole heir, whose wife died suddenly with joy at the sight of so much money left them by their uncle. It is said he had a natural son in his youth, who afterwards lived with him, was serviceable to him in many ways, and had a considerable share in his confidence. He went by the name of William Dinninger, and extremely resembledhis father.

"He read all books without exception the more odd and whimsical the title was, the more curious he was to examine the contents. He found a romance written in German by Mr. Eckard: this romance contained the history of a father, who having consulted an astrologer about the future destiny of his son, learnt that to preserve him from death, there was no other method than to make him pass for the son of a hangman. Leibnitz found this romance so excellent that he read it through at one sitting.

Gibbon has drawn the character of Leibnitz with great force and precision, as a man whose genius and studies have ranked his name with the first philosophic names of his age and country; but he thinks his reputation, perhaps, would have been more pure and permanent, if he had not ambitiously grasped the whole circle of human science. As a theologian, says Gibbon (who is not, perhaps, the most impartial judge of this subject), he successively contended with the sceptics, who believe too little, and with the papists who believe too much; and with the heretics, who believe otherwise than is inculcated by the Lutheran confession of Augsburgh. Yet the philosopher betrayed his love of union and toleration* his faith in revelation was accused, while he proved the Trinity by the principles of logic; and in the defence of the attributes and providence of the Deity, he was suspected of a secret correspondence with his adversary Bayle. The metaphysician expatiated in the fields of air; his pre-established harmony of the soul and body might have provoked the jealousy of Plato; and his optimism, the best of all possible worlds, seems an idea too vast for a mortal mind. He was a physician, in the large and genuine sense of the word like his brethren, he amused him with creating a globe and his Protogæa, or primitive earth, has not been useless to the last hypothesis of Buffon, which prefers the agency of fire to that of water. “I am not worthy,” adds Gibbon, “to praise the mathematician; but his name is mingled in all the problems and discoveries of the times; the masters of the art were his rivals or disciples; and if he borrowed from sir Isaac Newton, the sublime method of fluxions, Leibnitz was at least the Prometheus who imparted to mankind the sacred fire which he had stolen from the gods. His curiosity extended to every branch of chemistry, mechanics, and the arts; and the thirst of knowledge was always accompanied with the spirit of improvement. The vigour of his youth had been exercised in the schools of jurisprudence; and while he taught, he aspired to reform the laws of nature and nations, of Rome and Germany. The annals of Brunswick, and of the empire, of the ancient and modern world, were presented to the mind of the historian; and he could turn from the solution of a problem, to the dusty parchments and barbarous style of the records of the middle age. His genius was more nobly directed to investigate the origin of languages and nations; nor could he assume the character of a grammarian, without forming the project of an universal idiom and alphabet. These various studies were often interrupted by the occasional politics of the times; and his pen was always ready in the cause of the princes and patrons to whose service he was attached; many hours were consumed in a learned correspondence with all Europe; and the philosopher amused his leisure in the composition of French and Latin poetry. Such an example may display the exte^nt and powers of the human understanding, but even his powers were dissipated by the multiplicity of his pursuits. He attempted more than he could finish; he designed more than he could execute: his imagination was too easily satisfied with a bold and rapid glance on the subject, which he was impatient to leave; and Leibnitz may be compared to those heroes, whose empire has been lost in the ambition of universal conquest.”

, a learned theological writer of the seventeenth century, the son of Henry Leigh, esq. was born at Shawell in Leicestershire, March 24, 1602-3. He had his grammatical learning under a Mr. Lee of Waishall in Staffordshire; and when removed td Oxford, became a commoner of Magdalen-hall, in 1616, under Mr. William Pemble, a very celebrated tutor of that society. After completing his degrees in arts in 1623, he removed to the Middle Temple for the study of the law. During the violence of the plague in 1625, he took that opportunity to visit France; and on his return to the Temple, added to his law studies those of divinity and history, in both which he attained a great stock of knowledge. He was in fact a sort of lay divine, and superior to many of the profession. About 1636, we find him representing the borough of Stafford in parliament, when some of the members of that, which was called the Long parliament, had withdrawn to the king at Oxford. Mr. Leigh’s sentiments inclining him to remain and to support the measures of the party in opposition to the court, he was afterwards appointed to a seat in the assembly of divines, and certainly sat with no little propriety in one respect, being as ably skilled in matters of divinity and ecclesiastical history as most of them. He was also a colonel of a regiment in the parliamentary service, and custos rotulorum for the county of Stafford. He was not, however, prepared to approve of all the proceedings of the parliament and army; and having, in Dec. 1648, voted that his majesty’s concessions were satisfactory, he and some others, who held the same opinion, were turned out of parliament. From that time he appears to have retired from public life, and to have employed his time in study. He died June 2, 1671, at Rushall Hall in Staffordshire, and was buried in the chancel of that church. His works, which afford abundant proofs of his learning and industry, are, 1. “Select and choice Observations concerning the first twelve Cssars,” Oxon, 1635, 8vo. Additions were made to this work both by himself and his son Henry, who published an enlarged edition in 1657, 8vo, with the title of “Analecta Ccesarum Romanorum.” Two other editions, with farther improvements and plates of coins, &c. appeared in 1664 and 1670, 8vo. 2. “Treatise of Divine promises,” Lond. 1633, often reprinted, and was the model of Clarke’s “Scripture Promises,” and other collections of the same kind. 3. “Critica Sacra, or the Hebrew words of the Old, and of the Greek of the New Testament,” Lond. 1639, and 1646, 4to, afterwards enlarged with a supplement, to 2 vols. folio. This was one of the books on which the late learned Mr. Bowyer bestowed great pains, and had filled it with critical notes. 4. “A Treatise of Divinity,” ibid. 1648, 1651, 8vo. 5. “The Saint’s encouragement in evil times or observations concerning the martyrs in general,” ibid. 1648, 8vo. 6. “Annotations on all the New Testament,” ibid. 1650, folio. 7. “A philological Commentary; or, an illustration of the most obvious and useful words in the Law, &c.” ibid. 1652, &c. 8. “A System or Body of Divinity,” 1654, and 1662, folio. 9. “Treatise of Religion and Learning,” ibid. 1656, folio, which not succeeding, was republished in 1663, with only the new title of “Fcelix consortium, or a fit conjuncture of Religion and Learning.” H). “Choice French Proverbs,” ibid. 1657, 1664, 8vo. 11. “Annotations on the five poetical books of the Old Testament, viz. Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles,” ibid. 1657, folio. 12. “Second considerations of the high court of Chancery,” 1658, 4to. 13. “England described,” 1659, 8vo, mostly from Caraden*. 14. “Choice observations on all the kings of England, from the Saxons to the death of Charles I.” 1661, 8vo. 15. “Three Diatribes, or Discourses, of travel, money, and measuring, &c.” 1671, 8vo; in another edition it is called the “Gentleman’s Guide.” 16. “Two Sermons,” on the magistrate’s authority, by Christ. Cartwright, B. D. To these sir Edward prefixed a preface in vindication of his own character for appearing in the assembly of divines. This gentleman is by some writers called Sir Edward Leigh, but not so by Wood, nor can we find any information respecting his being knighted. In all his works, that we have seen, he is styled Edward Leigh, Esq.

, sometime bishop of Dunblane, and afterwards archbishop of Glasgow, son to the preceding, was born at London in 1613, but educated at the university of Edinburgh, where his talents were not more conspicuous than his piety and humble temper. He afterwards spent some time in France, particularly at Doway, where some of his relations lived. Our accounts, however, of his early years, are very imperfect. All we know with certainty of the period before us is, that when he had reached his thirtieth year, in 1643, he was settled in Scotland, according to the presbyterian form, as minister of the parish of Newbottle, near Edinburgh. Here he remained several years, and was most assiduous in discharging the various duties of his office. He did not, however, conceive it to be any part of that office to add to the distractions of that unhappy period, by making the pulpit the vehicle of political opinions. His object was to exhort his parishioners to live in charity, and not to trouble themselves with religious and political disputes. But such was not the common practice; and it being the custom of the presbytery to inquire of the several brethren, twice a year, “whether they had preached to the times?” “For God’s sake,” answered Leighton, “when all my brethren preach to the times, suffer one poor priest to preach about eternity.” Such moderation could not fail to give offence; and finding his labours of no service, he retired to a life of privacy. His mind was not, however, indifferent to what was passing in the political world, and he was one of those who dreaded the downfall of the monarchy, and the subsequent evils of a republican tyranny, and having probably declared his sentiments on these subjects, he was solicited by his friends, and particularly by his brother, sir Elisha Leighton, to change his connexions. For this he was denounced by the presbycerians as an apostate, and welcomed by the episcopalians as a convert. In his first outset, however, it is denied that he was a thorough presbyterian, or in his second, entirely an episcopalian; and it is certain that his becoming the latter could not bo imputed to motives of ambition or interest, for episcopacy was at this time the profession of the minority, and extremely unpopular. His design, however, of retiring to a life of privacy, was prevented by a circumstance which proved the high opinion entertained of his integrity, learn ing, and piety. The office of principal in the university of Edinburgh becoming vacant soon after Leighton’s resignation of his ministerial charge, the magistrates, who had the gift of presentation, unanimously chose him to fill the chair, and pressed his acceptance of it by urging that he might thereby be of great service to the church, without taking any part in public measures. Such a motive to a man of his moderation, was irresistible; and accordingly he accepted the offer, and executed the duties of his office for ten years with great reputation. It was the custom then for the principal to lecture to the students of theology in the Latin tongue; and Leighton’s lectures delivered at this period, which are extant both in Latin and English, are very striking proofs of the ability and assiduity with which he discharged this part of his duty.

After the death of the king, Dr. Leighton sometimes visited London during the vacations, but was disgusted with the proceedings there, and particularly conceived a dislike to the conduct of the independents as well as to their form of church-government. He made several excursions, likewise, to Flanders, that he might observe the actual state of the Romish church on the spot, and carried on a correspondence with some of his relations at Doway, who were in popish orders; but with the exception of some Jansenists, of whom he entertained a favourable opinion, his general aversion to popish divines and popery appears to have been increased by his experience abroad.

It may seem strange that Leighton, who was so disgusted with the proceedings of his brethren as now to think it a misfortune to belong to the order, and who had so earnestly tendered his resignation, should at no great distance of time (in 1670) be persuaded to remove from his sequestered diocese of Dunblane, to the more important province of Glasgow. This, however, may be accounted for to his honour, and not to the discredit of the court which urged him to accept the archbishopric. The motive of the king and his ministers was, that Leighton was the only man qualified to allay the discontents which prevailed in the west of Scotland; and Leighton now thought he might have an opportunity to bring forward a scheme of accommodation between the Episcopalians and Presbyterians, which had been for years the object of his study, and the of his heart. The king had examined this scheme, and promised his aid. It had all the features of moderation; and if moderation had been the characteristic of either party, might have been successful. Leighton wished that each party, for the sake of peace, should abate somewhat of its opinions, as to the mode of church-government and worship; that the power of the bishops should be reduced considerably, and that few of the ceremonies of public worship should be retained; that the bishop should only be perpetual moderator, or president in clerical asemblies; and should have no negative voice; and that every question should be determined by the majority of presbyters. Both parties, however, were too much exasperated, and too jealous of each other to yield a single point, and the scheme came to nothing, for which various reasons may be seen in the history of the times. The only circumstance not so well accounted for, is that Charles II. and his ministers should still persist in retaining a man in the high office of bishop, whose plans they disliked, and who formed a striking contrast to his brethren whom they supported.

Archbishop Leighton is celebrated by all who have written his life, or incidentally noticed him, as a striking example of unfeigned piety, extensive learning, and unbounded liberality. Every period of his life was marked with substantial, prudent, unostentatious charity; and that be might be enabled to employ his wealth in this way, he practised the arts of frugality in his own concerns. He enjoyed some property from his futher, but his income as bishop of Dunblane was only 200l., and as archbishop of Glasgow about 400l.; yet, besides his gifts of charity during his life, he founded an exhibition in the college of Edinburgh at the expence of 150l. and three more in the college of Glasgow, at the expence of 400l. and gave 300l. for the maintenance of four paupers in St. Nicholas’s hospital. He also bequeathed at last the whole of his remaining property to charitable purposes. His library and Mss. he left to the see of Dunblane. His love for retirement we have often mentioned; he carried it perhaps to an excess, and it certainly unfitted him for the more active duties of his high station. Although a prelate, he nnver seemed to have considered himself as more than a parish priest, and his diocese a large parish. He was not made for the times in which he lived, as a public character. They were too violent for his gentle spirit, and impressed him with a melancholy that checked the natural cheerfulness of his temper and conversation* As a preacher, he was admired beyond all his contemporaries, and his works have not yet lost their popularity. Some of them, as his “Commentary on St. Peter,” have been often reprinted, but the most complete edition, including many pieces never before published, is that which appeared in 1808, in 6 vols. 8vo, with a life of the author by the Rev. G. Jerment. Of this last we have availed ourselves in the preceding sketch, but must refer to it for a more ample account of the character and actions of this revered prelate.

, an eminent English antiquary, was born in London, in the beginning of the sixteenth century, but in what parish or year is uncertain. He was bred at St. Paul’s school, under the famous William Lilly. Having lost both his parents in his infancy, he found a foster-father in one Mr. Thomas Myles, who both maintained him at school, and sent him thence to Christ’s college, in Cambridge. Of this society, it is said, he became fellow; yet, it is certain that he afterwards removed to Oxford, and spent several years in All Souls college, where he prosecuted his studies with great assiduity, not only in the Greek and Latin tongues, but in the Saxon and Welch, the ancient languages of his country. For farther improvement he travelled to Paris, where he had the conversation and instruction of Budaeus, Faber, Paulus yEmilius, Ruellius, and Francis Sylvius; by whose assistance he not only perfected himself in the Latin and Greek tongues, but learned French, Italian, and Spanish. He also improved hia natural diposition to poetry, On his return home he entered into holy orders, and being esteemed an accomplished scholar, king Henry VIII. made him one of his chaplains, gave him the rectory of Popeling, Popering, or Pepling, in the marches of Calais, appointed him his library- keeper, and by a commission dated 1533, dignified him with the title of his antiquary. By this commission his majesty laid his commands on him to make search after “England’s antiquities, and peruse the libraries of all cathedrals, abbies, priories, colleges, &c. and places where records, writings, and secrets of antiquity were reposited.” For this purpose he had an honourable stipend allotted him, and obtained, in 1536, a dispensation for non-residence upon his living at Popeling. Being now at full liberty, he spent above six years in travelling about England and Wales, and collecting materials for the history and antiquities of the nation. He entered upon his journey with the greatest eagerness; and, in the execution of his design was so inquisitive, that, not content with what the libraries of the respective houses afforded, nor with what was recorded in the windows and other monuments belonging to cathedrals and monasteries, &c. he wandered from place to place where he thought there were any footsteps of Roman, Saxon, or Danish buildings, and took particular notice of all the tumuli, coins, inscriptions, &c. In short, he travelled every where, both by the seacoasts and the midland parts, sparing neither pains nor cost; insomuch that there was scarcely either cape or bay, haven, creek, or pier, river, or confluence of rivers, breaches, washes, lakes, meres, fenny waters, mountains, valleys, moors, heaths, forests, chaces, woods, cities, boroughs, castles, principal manor- places, monasteries, and colleges, which he had not seen, and noted, as he says, a whole world of things very memorable.

Leland not only sought out and rescued antique monuments of literature from the destructive hands of time, by a faithful copy and register of them, but likewise saved many from being despoiled by the hands of men. In those days the English were very indifferent and negligent in this particular: they took little heed and less care about these precious monuments of learning; which, being perceived by foreigners, especially in Germany, young students were frequently sent thence, who cut them out of the books in the libraries; and, then, returning home, published therti at the press of Frobenius, and other printers. This pilferage, together with the havock made of them at the dissolution of the monasteries, was observed by our antiquary with great regret; and he wrote a letter to Cromwell, then secretary of state, begging his assistance to bring to light many ancient authors buried in dust, and sending them to the king’s library. His majesty was truly sensible of the indefatigable industry and labour of his antiquary, and on his return from his travels in 1542, presented him to the rich rectory of Basely, in Oxfordshire, and the year following gave him, by the name of John Leland, scholar, and king’s chaplain, a canonry of King’s college, now Christ Church, in Oxford; and, about the same time, the prebend of East and West Knowle, in the church of Sarum. In 1545 he lost the canonry of Christ Church, upon the surrendry of that college to the king, and had no pension allowed him in the lieu of it, as other canons had, yet as he is said to have been “otherwise prov ided for,” it was probably at this time that the prebend of East and West Knowle was given him. In 1545, having digested into four books that part of his collections which contains an account of the illustrious writers in the realm, with their lives and monuments of literature, he presented it to his majesty, under the title of “A Newe Year’s Gifte;” with a scheme of what he intended to do farther *. For that purpose he retired to a house of his own, in the parish of St Michael le Querne, London; where he spent near six years in digesting and bringing into form and order, the immense collections he had with so great assiduity amassed together. It appears by a letter of his published by Hearne, that he was desirous of procuring an able assistant, but we are not informed whether he succeeded. It is certain that some assistance was necessary; for though he was a person of a clear judgment, and of great insight, to discern the difference “between substantial and superstitious learning,” notwithstanding these and other natural endowments of his mind, it is no wonder this double labour, this augaean task, to realize these undigested heaps, should overpower the strength of his constitution, and the spirits submit to what nature could no longer support. This was the fate of Leland; and by this unfortunate event an end was put to his labours, “a fatal stop to the satisfaction he was anxious to give to his king and country.”

Jtjng Henry died Jan. 28, 1547, and probably the great concerns of state had for some time slackened the attention of the court to his labours. Bayle suggests that the court did not pay Leland his stipend, and gives this as a plausible reason for his misfortune; but as we are told by his contemporary, bishop Bale, who had a better opportunity to

This event, as his illness before had, was deemed a national misfortune, greatly lamented by contemporaries, and by succeeding ages. On his demise, Leland’s papers were sought after by persons of the lirst rank and learning in the kingdom. King Edward, aware of their value, committed them to the custody of sir John Cheke, his tutor, who probably would have made some important use of them had he not been hindered by the confusions which followed the death of his sovereign. Sir John, being then obliged to go abroad, left four folio volumes of Leland’s collections to Humphrey Purefoy, esq. and these descended to Burton, the author of the History of Leicestershire, who obtained possession also of eight other volumes of Leland’s Mss. called his “Itinerary,” all which he deposited, in 1632, in the Bodleian library. The only other portion of Leland’s Mss. is in the Cottonian collection. Of all these, Holinshed, Drayton, Camden, Dugdale, Stowe, Lambard, Battely, Wood, &c. &c. have made much use in their historical researches; but we cannot too deeply regret that the author did not live to execute his own plans. His collections were in truth but labores incepti, begun, not completed. In that light he mentions them himself in an address to archbishop Cranmer, intreating the favour of that prelate’s protection of his indigested papers. Yet in this imperfect state they have been justly deemed a national treasure, have always been consulted by our best antiquaries, and their authority is cited as equal, if not superior to any, in points that concern antiquities. Dr. Tanner had once formed a plan for publishing Leland’s papers, but various avocations prevented him: at length Hearne undertook the task, and produced those two invaluable collections, the “Itinerary,” and “Collectanea,” both too well known to require a more minute description. To these may be added a work not so well edited, “Commentarii tie scriptoribus Britannicis,” Oxon. 1709, 2 vols. 8vo.(See Amthony Hall.) Some unpublished Mss. still remain, and it appears that Leland had prepared a large work entitled “De Antiquitate Britannica, sive, Historia Civilis.” It also appears that he had made large collections towards the antiquities of London, but these have long been lost to the public, as well as his quadrate table on silver, mentioned in the preceding note, and the “Description of England,” which he said would be published in twelve months.

, an eminent writer in defence of Christianity, was born at Wigan, in Lancashire, Oct. 18, 1691. Soon after, his father, who had lived in good repute for many years, being involved in pecuniary difficulties, gave up his effects to his creditors, and removed to Dublin. Finding here an opportunity for settling in business, he sent over for his wife and family of three sons, and was enabled to support them in a decent manner. John, the subject of this memoir, was his second son, and when in his sixth year, which was before they left England, as our account states, he met with a singular misfortune. He was seized with the small pox, which proved of so malignant a kind that his life was despaired of; and when, contrary to all expectation, he recovered, he was found to be deprived of his understanding and memory, which last retained no traces of what he had been taught. In this state he remained a year, when his faculties returned; but having still no remembrance of the past, he began anew to learn his letters, and in this his second education, made so quick a progress, and gave such proofs of superior memory and understanding, that his parents resolved to breed him up to one of the learned professions. In this, from their situation in life, they probably had not much choice, from the great expenses necessary to law or physic; and this, with their religious principles, induced them to decide in favour of divinity. He was therefore educated for the ministry among the dissenters; and having first exhibited his talents to advantage in a congregation of dissenters in New- row, Dublin, was, in a few months, invited to become joint-pastor with the Rev. Mr. Weld, to which office he was ordained in 1716. As he entered upon this station from the best and purest motives, he discharged the duties of it with the utmost fidelity; and, by indefatigable application to his studies, he made at the same time such improvements in every branch of useful knowledge, that he soon acquired a distinguished reputation in the learned world. In 1730 Tindal published his “Christianity as old as the Creation,” and although several excellent answers appeared to that impious work, Mr. Leland was of opinion that much remained to be said, in order to expose its fallacious reasonings and inconsistencies. Accordingly he first appeared as an author in 1733, by publishing “An Answer to a late book entitled ‘ Christianity as old as the Creation, &c.’” in 2 vols. In 1737 he embarked in a controversy with another of the same class of writers, Dr. Morgan, by publishing “The Divine Authority of the Old and New Testament asserted against the unjust aspersions and false reasonings of a Book entitled * The Moral Philosopher.'” The learning and abilities displayed by Mr. Leland in these publications, and the service which he rendered by them to the Christian cause, procured him many marks of respect and esteem from persons of the highest rank in the established church, as well as from the most eminent of his dissenting brethren; and from the university of Aberdeen he received, in the most honourable manner, the degree of D. D. In 1742 Dr. Leland published an answer to a pamphlet entitled “Christianity not founded on Argument;” and in 1753 he distinguished himself still further as an advocate in behalf of Christianity, by publishing “Reflections on the late lord Bolingbroke’s Letters on the study and use of History; especially so far as they relate to Christianity and the Holy Scriptures.” It is said to have been with some reluctance that he was persuaded to exert himself upon this occasion; for although, as he himself observes, no man needs make an apology for using his best endeavours in defence of Christianity when it is openly attacked, yet he was apprehensive that his engaging again in this cause, after having done so on some former occasions, might have an appearance of too much forwardness. But these apprehensions gave way to the judgment and advice of his friend, the late Dr. Thomas Wilson, rector of St. Stephen’s, Walbrook; and in complying with his recommendation, he performed an acceptable service to the Christian world, and added not a little to the reputation he had already acquired.

Dr. Leland being now justly considered a master in this branch of controversy, at the desire of some valuable friends he sent to the press, in 1754, “A View of the principal Deistical Writers that have appeared in England, in the last and present century, with observations upon them, &c. In several letters to a friend.” This friend was Dr. Wilson, to whom the letters were sent by the author, in the form in which they appear. When the work was ready for the press, the copy was so little esteemed that no bookseller would give more than 50l. for it; on which Dr. Wilson generously printed a numerous edition at his own risque, and the subsequent editions sold with great rapidity and profit. The design of this work was to give some idea of the productions of the deistical writers, and of the several schemes which they have advanced, as far as the cause of revealed religion is concerned. He afterwards published a supplement relating to the works of Mr. Hume and lord Bolingbroke, and this was followed by a third volume, comprehending the author’s additions and illustrations, with a new edition of “Reflections upon lord Bolingbroke’s Letters,” &c. The whole of this work is now comprised in two volumes; it secured the author general public approbation, and encouraged him to continue his exertions to a very advanced age. Accordingly, when he was upwards of seventy years old, he published, in 2 vols. 4to, “The advantage and necessity of the Christian Revelation, shewn from the state of religion in the ancient heathen world, especially with respect to the knowledge and worship of the one true God; a rule of moral duty, and a state of t'uture rewards and punishments,” &c. This work was afterwards reprinted in two volumes, 8vo. Dr. Leland died in'his seventy-fifth year, on the 16th of January 1766; he was distinguished by considerable abilities, and very extensive learning; he had a memory so tenacious, that he was often called “the walking library.” After his death a collection of his sermons was published in four volumes octavo, with a preface containing some account of the life, character, and writings of the author, by the Rev. Dr. Isaac Weld, who preached his funeral sermon at the meeting in Eustace-street, Dublin, of which Dr. Leland had for ma-jy years been the pastor. The extensive circulation 01 luticiel writings about twenty years ago, induced the Rev. Dr. W. L. Brown, principal of Marishal college, Aberdeen, to superintend a new edition of the “View of the Deistieal writers,” 1798, 2 vols. 8vo, to which he added an excellent * View of the Present Times, with regard to religion and morals, and other important subjects."

, a learned uivine and translator, the son of a citizen of Dublin, was born in that city in 1722. The first rudiments of classical education he received at the seuool kept by the celebrated Dr. Sheridan, whose talents and success in forming excellent scholars, were then well known. In 17^7 he entered a pensioner in Trinity college; and in 1741 was elected a scholar commenced bachelor of arts in 1742, and was a candidate for a fellowship in 1745, in which he failed at this time, but succeeded the following year by the unanimous voice of the electors, On bein^ thus placed in a state of independence, he did not resign himself to ease and indolence, but was conspicuous for the same ardent love of knowledge which appeared in the commencement of his studies, and was predominant throughout his whole life. In 1748 he entered into holy orders, and from a deep sense of the importance of his profession, drew up a discourse “On the helps and impediments to the acquisition of knowledge in religious and moral subjects,” wtiich was much admired at that time, but no copy is now to be found In 1754, in conjunction with Dr. John Stokes, he published, at the desire of the university, an edition of the “Orations of Demosthenes,” with a Latin version and notes, which we do not find mentioned by any of our classical bibliographers, except Harwood, who says it is in 2 vols. 12mo. In 1760 Dr. Leiand published the first volume of his English “Translation of Demosthenes,” 4to, with notes critical and historical; the second volume of which appeared in 1761, and the third in 1770. This raised his reputation very high as a classical scholar and critic, and public expectation was farther gratified in 1758 by his “History of the Life and Reign of Philip king of Macedon, the father of Alexander,” 2 vols. 4to. His attention to the orations of Demosthenes and Æschmes, and to Grecian politics, eminently qualified him for treating the life of Philip with copiousness and accuracy. After this he proceeded with translations of Æschines, and the other orations of Demosthenes. In 1762, he is supposed to have written, although he never formally avowed it, the ingenious historical romance of “Longsword, earl or Salisbury.”

, a most capital painter of the reign of Charles II. was born at Soest, in Westphalia, in 1617. His family name was Vander Vaas; but from the circumstance of his father, who was a captain of foot, being born in a perfumer’s shop, whose sign was a lily, and receiving the appellation of captain Du Lys, or Lely, our artist obtained it as a proper name. He was first instructed in the art by Peter Grebber, at Haerlem; and having acquired a very considerable degree of skill in execution, he came to England in 1641, and commenced portrait-painter. After the restoration he was appointed state-painter to Charles II. and continued to hold that office with great reputation till his death, which happened in 1680. He was seized by an apoplexy while painting a portrait of the duchess of Somerset, and died instantly, at the age of sixty-three.

, a celebrated chemist, was born Nov. 17, 1645, at Rouen in Normandy, of which parliament his father was a proctor, and of the reformed religion. Having received a suitable education at the place of his birth, he was put apprentice to an apothecary, who was a relation; but, finding in a short lime that his master knew little of chemistry, he left him in 1666, and went to improve himself in that art at Paris, where he applied to Mr. Glazer, then demonstrator of chemistry in the royal gardens; but as Mr. Glazer was one of those professors who are full of obscure ideas, and was also far from being communicative, Lemery stayed with him only two months, and then proceeded to travel through France in quest of some better masters. In this resolution he went to Montpelier, where he continued three years with Mr. Vernant, an apothecary, who gave him an opportunity of performing several chemical operations, and of reading lectures also to some of his scholars. By these means he made such advances in chemistry, that in a little time he drew all the professors of physic, as well as other curious persons at Montpelier, to hear him; having always some new discoveries, which raised his reputation so high, that he practised physic in. that university without a doctor’s degree.

, a learned French writer in the eighteenth century, was born at Bazoches, in Beausse, April 13, 1661. He was son of Paul Lenfant, minister at Chatillon, who died at Marbourg, in June 1686. He studied divinity at Saumur, where he lodged at the house of James Cappel, professor of Hebrew, by whom he was always highly esteemed; and afterwards went to Geneva, to continue his studies there. Leaving Geneva towards the end of 1683, he went to Heidelberg, where he was ordained in August, 1684. He discharged the duties of his function there with great reputation as chaplain of the electress dowager of Palatine, and pastor in ordinary to the French church. The descent of the French into the Palatinate, however, obliged him to depart from Heidelberg in 1688. Two letters which he had written against the Jesuits, and which are jnserted at the end of his “Preservatif,” ren r dered it somewhat hazardous to continue at the mercy of a society whose power was then in its plenitude. He left the Palatinate, therefore, in October 1688, with the consent of his church and superiors, and arrived at Berlin in November following. Though the French church of Berlin had already a sufficient number of ministers, the elector Frederic, afterwards king of Prussia, appointed Mr. Lenfant one of them, who began his functions on Easter-day, March the 21st, 1689, and continued them thirty-nine years and four months, and during this time added greatly to his reputation by his writings. His merit was so fully acknowledged, as to be rewarded with every mark of distinction suitable to his profession. He was preacher to the queen of Prussia, Charlotta-Sophia, who was eminent for her sense and extensive knowledge, and after her death he became chaplain to the king of Prussia. He was counsellor of the superior consistory, and member of the French council, which were formed to direct the general affairs of that nation. In 1710 he was chosen a member of the society for propagating the gospel established in England; and March the 2d, 1724, was elected member of the academy of sciences at Berlin. In 1707 he took a journey to Holland and England, where he had the honour to preach before queen Anne; and if he had thought proper to leave his church at Berlin, for which he had a great respect, he might have had a settlement at London, with the rank of chaplain to her majesty. In 1712, he went to Helmstad; in 1715 to Leipsic; and in 1725, to Breslaw, to search for rare books and manuscripts necessary for the histories which he was writing. In those excursions he was honoured with several valuable materials from the electress of Brunswic-Lunebourg, princess Palatine; the princess of Wales, afterwards Caroline queen of Great Britain; the count de Fleming; mons. Daguesseau, chancellor of France; and a great number of learned men, both protestants and papists, among the latter of whom was the abbé Bignon. It is not certain whether he first formed thedesign of the “Bibliotheque Germanique,” which began in 1720; or whether it was suggested to him by one of the society of learned men, which took the name of Anonymous; but they ordinarily met at his house, and he was a frequent contributor to that journal. When the king of Poland was at Berlin, in the end of May and beginning of June 1728, Mr. Lenfant, we are told, dreamt that he was ordered to preach. He excused himself that he was not prepared; and not knowing what subject he should pitch upon, was directed to preach upon these words, Isaiah XxxtiiL 1. “Set thine house in order, for thou shalt die, and not live.” He related this dream to some of his friends, and although not a credulous man, it is thought to have made some impression on him, for he applied with additional vigour to finish his “History of the War of the Hussites and the Council of Basil.” On Sunday July the 25tn following, he had preached in his turn at his church; but on Thursday, July the 29th, he had a slight attack of the palsy, which was followed by one more violent, of which he died on the 7th of the next month, in his sixtyeighthyear. He was interred at Berlin, at the foot of the pulpit of the French church, where he ordinarily preached since 1715, when his Prussian majesty appointed particular ministers to every church, which before were served by the same ministers in their turns. His stature was a little below the common height. His eye was very lively anil penetrating. He did not talk much, but always well. Whenever any dispute arose in conversation, he spoke without any heat; a proper and delicate irony was the only weapon he made use of on such occasions. He loved company, and passed but few days without seeing some of his friends. He was a sincere friend, and remarkable for a disinterested and generous disposition. In preaching, his voice was good; his pronunciation distinct and varied; his style clear, grave, and elegant without affectation; and he entered into the true sense of a text with great force. His publications were numerous in divinity, ecclesiastical history, criticism, and polite literature. Those which are held in the highest estimation, are his Histories of the Councils of Pisa, Constance, and Basil, each in 2 vols. 4to. These are written with great ability and impartiality, and they abound with interesting facts and curious researches. Lenfant, in conjunction with M. Beausobre, published “The New Testament, translated from the original Greek into French,” in 2 vols. 4to, with notes, and a general preface, or introduction to the reading of the Holy Scriptures, useful for students in divinity. He is known also by his “De iuquirenda Veritate,” which is a translation of Malebranche’s “Search after Truth” “The History of Pope Joan” “Poggiana or, the life, character,- opinions, c. of Poggio the Florentine, with the History of the Republic of Florence,” and the abovementioned “History of the Wars of the Hussites,” Utrecht, 1731, 2 vols. in 4to, dedicated by his widow to the prince royal of Prussia. This was the last work in which our author was engaged. He had revised the copy of the first volume, and was reading over that of the second, when he was seized with the apoplexy. But for this it appears to have been his intention to continue his History to about 1460. To this History is added monsieur Beausobre’s “Dissertation upon the Adamites of Bohemia.”

, a learned English prelate, was born at Norwich in 1665, and educated at St. Paul’s school, London, whence he removed to Catherine-hall, Cambridge; and took his degrees of A. B. in 1636, A.M. 1690, and B. D. 1698. He was, in 1708, presented to the rectory of Beddington in Surrey, by sir Nicholas Carew, bart. who had been his pupil; and he was appointed chaplain to king George I. who also promoted him to the see of Norwich in 1723. He died Oct. 26, 1727, of the small-pox, which he caught at the coronation of George II. He lies buried in the church of St. Margaret, Westminster, where is a monument to his memory. Richardson, in his continuation of Godwin, calls him a man of the first-rate genius and abilities. In 1695, he published two of the comedies of Aristophanes, the “Plutus” and “Nubes,” Gr. & Lat. 8vo, with notes; and in 1719 preached the sermons at Boyle’s lecture, which are printed, as are a set of his sermons preached at Tunbridge, and a few others upon occasional subjects. He was editor also of one of the most magnificent and correct editions of “Terence,” that printed at Cambridge in 1701, 4to. For this he consulted thirteen manuscripts, and many ancient editions, and enriched the work with critical notes, and a dissertation “De ratione et licentia metri Terentiani.” It was reprinted at Cambridge, in octavo, 1701 and 1723, which last Dr. Harwood thinks the best editon. Dr. Leng corrected and revised the sixth edition of sir Roger L'Estrange’s translation of Cicero de Officiis, an employment which we are surprized he should have undertaken, who could with more ease and elegance have given a new one.

, a voluminous French writer, was born October 5, 1674, at Beauvais. He entered the Sorbonne, as a student, under M. Pirot, a celebrated doctor of that house; but, being convicted of having privately obtained from this gentleman’s bureau, some papers relative to what was then transacting in the Sorbonne, respecting Maria d'Agreda’s “Mystical city of God,” and having published, 1696, a “Letter addressed to Messieurs the Syndics and doctors in divinity of the faculty of Paris,” concerning this censure, M. Pirot expelled him. Lenglet then went to the seminary of St. Magloire, entered into sacred orders, and took his licentiate’s degree, 1703. He was sent to Lisle, 1705, by M. Torcey, minister for foreign affairs, as first secretary for the Latin and French languages, and with a charge to watch that the elector of Cologn’s ministers, who were then at Lisle, might do nothing against the king’s interest; and was also entrusted by the elector with the foreign correspondence of Brussels and Holland. When Lisle was taken in 1708, Lenglet obtained a safeguard for the elector of Cologn’s furniture and property from prince Eugene. Having made himself known to that prince through M. Hoendorf, he desired the latter to tell his highness, that he would give up the memoirs of the Intendants for fifty pistoles, which the prince sent him; but be wrote to M. Hoendorf eight days after, to say that the papers had been seized at his house by the minister’s order, and kept the money. He discovered a conspiracy formed by a captain at the gates of Mons, who had promised not only to deliver up that city, but also the electors of Cologn and Bavaria, who had retired thither, for a hundred thousand piastres. Lenglet was arrested at the Hague fur his “Memoirs sur la Collation des Canonicats de Tournay,” which he had published there, to exclude the disciples of Jansenius from this collation; but he obtained his liberty six weeks after, at prince Eugene’s solicitation. After his return to France, the prince de Cellemare’s conspiracy, which cardinal Albtjroni had planned, being discovered in Dec. 1718, he was chosen to find out the number and designs of the conspirators, which he did, after receiving a promise that none of those so discovered should be sentenced to death; this promise the court kept, and gave Lenglet a pension. In 1721, he went to Vienna, pretending to solicit the removal of M. Ernest, whom the Dutch had made dean of Tournay; but having no orders from France for the journey, was arrested at Strasburgh on his return, and confined six months in prison. This disgrace the abbé Lenglet attributed to the celebrated Rousseau, whom he had seen at Vienna, and from whom he had received every possible service in that city; and thence originated his aversion to him, and the satire which he wrote against him, under the title of “Eloge historique de Rousseau, par Brossette,” which that friend of Rousseau’s disavowed, and the latter found means to have suppressed in Holland, where it had been printed, in 1731. Lenglet refused to attach himself to cardinal Passionei, who wished to have him at Rome, and, indeed, he was so far from deriving any advantage from the favourable circumstances he found himself in, or from the powerful patrons which he had acquired by his talents and services, that his life was one continued series of adventures and misfortunes. His passion was to write, think, act, and live, with a kind of cynical freedom; and though badly lodged, clothed, and fed, he was still satisfied, while at liberty to say and write what he pleased; which liberty, however, he carried to so great an extreme, and so strangely abused, that he was sent to the bastille ten or twelve times. Lenglet bore all this without murmuring, and no sooner found himself out of prison, than he laboured to deserve a fresh confinement. The bastille was become so familiar to him, that when Tapin (one of the life guards) who usually conducted him thither, entered his chamber, he did not wait to hear his commission, but began himself by saying, “Ah M. Tapin, good morning” then turning to the woman who waited upon him, cried, “Bring my little bundle of linen and snuff directly,” and followed M. Tapin with the utmost cheerfulness. This spirit of freedom and independence, and this rage for writing, never left him; he chose rather to work and live alone in a kind of garret, than reside with a rich sister, who was fond of him, and offered him a convenient apartment at her house in Paris, with the use of her table and servants. Lenglet would have enjoyed greater plenty in this situation, but every thing would have fatigued him, and he would have thought regularity in meals quite a slavery. Some have supposed that he studied chymistry, and endeavoured to discover the philosopher’s stone, to which operations he desired no witnesses. He owed his death to a melancholy accident; for going home about six in the evening, Jan. 15, 1755, after having dined with his sister, he fell asleep, while reading a new book which had been sent him, and fell into the tire. The neighbours went to his assistance, but too late, his head being almost entirely burnt. He had attained the age of eighty-two. The abbé Lenglet’s works are numerous their subjects extremely various, and many of them very extravagant. Those which are most likely to live are his, “Méthode pour etudier l'Histoire, avec un Catalogue des principaux Historiens,” 12 vols.; “Methode pour Etudier la Geographic,” with maps; “Histoire de la Philosophic Hermetique,” and “Tablettes Chronologiques de T Histoire Universelle,” 1744-, two vols. An enlarged edition of this work was published in 1777. His “Chronological Tables” were published in English, in 8vo. It is a work of great accuracy, and of some whim, for he lays down a calculation according to which a reader may go through an entire course of universal history, sacred and profane, in the space of ten years and six months at the rate of six hours per day.

, an English writer, was related to Sampson Lennard, who married Margaret baroness Dacre, and of whom honourable mention is made in Camden’s Britannia. In early life he followed the profession of arms, and was attached to sir Philip Sidney, with whom he fought at the battle of Zutphen. He was afterwards distinguished as a man of letters, and published various translations from the Latin and French, particularly Perrin’s “History of the Waldenses;” Du Plessis Mornay’s History of Papacie;“and Charron” On Wisdom.“He was of some note as a topographer, and of considerable eminence as a herald, having been, in the latter part of his life, a member of the college of arms. Some of his heraldical compilations, which are justly esteemed, (see” Catalogue of the Harleian Mss.") are among the manuscripts in the British Museum. He died in August 1633, and was buried at St. Bennet’s, Paul’s Wharf. Mr. Granger received this brief memoir of Lennard, from Thomas the late lord Dacre.

, a lady long distinguished for her genius and literary merit, and highly respected by Johnson and Richardson, was born in 1720. Her father, colonel James Ramsay, was a field-officer, and lieutenant-­governor of New-York, who sent her over, at the age of fifteen, to. England, to an opulent aunt, but whom, on ner arrival, she found incurably insane. The father died soon after, leaving his widow (who died at New York in Aug. 1765), and this daughter, without any provision. Who Mr. Lennox was, or when she married, we have not been able to learn, and, indeed, very little is known of her early history by her few surviving friends, who became acquainted with her only in her Tatter days. We are told, that from the death of her father she supported herself by her literary talents, which she always employed usefully.

It is to be regretted, that the latter days of this ingenious lady were clouded by penury and sickness; calamities which were in a considerable degree alleviated by the kindness of some friends, who revered alike her literary and her moral character. Among these it would be unjust not to mention the names of the right hon. George Rose, and the rev. W. Beloe. But the most effectual aid she received was from The Literary Fund society, in consequence of which her only son was, a few years since, enabled to fit himself out for an employment in the Anglo-American States; and from the same source the means of decent subsistence were, for the last twelvemonth of her life, afforded to the mother. She died Jan. 4, 1804.

, surnamed The Great, a doctor of the church, and one of the most eminent popes who have filled the Roman see, was born in Tuscany, or rather at Rome. He made himself very useful to the church under pope St. Celestine, and Sixtus III. and was concerned in all important affairs while but a deacon. The Roman clergy recalled him from Gaul, whither he was gone to reconcile Albums and Ætius, generals of the army, and raised him to the papal chair Sept. 1, 440. He condemned the Manicheans, in a council held at Rome in the year 444, and completely extirpated the remains of the Pelagian heresy in Italy: “Let those Pelagians,” said he, “who return to the church, declare by a clear and public profession, that they condemn the authors of their heresy, that they detest that part of their doctrine which the universal church has beheld with horror, and that they receive all such decrees of the councils as have been passed for exterminating the Pelagian heresy, and are confirmed by the authority of the apostolical see, acknowledging by a clear and full declaration, signed by their hand, that they admit these decrees, and approve them in every thing,” Leo also condemned the Priscillianists, and annulled all the proceedings in the council of Ephesus, which was called “the band of Ephesian robbers,” in the year 449. He presided by his legates at the general council of Chalcedon, in the year 451, but opposed the canon made there in favour of the church of Constantinople, which gave it the second rank, to the prejudice of that at Alexandria. The letter which Leo had written to Flavian us on the mystery of the Incarnation, was received with acclamations in this council, and the errors of Eutyches and Dioscorus condemned. The following year he went to meet Attila, king of the Huns, who was advancing to Rome, and addressed him with so much eloquence that he was prevailed upon to return home. Genseric having taken Rome, in the year 455, Leo obtained from that barbarous prince, that his soldiers should not set fire to the city, and saved the three grand churches (which Constantine had enriched with magnificent gifts) from being plundered. He was a strict observer of ecclesiastical discipline. He died November 3, in the year 461, at Rome. Never has the Romish church appeared with more true grandeur, or less pomp, than in this pontiff’s time; no pope was ever more honoured, esteemed, and respected; no pope ever displayed more humility, wisdom, mildness, and charity. Leo left ninety-six: “Sermons,” on the principal festivals throughout the year, and one hundred and forty-one Letters, which may be found in the library of the fathers. The best edition of his works is that by Pere Quesnel, Lyons, 1700, fol. They have been printed at Rome, by father Cacciaci, 3 vols. fol. and at Venice, by Messrs. Ballarimi, 3 vols. fol. but these editions have not sunk the credit of Quesnel’s. P. Maimbourg has written a history of his pontificate, 4to, or 2 vols. 12mo.

was a pontiff whose history is so connected with that of literature and the reformation, that more notice of him becomes necessary than we usually allot to his brethren, although scarce any abridgment of his life will be thought satisfactory, after the very luminous and interesting work of Mr. Roscoe. Leo was born at Florence in December 1475, the second son of Lorenzo de Medici, the Magnificent, and was christened John. Being originally destined by his father for the church, he was prorooted before he knew what it meant, received the tonsure at the age of seven years, two rich abbacies, and before he ceased to he a boy, received other preferments to the number of twenty-nine, and thus early imbibed a taste for aggrandizement which never left him. Upon the accession of Innocent VIII. to the pontificate, John, then thirteen years of age only, was nominated to the dignity of cardinal. Having now secured his promotion, his father began to think of his education, and when he was nominated to the cardinalate, it was made a condition that he should spend three years at the university of Pisa, in professional studies, before he was invested formally with the purple. In 145>2 this solemn act took place, and he immediately went to reside at Rome as one of the sacred college. His father soon after died, and was succeeded in his honours in the Florentine republic by his eldest son Peter. The young cardinal’s opposition to the election of pope Alexander VI. rendered it expedient for him to withdraw to Florence, and at the invasion of Italy by Charles VIII. he and the whole family were obliged to take refuge in Bologna. About 1500 he again fixed his residence at Rome, where he resided during the remainder of Alexander’s pontificate, and likewise in the early part of that of Julius II. cultivating polite literature, and the pleasures of elegant society, and indulging his taste for the fine arts, for music, and the chase, to which latter amusement he was much addicted. In 1505 he began to take an active part in public affairs, and was appointed by Julius to the government of Perugia. By his firm adherence to the interest of the pope, the cardinal acquired the most unlimited confidence of his holiness, and was entrusted with the supreme direction of the papal army in the Holj League against the French in 1511, with the title of legate of Bologna. At the bloody battle of Ravenna, in 1512, he was made prisoner, and wos conveyed to Milan, but afterwards effected his escape. About this time he contributed to the restoration of his family at Florence, by overthrowing the popular “constitution of that republic, and there he remained until the death of Julius II. in 1513, when he was elected pope in his stead, in the thirty-eighth year of his age. He assumed the name of Leo X. and ascended the throne with greater manifestations of goodwill, both from Italians and foreigners, than most of his predecessors had enjoyed. One of his first acts was to interpose in favour of some conspirators against the house of Medici, at Florence, and he treated with great kindness the family of Sodorini, which had long been at the head of the opposite party in that republic. He exhibited his taste for literature by the appointment of two of the most elegant scholars of the age, Bembo and Sadoleti, to the ffice of papal secretaries. With regard to foreign politics, he pursued the system of his predecessor, in attempting to free Italy from the dominion of foreign powers: and in order to counteract the antipapal council of Pisa, which was assembled at Lyons, he renewed the meetings of the council of Lateran, which Julius II. had begun, and he had the good fortune to terminate a division which threatened a schism in the church. Lewis XII. who had incurred ecclesiastical censure, made a formal submission, and received absolution. Having secured external tranquillity, Leo did not delay to consult the interests of literature by an ample patronage of learned studies. He restored to its former splendour the Roman gymnasium or university, which he effected by new grants of its revenues and privileges, and by filling its professorships with eminent men invited from all quarters. The study of the Greek language was a very particular object of his encouragement. Under the direction of Lascaris a college of noble Grecian youths was founded at Rome for the purpose of editing Greek authors; and a Greek press was established in that city. Public notice was circulated throughout Europe, that all persons who possessed Mss. of ancient authors would be liberally rewarded on bringing or sending them to the pope. Leo founded the first professorship in Italy of the Syriac and Chaldaic languages in the university of Bologna. With regard to the politics of the times, the pope had two leading objects in view, viz. the maintenance of that balance of power which might protect Italy from the over-bearing influence of any foreign potentate; and the aggrandizement of the house of Medici. When Francis I. succeeded to the throne of France, it was soon apparent that there would necessarily be a new war in the north of Italy.' Leo attempted to remain neuter, winch. being found to be impracticable, he joined the emperor, the Swiss, and other sovereigns against the French king and the state of Venice. The rapid successes of the French arms soon brought him to hesitate, and after the Swiss army had been defeated, the pope thought it expedient to abandon his allies, and form an union with the king of France. These two sovereigns, in the close of 1515, had an interview at Bologna, when the famous Pragmatic Sanction was abolished, and a concordat established in it stead. The death of Leo’s brother left his nephew Lorenzo the principal object of that passion for aggrandizing his family, which this pontiff felt full as strongly as any one of his predecessors, and to gratify which he scrupled no acts of injustice and tyranny. In 1516 he issued a monitory against the duke of Urbino, and upon his non-appearance, an excommunication, and then seized his whole territory, with which, together with the ducal title, he invested his nephew. In the same year a general pacification took place, though all the efforts of the pope were made to prevent it. In 1517 the expelled duke of Urbino collected an army, and, by rapid movements, completely regained his capital and dominions. Leo, excessively chagrined at this event, would gladly have engaged a crusade of all Christian princes against him. By an application, which nothing could justify, of the treasures of the church, he raised a considerable army, under the command of his nephew, and compelled the duke to resign his dominion, upon what were called honourable terms. The violation of the safe conduct, granted by Lorenzo to the duke’s secretary, who was seized at Rome, and put to torture, in order to oblige him to reveal his master’s secrets, imprints on the memory of Leo X. an indelible stain. In the same year his life was endangered by a conspiracy formed against him, in which the chief actor was cardinal Petrucci. The plan failed, and the cardinal, being decoyed to Rome, from whence he had escaped, was put to dt-ath; and his agents, as many as were discovered, were executed with horrid tortures. The conduct of Leo on this occasion was little honourable to his fortitude or clemency, and it was believed that several persons suffered as guilty who were wholly innocent of the crimes laid to their charge. To secure himself for the future, the pope, by a great stretch of his high authority, created in one day thirty-one nevr cardinals, many of them his relations and friends, who had not even risen in the.church to the dignity of. the episcopal office; but many persons also, who, from their talents and virtues, were well worthy of his choice. He bestowed upon them rich benefices and preferments, as well in the remote parts of Christendom, as in Italy, and thus formed a numerous and splendid court attached to his person, and adding to the pomp and grandeur of the capital. During the pontificate of Leo X. the reformation under Luther took its rise, humanly speaking, from the following circumstances. The unbounded profusion of this pope had rendered it necessary to devise means for replenishing his exhausted treasury; and one of those which occurred was the sale of indulgences, which were sold in Germany with such ridiculous parade of their efficacy, as to rouse the spirit of Luther, who warmly protested against this abuse in his discourses, and in a letter addressed to the elector of Mentz. He likewise published a set of propositions, in which he called in question the authority of the pope to remit sins, and made some very severe strictures on this method of raising money. His remonstrances produced considerable effect, and several of his cloth undertook to refute him. Leo probably regarded theological quarrels with contempt, and from his pontifical throne looked down upon the efforts of a German doctor with scorn; even when his interference was deemed necessary, he was inclined to lenient measures. At length, at the express desire of the emperor Maximilian, he summoned Luther to appear before the court of Rome. Permission was, however, granted for the cardinal of Gaeta to hear his defence at Augsburg. Nothing satisfactory was determined, and the pope, in 1518, published a bull, asserting his authority to grant indulgences, which would avail both the living, and the dead in purgatory. Upon this, the reformer appealed to a general council, and thus open war was declared, in which the abettors of Luther appeared with a strength little calculated upon by the court of Rome. The sentiments of the Christian world were not at all favourable to that court.” The scandal,“says the biographer,” incurred by the infamy of Alexander VI., and the violence of Julius II., was not much alleviated in the reign of a pontiff who was characterized by an inordinate love of pomp and pleasure, and whose classical taste even caused him to be regarded by many as more of a heathen than a Christian."

The warlike disposition of Selim. the reigning Turkish emperor, excited great alarms in Europe, and gave occasion to Leo to attempt a revival of the ancient crusades, by means of an alliance between all Christian princes; he probably hoped, by this show of zeal for the Christian cause, that he should recover some of his lost credit as head of the church. He had, likewise, another object in view, viz. that of recruiting his finances, by the contributions which his emissaries levied upon the devotees in different countries. By the death of Maximilian in 1519, a competition for the imperial crown between Charles V. and Francis 1. took place. Leo was decidedly against the claims of both the rival candidates, and attempted to raise a competitor in one of the German princes, but he was unable to resist the fortune of Charles. At this period he incurred a very severe domestic misfortune in the death of his nephew Lorenzo, who left an infant daughter, afterwards the celebrated Catherine de Medicis, the queen and regent of France. The death of Lorenzo led to the immediate annexation of the duchy of Urbino, with its dependencies, to the Roman see, and to the appointment of Julius, Leo’s cousin, to the supreme direction of the state of Florence. The issue of his contest with Luther will occur hereafter in our account of that reformer. It may here, however, be noticed that Leo conferred on Henry VIII. of England, the title of “Defender of the Faith,” for his appearance on the side of the church as a controversial writer. The tranquil state of Italy, at this period, allowed the pope to indulge his taste for magnificence in shows and spectacles. His private hours were chiefly devoted to indolence, or to amusements, frequently of a kind little suited to the dignity of his high station. He was not, however, so much absorbed in them as to neglect the aggrandizement of his family and see. Several cities and districts in the vicinity of the papal territories, and to which the church had claims, had been seized by powerful citizens, or military adventurers; some of these the pope summoned to his court to answer for their conduct; which not being able to do, he caused them to be put to death. Having next set his heart on the possession of the territory of Ferrara, he had recourse to treachery, and is thought to have even meditated the assassination of the duke, but his plot being discovered by the treachery of one whom he had bribed, he was disappointed in his plans. Another of his designs was the expulsion of the French from Italy,* and he had made some progress in this when he was seized with an illness which put an end to his life in a few days. He died Dec. 1, 1521, in the forty-sixth year of his age.

From the preceding circumstances, gleaned from Mr. Roscoe’s elaborate account of Leo, a judgment may be formed of his character, in which, although some things may have been exaggerated by the enemies of the Romish church, enough remains uncontested to prove that he had many of the worst vices, and, when it became necessary to his aggrandizement, practised the worst crimes of his predecessors. His biographer, by embodying the history of literature and the arts in the life of Leo, one of the most pleasing and truly valuable parts of the work, has, we think, failed, in attributing much of their advancement to Leo. And indeed it has been too much a fashion to speak of the “age of Leo” as of a glorious period which his patronage created. Too much stress, perhaps, is frequently laid on patronage; and we ought to hesitate in declaring how much it has produced, when we consider how much in all ages has been produced without it. But Leo’s patronage was not general, for it excluded Ariosto and Erasmus, two of the greatest men of the age; nor was it judicious in selection, for he bestowed it on such worthless characters as Aretin and Niso, not to speak of a number of less known characters, whose merit rises no higher than that of being able to write amorous Italian sonnets, and panegyrical Latin verses. With respect to the arts, it has been justly remarked, that when he ascended the throne they were at their meridian. He found greater talents than he employed, and greater works commenced than he completed. Leonard Da Vinci, Michael Angelo, and Raffaello, performed their greatest works before the accession of Leo X.; Bramante, the architect of St. Peter’s, died in the second year of his pontificate; and Da Vinci and Michael Angelo shared none of his favours. It is from his attachment to Raflfaello that he derives his strongest claims as a patron of art; yet a part of his conduct to this great artist makes us question whether Leo had a refined taste. Raffaello made thirteen cartoons of religious subjects to complete the decoration of the hall of Constantine, and had sent them into Flanders, to be returned in worsted copies, without any care to preserve the originals, nor any inquiry made concerning them after the subjects were manufactured into tapestry. By accident, seven of these are yet to be seen in this country, and may enable us to estimate the taste of the pontiff who could so easily forget them. Yet Leo must not be deprived of the merit that justly belongs to him. He drew together the learned men of his time, and formed eminent schools, and he did much in promoting the art of printing, then of incalculable importance to literature. In these respects, and upon account of the share he had in precipitating the reformation, his short pontificate of eight years and eight months must be allowed to form one of the most interesting periods in papal history, and worthy of the illustration it has received.

emperor of the East, surnamed The Wise, and the Philosopher, succeeded his father Basilius the Macedonian, March 1, 886. He drove Photius from the see of Constantinople, fought with success against the Hungarians and Bulgarians, and died June 11, 911, leaving one son> Constantine Porphyrogeneta. This emperor was surnamed The Philosopher, from his attachment to learning, and not from his manners, which were very irregular. He was fond of writing sermons, and there are several of his composing in the library of the fathers. The following works are also attributed to him; a treatise on Tactics, a useful work for those who would acquire a knowledge of the lower empire it was printed in German by Bourscheid, at Vienna, and in French by M. de Maiserrti, 1770, 2 vols. 8vo “Novelise Constitutiones,” in which several of the novels introduced by Justinian are abolished; “Opus Basilicon,” where all the laws contained in Justinian’s works are new modelled. This system of law was adopted by the Greeks afterwards. In Constantine Manasses, printed at the Louvre, may be found “Leonis sapientis oracula.”

, or Leo Urbevetanus, a native of that city, is said by some to have been a Franciscan, and by others a Dominican. He left a “Chronicle” of the popes, which ends in 1314, and one of the “Emperors,” ending 1308, published by father Lamy, at Florence, 1737, 2 vols. 8vo. These chronicles are useful for the history of those times, to those who can distinguish the fabulous parts.

, an Italian mathematician, who flourished at the commencement of the thirteenth century, was the first person who brought into Europe the knowledge of the Arabic cyphers and algebra. He travelled into the East for instruction, and being at Bugia, a town in Africa, was taught the Arabic method of keeping accounts, and finding it more convenient and preferable to the European method, he drew up a treatise for the purpose of introducing it into Italy, where it was cultivated with success, and became speedily known to all mathematicians From Italy the knowledge of the Arabic cyphers and algebra was afterwards communicated to the other countries of Europe. He was author of a treatise on surveying,preserved in the Magliabecchi library at Florence.

, an eminent Italian phy-, sician, was born in one of the Venetian states in 1428. He was professor of medicine at Ferrara during upwards of, sixty years, and was the first person who undertook to translate the works of Galen into Latin. His attachment to literary pursuits alienated him from practice; and in excuse he used to say, “I do more service to the public than if I visited the sick, by instructing those who are to cure them.” Extending his attention also to the belles lettres, he wrote some poetry, and translated into Italian the history of Dion Cassius, and the dialogues of Lucian. Until the age of thirty, Leonicenus was tormented with frequent attacks of epilepsy, which reduced him at times to melancholy and despair. This disease, however, afterwards left him, and, by means of great regularity and temperance, he attained the age of ninety-six years, and died in 1524, possessed of all his faculties. To one who in quired, with astonishment, by what secret he had preserved this entire possession of his faculties, together with an erect body and vigorous health, at so great an age, he replied, that it was the effect of innocence of manners, tranquillity of mind, and frugality in diet. The duke and senate of. Ferrara erected a monument to his memory. He left several works, most of which have been several times reprinted, but are not now in request, except perhaps his examination of the errors of Pliny, &c. “Plinii et aliorurn plurimum auctorum qui de simplicibus medicaminibui scripserunt, crrores notati,” Bude, 1532, folio, which involved him in a controversy, sustained with his usual tranquillity; and his “Liber de Epidemia quam Itali morbum Gallicum vocant,” Venice, 1497, 4to, a book of great rarity. He was the first in Italy who treated of this disorder 1 There is an edition of all his works, printed at Bale, 1533, fol.

, a poet of Scotland, who flourished in the thirteenth century, is familiarly known by the name of Thomas the Rhymer. The history of his life is involved in much obscurity. What has been unravelled may be seen in our authority. He was a prophet as well as a poet. His merit in the former character may be disputed, but of his poetical talents, Mr. Walter Scott has enabled the public to judge, by giving an excellent edition of his metrical romance of “Sir Tristrem,” published in 1804, and very ably illustrated with notes, &c. by Mr. Scott, who has in this work shown that the most arduous labours of the antiquary are not incompatible with the genius and spirit of the poet.

, a native of Mitylene, who flourished in the first century of the Christian aera, was a disciple of Timocrates, afterwards became a teacher of philosophy in his native city, and obtained a great number of scholars. He was author of many books of philosophy, and Photius says he had read sixteen orations written by him. Two of these were first published by Aldus, in his edition of the ancient orators, in 1513; afterwards by Henry Stephens, with the orations of JEschines, Lysias, and others; and in 1619, by Gruter. Lesbonax is said. to have been the author of a treatise “De Figuris Grammaticis,” printed with Ammonius, Leyden, 1739, 4to. He left a son named Potamon, an eminent rhetorician at Rome, in the reign of the emperor Tiberius. So sensible were the magistrates of Mitylene of his merits, and of the utility of his labours, that they caused a medal to be struck in his honour: one of which was discovered in the south of France about 1740, and an engraving of it, with a learned dissertation, published in the year 174-4, by M. Gary, of the Academy of Marseilles, but there seems some reason to think that Lesbonax the philosopher, and Lesbonax the grammarian, were different persons.

, a celebrated Dutch printer, was born in 1610 of an illustrious family at Geneva, which removed to Holland, where his press became famous for the number of beautiful and accurate editions which issued from it. He was also esteemed an excellent poet; and his daughter, Catherine Lescaille, who died June 8, 1711, was so much admired for her poetical talents, as to be called the Dutch Sappho, and the tenth Muse. A collection of her Poems was printed in 1728, with the following tragedies: Genseric, Wenceslaus, Herod and Mariamne, Hercules and Deianira, Nicomedes, Ariadne, Cassandra, &c. which, although they are not written according to the ordinary rules of the drama, frequently discover marks of superior genius. James Lescaille was honoured with the poetic crown by the emperor Leopold in 1663, and died in 1677.

, the celebrated bishop of Ross in Scotland, was descended from a very ancient family, and bora in 1527. He had his education in the university of Aberdeen; and, in 1547, was made canon of the cathedralchurch of Aberdeen and Murray. After this, he travelled into France; and pursued his studies in the universities of Thoulouse, Poictiers, and Paris, at which place he took the degree 01 doctor of laws. He continued abroad till 1554, when he was commanded home by the queen-regent, and made official and vicar-general of the diocese of Aberdeen; and, entering into the priesthood, became parson of Une, or Oyne. About this time the doctrines of the reformation having reached Scotland, were zealously opposed by our author; and, a solemn dispute being held between the protestants and papists in 1560, at Edinburgh, Lesley was a principal champion on the side of the latter, and had Knox for one of his antagonists. This, however, was so far from putting an end to the divisions, that they daily increased; which occasioning many disturbances and commotions, both parties agreed to send deputations, inviting home the queen, who was then absent in France. It was a matter of importance to be expeditious in this race of politic courtesy; and Lesley, who was employed by the Roman catholics, made such dispatch, that he arrived several days before lord James Stuart, who was sent by the protestants, to Vitri, where queen Mary was then lamenting the death of her husband, the king of France. Having delivered to her his credentials, he told her majesty of lord James Stuart’s (who was her natural brother) coming from the protestants in Scotland, and of his designs against the Roman catholic. religion; and advised her to detain him in France by some honourable employment till she could settle her affairs at home; thus infusing suspicions of her protestant subjects into the queen’s mind, with a view that she should throw herself entirely into the hands of those who were of her own religion. The queen, however, not at all distrusting the nobility, who had sent lord James, desired Lesley to wait, till she could consult with her friends upon the methods most proper for her to take. At first, the court of France opposed her return home; but, finding her much inclined to it, they ordered a fleet to attend her; and Lesley embarked with her at Calais for Scotland, Aug. 19, 1561.

Soon after his arrival, he was appointed one of the senators of the college of justice, and sworn into the privycouncil. In 1564, the abbey of Lundores was conferred upon him; and, upon the death of Sinclair bishop of Ross, he was promoted to that see. This advancement was no more than he merited from the head of the Roman church in Scotland, in whose defence he was always an active and able disputant with the reformed party. His learning was not inferior to his other attainments; nor was his attention so entirely absorbed in ecclesiastical matters, as to prevent his introducing some important improvements in the civil state of the kingdom. To this end, having observed that all the ancient laws were growing obsolete, for want of being collected into a body, he represented this matter to the queen, and prevailed with her majesty to appoint proper persons for the work. Accordingly, a commission was made out, granting to Lesley, and fifteen others, privycounsellors and advocates in the law, authority to print the same. Thus it is to the care principally of the bishop of Ross, that the Scots owe the first impression of their laws at Edinburgh, in 1566, commonly called the black acts of parliament, from their being printed in the black Saxon character. Upon the queen’s flying into England from her protestant subjects, who had taken up arms against her, queen Elizabeth appointed commissioners at York to examine the case between her and them, and bishop Lesley was one of those chosen by Mary, in 1568, to defend her cause, which he did with great vigour and strength of reasoning; and, when this method proved ineffectual, appeared afterwards in the character of ambassador at the English court, to complain of the injustice done to his queen. Finding no notice taken of his public solicitations, he began to form schemes to procure her escape privately, and at the same time seems to have been concerned with foreign courts in conspiracies against queen Elizabeth. With a view, however, to serve queen Mary, he hit upon the unfortunate expedient of negotiating her marriage with the duke of Norfolk; which being discovered, the duke was convicted of treason, and executed. Lesley being examined upon it, pleaded the privileges of an ambassador; alleging, that he had done nothing but what his place and duty demanded for procuring the liberty of his princess; and that he came into England with sufficient warrant and authority, which he had produced, and which had been admitted. It was answered, that the privileges of ambasjadors could not protect those who offended against the majesty of the princes to whom they were sent; and that they werfe to be considered in no other light than as enemies who practised rebellion against the state. To this our prelate replied, that he had neither raised nor practised rebellion; but, perceiving the adversaries of queen Mary countenanced, and her deprived of all hope of liberty, he could not abandon his sovereign in her afflictions, but do his best to procure her freedom; and that it would never be found that the privileges of ambassadors were violated, via juris, by course of law, but only via facti, by way of fact, which seldom had good success.

At length, after several debates, five civilians, Lewis, Dale, Drury, Aubry, and Jones, were appointed to ejamine the bishop of Ross’s case, and to give in answers to the following queries. 1. Whether an ambassador, who raises rebellion against the prince to whom he is sent, should enjoy the privileges of an ambassador, and not rather be liable to punishment as an enemy? To this it was answered, that such an ambassador, by the laws of nations, and the civil law of the Romans, has forfeited the privileges of an ambassador, and is liable to punishment. 2. Whether the minister or agent of a prince deposed from his public authority, and in whose stead another is substituted, may enjoy the privileges of an ambassador? To this it was answered, if such a prince be lawfully deposed, his agent cannot challenge the privileges of an ambassador, since none but absolute princes, and such as enjoy a royal prerogative, can constitute ambassadors. 3. Whether a prince, who comes into another prince’s country, and is there kept prisoner, can have his agent, and whether that agent can be reputed an ambassador? To this it was answered, if such a prince have not lost his sovereignty, he may have an agent; but whether that agent may be reputed an ambassador, dependeth upon the authority of his commission. 4. Whether if a prince declare to such an agent, and his prince in custody, that he shall no longer be reputed an ambassador, that agent may, by law, challenge the privileges of an ambassador? To this it was answered, that a prince may forbid an ambassador to enter into his kingdom, and may command him to depart the kingdom, if he keep himself not within the bounds prescribed to an ambassador; yet in the mean while he is to enjoy the privileges of an ambassador Queen Elizabeth and her cdunsel being satisfied with these answers of the civilians, sent bishop Lesley prisoner to the isle of Ely, and afterwards to the Tower of London; but at length he was set at liberty in 1573, and being banished England, he retired to the Netherlands. The two following years he employed in soliciting the kings of France and Spain, and all the German princes, to interest themselves in the deliverance of his mistress. Finding them tardy in their proceedings, he went to Rome, to solicit the pope’s interference with them, but all his efforts being fruitless, he had recourse to his pen, and published several pieces to promote the same design. In 1579, he was made suffragan and vicar-general of the archbishopric of Rouen in Normandy, and, in his visitation of that diocese, was apprehended and thrown into prison, and obliged to pay three thousand pistoles for his ransom, to prevent his being given op to queen Elizabeth. He then remained unmolested under the protection of Henry III. of France; but, upon the accession of Henry IV. a protestant, who was supported in his claim to that crown by queen Elizabeth, he was apprehended, in his visitation through his diocese, in 1590; and, being thrown into prison, was again obliged to pay three thousand pistoles, to save himself from being given up to Elizabeth. In 1593, he was declared bishop of Constance, with licence to hold the bishopric of Ross, till he should obtain peaceable possession of the church of Constance and its revenues. Some time after this, he went and resided at Brussels; and when no hopes remained of his returning to his bishopric of Ross, by the establishment of the reformation under king James, he retired into a monastery at Guirtenburg, about two miles from Brussels, where he passed the remainder of his days, died May 31, 1596, and lies buried there under a monument erected to his memory by his nephew and heir, John Lesley.

Bishop Lesley’s writings are, 1. “Afflicti Aninw Consolationes, & tranquilli Animi Conservatio,” Paris, 1574, 8vo. 2. “De Origine, Moribus, & Rebus gestis Scotorum,” Romae, 1578, 4to. It consists of ten books, of which the three last, making half the volume, are dedicated to queen Mary; to whom they had been presented in English, seven years before the first publication in Latin. There are separate copies of them in several libraries. See Catalog, Mss. Oxon. This valuable history is carried down to the queen’s return from France in 1561. He seems unwilling to divulge what he knew of some transactions after that period. “Some things,” says he, “savoured so much of ingratitude and perfidy, that, although it were very proper they should be known, yet it were improper for me to record them, because often, with the danger of my life, I endeavoured to put a stop to them; and I ought to do all that is in me, not to let them be known unto strangers.” With this work are published, 3. “Paraenesis ad Nobilitatem Populumque Scotorum” and, 4. “Regionum & Insularum Scotiae Descriptio.” 5.“” Defence of the Honour of Mary Queen of Scotland; with a Declaration of her right, title, and interest, to the crown of England,“Liege, 1571, 8vo, which was immediately suppressed. 6.” A Treatise, shewing, that the Regimen of Women is conformable to the Law of God and Nature.“These two last are ascribed, by Parsons the Jesuit, to Morgan Philips, but Camden asserts them to be our author’s, Annal. Eliz. sub. ann. 1569. 7.” DeTitulo & Jure Marias Scotorum Reginae, quo Anglias Successionem Jure sibi vindicat,“Rheims, 1580, 4to. 8. There is a ms. upon the same subject in French, entitled” Remonstrance au Pape,“&c. Cotton library, Titus, cxii. 1. and F. 3. 14. 9.” An Account of his Embassage in. England, from 1568 to 1572,“ms. in the advocates’ library in Scotland. Catal. of Oxford Mss. 10.” An Apology for the Bishop of Ross, as to what is laid to his Charge concerning the Duke of Norfolk,“ms. in the library of the lord Longueville. 11.” Several Letters in the hands of Dr. George Mackenzie," who wrote his life.

, bishop of Cloghcr in Ireland, was descended from an ancient family, and born at Balquhaine, in the north of Scotland. The first part of his education was at Aberdeen, whence he removed to Oxford. Afterwards he travelled into Spain, Italy, Germany, and France: he spoke French, Spanish, and Italian, with the same propriety and fluency as the natives; and was so great a master of the Latin, that it was said of him, when in Spain, Solus Lcsleius Latine loquitur. He continued twenty-two years abroad; and, during that time, was at the siege of Rochelle, and the expedition to the isle of Rhee, with the duke of Buckingham. He was all along conversant in courts, and at home was happy in that of Charles I. who admitted him into his privy. council both in Scotland and Ireland; in which stations he was continued by Charles II. after the restoration. His chief preferment in the church of Scotland was the bishopric of the Orkneys, whence he was translated to Raphoe in Ireland, in 1633; and, the same year, sworn a privy-counsellor in that kingdom. He built a stately palace in his diocese, in the form and strength of a castle, one of the finest episcopal palaces in Ireland, and proved to be useful afterwards in the rebellion of 1641, by preserving a good part of that country. The good bishop exerted himself, as much as he could, in defence of the royal cause, and endured a siege in his castle of Raphoe, before he would surrender it to Oliver Cromwell, being the last which held out in that country. He then retired to Dublin, where he always used the liturgy of the church of Ireland in his family, and even had frequent confirmations and ordinations. After the restoration, he came over to England; and, in 1661, was translated to the see of Clogher. He died in 1671, aged above 100 3'ears, having been above 50 years a bishop; and was then consequently the oldest bishop in the world.

As the papists had got possession of an episcopal see, they engrossed other offices too; and a popish high-sheriff was appointed for the county of Monaghan. This proceeding alarmed the gentlemen in that country; who, depending much on Leslie’s knowledge as a justice of peace, repaired to him, then confined by the gout to his house. He told them, that it would be as illegal in them to permit the sheriff to act, as it would be in him to attempt it. But they insisted that himself should appear in person on the bench, at the approaching quarter-sessions, and all promised to act as he did; so he was carried there with much difficulty, and in great pain. Upon the question, whether the sheriff was legally qualified, the latter replied, “That he was of the king’s own religion, and it was his majesty’s will that he should be sheriff.” Leslie then observed, “That they were not inquiring into his majesty’s religion, but whether he (the pretended sheriff) had qualified himself according to law, for acting as a proper officer; that the law was the king’s will, and nothing else to be deemed such; that his subjects had no other way of knowing his will but as it is revealed to them in his laws; and it must always be thought to continue so, till the contrary is notified to them in the same authentic manner.” This argument was so convincing, that the bench unanimously agreed to commit the sheriff for his intrusion and arrogant contempt of the court. Leslie also committed gome officers of that tumultuous army which the lord Tyrconnel raised, for robbing the country.

In this spirited conduct Leslie acted like a sound divine and an upright magistrate; but, while he thought himself authorized to resist the illegal mandates of his sovereign, be never approved of carrying these principles of resistance so far as to deprive the king of the supreme power; and persevering steadily in that opinion, he continued, after the revolution, in allegiance to king James. In consequence, refusingto take the new oaths appointed upon that change, he lost all his preferments and in 1689, when the troubles began to arise in Ireland, withdrew, with his family, into England. Here he employed his time in writing a great many political pieces in support of the cause he had embraced; and being confessedly a person of extraordinary wit and learning, he became a very formidable champion of the nonjurors. His first piece in this cause was an answer to Abp. King’s “State of the Protestants in Ireland, under the late King James’s Government,” in which he shewed himself as averse from the principles and practices of the Irish and other Papists, as he was from those of the author whom he refuted. Neither did his sufferings make him forget his duty to the church of England; in defence of which he shewed himself a strenuous champion against the quakers, many of whom were converted by him. But, as these converts were desirous of returning to presbytery, whence they had last sprung, he was obliged to treat the subject of church government in defence of episcopacy. He likewise employed his pen in the general cause of the Christian religion, against Jews, Deists, and Socinians. In the mean time, however, these writings, and his frequent visits to the courts of St. Germain’s and Bar le Due, rendered him obnoxious to the government; but he became more so upon the publication of the “Hereditary Right of the Crown of England asserted;” of which he was the reputed author. Finding himself, on this account, under a necessity of leaving the kingdom, he repaired to the Pretender at Bar le Due; where he was allowed to officiate, in a private chapel, after the rites of the Church of England; and it is said he took much pains to convert the Pretender to the Protestant religion, but in vain . However, to promote the said Pretender’s interest, when some hopes of his restoration were entertained by his party in England, he wrote a letter from Bar le Due, dated April 23, 1714, which was printed and dispersed among his adherents, in which, after giving a flattering description of the Pretender’s person and character, his graceful mien, magnanimity of spirit, devotion free from bigotry, application to business, ready apprehension, sound judgment, and affability, so that none conversed with him without being charmed with his good sense and temper; he concludes with a proposal, “on condition of his being restored to his crown, that, for the security of the church of England as by law established, he would so far wave his prerogative, in the nomination of bishops, deans, and all other ecclesiastical preferments in the gift of the crown, that five bishops should be appointed, of which the archbishop of Canterbury for the time being always to be one, who, upon any vacancy, might name three persons to him, from whom he would chuse.” Many other proposals of the like nature were made soon after, and several projects were concerted not only in England, but an actual insurrection begun in Scotland by his party, in 1715, all which ended in the crushing and dispersing of the rebels, and in the Pretender’s being obliged to leave the French dominions.

As to his character, Bayle styles him “a man of merit and learning,” and tellsus, that he was the first who wrote in Great Britain against the errors of madam Bourignon. His books, adds he, are much esteemed, and especially his treatise of “The Snake in the Grass.” Salmon observes, that his works must transmit him to posterity as a man thoroughly learned and truly pious. Mr. Harris, the continuator of Ware, informs us that Leslie made several converts from popery; and says, that notwithstanding his mistaken opinions about government, and a few other matters, he deserves the highest praise for defending the Christian religion against Deists, Jews, Quakers, and for admirably well supporting the doctrines of the church of England against those of Rome. The author of the “Freeholder’s Journal/' immediately after the death of Mr, Leslie, observed, that when the popish emissaries were most active in poisoning the minds of the people, Mr. Leslie was equally vigilant in exposing, both in public and private, the errors and absurdities of the Romish doctrines. Yet, upon the abdication of king James, he resigned his livings, followed his fortunes, and adhered firmly to his interests; and, after his demise, to those of the Pretender. Notwithstanding his well-known attachment to the Jacobite interest, and, his frequent visits to the court of St. Germain’s, he was not much molested by the government till a little before Sacheverell’s trial, when he attacked Bp. Burnet rather warmly, in a pamphlet called” The good Old Cause, or Lying in Truth," in which he endeavoured to prove, from the bishop’s former works, the truth of that doctrine for which the doctor was prosecuted by the Commons, and violently inveighed against the bishop himself.

“A charge, however,” says the writer whom we have already quoted in the preceding note, “has been lately brought against him of such a nature, as, if well founded, must detract, not only from his literary fame, but also from his integrity. `The short and easy Method with the Deists’ is unquestionably his most valuable, and, apparently, his most original work; yet this tract is published in French among the works of the abbé St. Real, who died in 1692; and therefore it has been said, that unless it was published in English prior to that period, Charles Leslie must be considered as a shameless plagiary.”

II. Against the Presbyterians: 10. “A Discourse, shevring who they are that are now qualified to administer Baptism,” &c. 11. “The History of Sin and Heresy,” &c. 1698, 8vo.

, a distinguished German writer, was born at Kamenz, in Pomerania, in 1729. His father, who was a man of talents and learning, had destined himself to an academical life, but was called to take charge of a congregation at Kamenz, the place of his nativity. Here he was in correspondence with the most famous preachers of his time, published some works of his own, and translated several treatises of AbjJ. Tillotson. He also left behind him a manuscript refutation of some prejudices against the reformation. There can be no doubt but the example and cares of so learned and thoughtful a father had no inconsiderable influence on the early turn which Lessing shewed for literature. When, in his sixth year, his father chose to have his picture drawn, in which he was to be represented sitting under a tree playing with a bird, young Lessing shewed his utter dislike to the plan, and said, “if I am to be painted, let me be drawn with a great heap of books about me, otherwise I had rather not be painted at all;” which was accordingly done. He passed five entire years at the high-school at Meissen, to which, by his own account, he was indebted for whatever learning and solidity of thinking he possessed. Though the Latin poetry belongs to the officiis perfectis of a scholar in this academy, and the German poetry to the imperfectis, yet he pursued the latter much more than the former, and celebrated the battle of Kesseldorf in German verse, at the request of his father. Professor Klemm particularly encouraged him to the-study of mathematics and philosophy while Grabner, the rector of the academy, wrote to his father concerning them “He is a colt that requires a double allowance of provender. The lessons that are found too difficult for others, are but child’s play to him. We shall hardly be sufficient for him much longer.” Being removed to Leipsic, he soon displayed his inclination to write for the stage, and likewise made great proficiency in the bodily exercises of horsemanship, fencing, dancing, and leaping. Mr. Weisse was his first and principal friend at this place; and their friendship was only dissolved by death. Lessing frequented the college-exercises but little, and that irregularly: none of the professors gave him satisfaction, excepting Ernesti, whose lectures he sometimes attended; but he was himself an extensive reader, and was especially partial to the writings of Wolff in German. He kept up a great intimacy with Naumann, the author of “Nimrod,” on account of his possessing many singular qualities, which were always more agreeable to Lessing, than the common dull monotony of character, even though mingled with some weaknesses and defects. Under Kastner he exercised himself in disputation; and here began his close connection with Mylius, whose works he after-, wards published. His intercourse with this free-thinker, and with the company of comedians, however, gave great uneasiness to his parents. His first literary productions appeared in a Hamburgh newspaper. In company with M. Weisse, he translated “Hannibal,” the only tragedy of Marivaux, into rhyming Alexandrines. His comedy of the “Young Scholar,” which he had begun while a schoolboy, was finished at Leipsic, from an actual event that happened to a young scholar disappointed in his hopes of the prize from the academy at Berlin. His father about this time thought proper to recall him home for a time, in order to wean him from the bad company he was thought to frequent. In this interval, he composed a number of Anacreontics on love and wine. One day, his pious sister coming into his room, in his absence, saw these sonnets, read them over, and, not a little angry that her brother could so employ his time, threw them into the fire. A trifling burst of resentment was all he felt on the occasion. He took a handful of snow, and threw it into her bosom, in order to cool her zeal. He now went back to Leipzig; which place he soon after quitted, going by Wittenberg to Berlin. This gave his father fresh uneasiness; and produced those justificatory letters of his son, which at least display the frankness of his character. At Berlin, in conjunction with Mylius, he compiled the celebrated “Sketch of the History and Progress of the Drama.” The father of a writer who had been sharply criticised in this work, made complaint of it to Lessing’s father. To this person he wrote in answer: “The critique is mine, and I only lament that I did not make it more severe. Should Gr. complain of the injustice of my judgment, I give him full liberty to retaliate, as he pleases on my works.” One of his first acquaintances in Berlin was a certain Richier de Louvain, who, in 1750, from a French teacher, was become secretary to Voltaire, with whom he brought our author acquainted. From Berlin he went to Wittenberg, where he plied his studies with great diligence, and took the degree of master, but remained only one year, and then returned to Berlin. At Berlin he undertook the literary article for the periodical publication of Voss, in which employment he both wrote and translated a great variety of pieces, and formed several plans which were never executed. Among others, he agreed with Mendelsohn to write a journal, under the title of “The best from bad Books:” with the motto taken from St. Ambrose, “Legimus aliqua ne legantur.” “We read some books to save others the trouble.” Jn 1755, he went back to Leipzic, and thence set out upon a journey, in company with a young man of the name of Winkler: but this was soon interrupted, and brought op a law-suit, in which Lessing came off conqueror. He now, in order to please his sister, translated “Law’s serious Call,” which was finished and published by Mr. Weisse. At the beginning of 1759, Lessing went again to Berlin, where he very much addicted himself to gaming. This has been attributed to his situation at Breslaw, where he was in the seven years war for some time in quality of secretary to general Tauenzien. Even the care for his health was conducive to it. “Were I able to play calmly,” said he, “I would not play at all; but it is not without reason that I play with eagerness. The vehement agitation sets my clogged machine in motion, by forcing the fluids into circulation; it frees me from a bodily torment, to which I am often subject.” His intimate friends among the learned at Breslaw were Arletius and Klose. Here he was attacked by a violent fever. Though he suffered much from the disease, yet be declared that his greatest torment arose from the conversations of his physician, old Dr. Morganbesser, which he could scarcely endure when he was well. When the fever was at its height, he lay perfectly quiet, with great significance in his looks. This so much struck his friend standing by- the bed, that he familiarly asked him what he was thinking of? “I am curious to know what will pass in my mind when I am in the act of dying.” Being told that was impossible, he abruptly replied: “You want to cheat me.” On the day of his reception into the order of free-masons at Hamburgh, one of his friends, a zealous free-mason, took him aside into an adjoining room, and asked him, “Is it not true, now, that you find nothing among us against the government, religion, or morals” “Yes,” answered Lessmg, with great vivacity, “would to heaven I had I should then at least have found something” The extent of his genius must be gathered from his numerous writings. Mendelsohn said of him in a letter to his brother, shortly after his death, that he was advanced at least a century before the age in which he lived.

lu 1762, he accompanied his general to the siege of Schweidnitz; but after the peace, he was introduced to the king of Prussia, and then resumed his literary occupations at Berlin. Though he produced many works, yet they were not the source of much profit, and, in 1769, his circumstances were so narrow, that he was obliged to sell his library for support. At this critical juncture he met with a generous patron in Leopold, heir-apparent to the duke of Brunswick, through whose means he was appointed librarian at Wolfenbuttle. One of the fruits of this very desirable situation was a periodical publication, entitled “Contributions to Literary History,” containing notices and extracts of the most remarkable Mss. The “Contributions” were made the vehicle of “Fragments of an anonymous Writer discovered in the Library at Wolfenbuttle,” which consisted of direct attacks upon the Christian revelation. They occasioned a great commotion among the German theologians, and would not have been printed but for the interference of prince Leopold with the licensers of the press. In 1778 they were suppressed. Lessing, from his rising fame, and connection with prince Leopold, with whom he went on a tour to Italy, was so distinguished among the German literati, that several potentates of that country made him offers. of an advantageous settlement. Nothing, however, could lead him to break his connection with his liberal patron the prince of Brunswick, who, by his accession in 1730 to the sovereignty, was enabled to augment his favours towards him. His latter publications were “Nathan the Wise;” a second part of the same drama, entitled “The Monk of Lebanon;” and “A Dissertation on the Education of the Human Race.” He died at Hamburgh in the month of February, 1781. Lessing had more genius than learning, and his fame, therefore, even in his own country, rests on his plays, fables, songs, and epigrams. His life was published at Berlin in 1793, and is more replete with anecdote than instruction, as may be gathered from the few circumstances we have detailed. He was a decided deist, and his morals corresponded.

L‘Estrange (Sir Roger), was descended from an ancient and reputable family, seated at Hunstanton-hall, Norfolk; where he was born Dec. 17, 1616. He was the youngest son of sir Hamond L’Estrange, knt. a zealous royalist during the disputes between king Charles and his parliament; who, having his estate sequestered, retired to Lynn, of which town he was made governor. The son had a liberal education, which was completed probably at Cambridge; and adopted his father’s principles with uncommon zeal, and in 1639, when about two-and- twenty, attended king Charles upon his expedition to Scotland, his attachment to whom some years after neatly cost him his life. In 1644, soon after the earl of Manchester had reduced the town of Lynn in Norfolk, Mr. L'Estrange, thinking he had sorpe interest in the place, as his father had been governor of it, formed a plan for surprizing it, and received a commission from the king, constituting him governor of the town in case of success: but, being seized, in consequence of the treachery of two of his associates, Leman and Hager, and his majesty’s commission found upon him, he was carried first to Lynn, thence to London, and there transmitted to the city court-martial for his trial; where, after suffering all manner of indignities, he was, as Whitlocke says, condemned to die as a spy, coming from the king’s quarters without drum, trumpet, or pass.

This appearance at the court of Cromwell was much censured, after the restoration, by some of the royal party, who also objected to him, that he had once been heard playing in a concert where the usurper was present, and, therefore, they nick-named him “Oliver’s Fidler.” He was charged also with having bribed some of the protector’s people, but he positively disavows it; averring, he never spoke to Thurloe but once in his life about his discharge; and that, though during the dependency of that affair he might well be seen at Whitehall, yet he never spoke to Cromwell on any other business, or had the least commerce of any kind with him. From this to the time of the restoration, he seems to have lived free from any disturbance from the then governing powers; and perhaps the obscurity into which he had fallen made him be overlooked by Charles II. and his ministry, on that prince’s recovering his throne. He did not, however, so undervalue his own sufferings and merits, as to put up quietly with this usage, and therefore addressed a warm expostulation to the earl of Clarendon, in the dedication to that minister of his “Memento,” published in 1662; where he joins himself with other neglected cavaliers, who had suffered for their attachment to the royal family during the civil wars and the succeeding usurpation, at the same tima acknowledging the personal obligations he had received from Clarendon. For some time his remonstrances appear to have produced little effect, but at length he was made licenser of the press, a profitable post, which he enjoyed till the eve of the revolution. This, however, was all the recompence he ever received, except being in the commission of the peace, after more than twenty years, as he says, spent in serving the royal cause, near six of them in gaols, and almost four under a sentence of death in Newgate. It is true, he hints at greater things promised him; and, in these hopes, exerted his talents, on behalf of the crown, in publishing several pieces. In 1663, for a farther support, he set up a paper, called “The Public Intelligencer, and the News;' f the first of which came out the 1st of August, and continued to be published twice a week, till January 19, 1665; when he laid it down, on the design then concerted of publishing the” London Gazette,“the first of which papers made its appearance on. Saturday Feb. 4. After the dissolution of Charles’s second parliament, in 1679, he set up a paper, called” The Observator;“the design of which was to vindicate the measures of the court, and the character of the king, from the charge of being popislily affected. With the same spirit he exerted himself in 1681, in ridiculing the popish plot; which he did with such vehemence, that it raised him many enemies, who endeavoured, notwithstanding his known loyalty, to render him obnoxious to the government. But he appeared with no less vehemence against the fanatic plot in 1682; and, in 1683, was particularly employed by the court to publish Dr. Tillotson’s papers exhorting lord Russel to avow the doctrine of non-resistance, a little before his execution. In this manner he weathered all the storms raised against him during that reign, and, in the next, unrewarded with the honour of knighthood, accompanied with this declaration,” that it was in consideration of his eminent services and unshaken loyalty to the crown, in all extremities; and as a mark of the singular satisfaction of his majesty, in his present as well as his past services.“In 1687, he was obliged to lay down his” Observator,“now swelled to three volumes; as he could not agree with the toleration proposed by his majesty, though, in all other respects, he had gone the utmost lengths. He had even written strenuously in defence of the dispensing power, claimed by that infatuated prince; and this was probably one reason, why some accused him of having become a proselyte to the church of Home, an accusation which gave him much uneasiness, and which was heightened by his daughter’s defection to that church. To clear himself from this aspersion, he drew up a formal declaration, directed to his kinsman, sir Nicolas L'Estrange, on the truth of which he received the sacrament at the time of publishing the same, which is supposed to be in 1690 . By this declaration we find he was married his lady’s name was Anne Doleman but what issue he had by her, besides the just- mentioned daughter, has not come to our knowledge. After the revolution, he seems to have been left out of the commission of the peace; and, it is said, queen Mary shewed her contempt of him by the following anagram she made upon his name,” Lying- Strange Roger:" and it is certain he met with some trouble, for the remainder of his life, on account of his being a disaffected person.

Among others who attacked the character of sir Roger, was the noted Miles Prance, who was convicted of perjury in the affair of the murder of sir Edmundbury Godfrey. Echard, in his History of England, gives us an anecdote of these two worthies which seems characteristic of both parties. Echard says that Dr. Sharp told him, when archbishop of York, that while he was rector of St. Giles’s in the Fields, L‘Estrange, the famous Richard Baxter, and Miles Prance, on a certain sacrament-day, all approached the communion-table; L’Estrange at one end, Prance at the other, and Baxter in the middle; that these two by their situation, were administered to before L‘Estrange, who, when it came to his turn, taking the bread in his hand, asked the doctor if he knew who that man (pointing to Prance) on the other side of the rails was, to which the doctor answering in the negative, L’Estrange replied, “That is Miles Prance, and I here challenge him, and solemnly declare before God and this congregation, that what that man has sworn or published concerning me is totally and absolutely false; and may this sacrament be my damnation if all this declaration be not true.” Echard adds, “Prance was silent, Mr. Baxter took special notice of it, and Dr. Sharp declared he would have refused Prance the sacrament had the challenge been made in time.” Sir Roger L'Estrange died Sept. 11, 1704, in the eightyeighth year of his age, during the latter part of which his faculties were impaired. His corpse was interred in the church of St. Giles’s in the Fields, where there is an inscription to his memory. He was author of many political tract*, and translated several works from the Greek, Latin, and Spanish. Among his political effusions are, “Roger L'Estrange’s Apology” “Truth and Loyalty vindicated,” c< “The Memento” “The Reformed Catholic” “The free-born Subject” “Answer to the Appeal,” &c.; “Seasonable Memorial” “Cit and Bumpkin,” in two parts “Farther Discovery;” “Case put;” “Narrative of the Plot;” “Holy Cheat;” “Toleration discussed;” “Discovery on Discovery;” “L'Estrange’s Appeal,” &c. “Collections in defence of the King” “Relapsed Apostate” “Apology for Protestants” “Richard against Baxter;” “Tyranny and Popery;” “Growth of Knavery” “L' Estrange no Papist,” &c. “The Shammer shammed” “Account cleared” “Reformation reformed” “Dissenters Sayings,” two parts “Notes on College, i. e Stephen College;” the “Protestant Joiner;” “Zekieland Ephraim;” “Papist in Masquerade;” “Answer to the Second Character of a Popish Successor;” “Considerations on lord RussePs Speech.” All these were printed in 4to. “History of the Plot” “Caveat to the Cavaliers;” “Plea for the Caveat and its Author.” These were in folio. His translations were, “Josephus’s Works,” his best performance “Cicero’s Offices” “Seneca’s Morals” “Erasmus’s Colloquies” “Æsop’s Fables” “Quevedo’s Visions” “Bona’s Guide to Eternity” and “Five Letters from a Nun to a Cavalier.” Besides these, he wrote several news-papers, and occasional pieces.

Mr. Granger has very justly remarked that L'Estrange was one of the great corruptors of the English language, and he might have added, exhibits one of the worst models of political controversy. He had, however, often to contend with men whose language was equally vulgar and intemperate; and having at all times more zeal than judgment, we can but just discover real talents in a vast mass of declamation, which few will now have patience to examine. His newspapers, and some of his political pieces, may yet be consulted with advantage for the information they contain, and the many traits of characters and manners which they exhibit; but a cautious reader will find it often necessary to verify his reports by contemporary evidence. Coarse, virulent, and abusive writers have sometimes been thought necessary to the support of political parties, and the present age is not without them; but such men leave no impression of respect on the minds even of those who employ them, and are generally condemned as the mercenary tools of a party. In the character of sir Roger L' Estrange we see not much to distinguish him from this class of writers, except that he sometimes discovers a portion of ease, elegance, and perspicuity, and might probably have displayed these qualities more frequently had he not written more from passion than reflection. It may be added too, that he was more consistent than some of his successors; and being the first who regularly “enlisted himself under the banners of a party for pay, he fought for the cause through right and wrong for upwards of forty campaigns.” This intrepidity gained him the esteem of Cromwell himself, and the papers which he wrote even just before the revolution, with almost a rope about his neck, have the same character of perseverance.

He had a brother, Hammond L'Estrange, who wrote a learned work entitled “The Alliance of Divine Offices,” and a “Life of Charles I.” Of him we find no memoirs worth transcribing. In 1760 sir Henry L'Estrange, bart. of Hunstanton, died, and with him the title became extinct.

, gentleman-commoner of Trinity college, Oxford, was the second son of John Lethieullier, esq. of Aldersbrook, in Essex, where he had a noble collection of Mss. choice books, medals, and na-, tural curiosities, which he had collected in his travels through France, Italy, and Germany. His father dying Jan. 1, 1736-7, and his elder brother being dead before, he became heir to the paternal estates, which were very considerable. He was elected F. S. A. in July 1724. He married, Feb. 6, 1725-6, Margaret, daughter of William Sloper, esq. of Woodhay, in Berkshire; but died Aug. 27, 1760, aged fifty-nine, without issue. He was succeeded in his estates, to which he had added the manor of Birch- hall in They don Bois, by Mary, only daughter of his next brother Charles Lethieullier, LL.D. fellow of All Souls college, F. A. S. and counsellor at law, who died the year before him. He was an excellent scholar, a polite gentleman, and universally esteemed by all the learned men of his time. Some papers of his are printed in Phil. Trans. No. 497, and Archseologia, I. p. 26, 57, 73, 75; II. 291. His library was sold by auction, 1760. The following eloge was written by the late Mr. Collinson immediately after the death of Mr. Lethieullier: “He was descended from an ancient family from France in time of persecution, and a gentleman every way eminent for his excellent endowments. His desire to improve in the civil and natural history of his country led him to visit all parts of it; the itineraries in his library, and the discoveries he made relating to its antiquities, with drawings of every thing remarkable, are evidences of his great application to rescue so many ancient remains from mouldering into oblivion. His happy turn of mind was not confined solely to antiquities, but in these journeys he was indefatigable in collecting all the variety of English fossils, with a view to investigate their origin: this great collection, which excels most others, is deposited in two large cabinets, disposed under their proper classes. The most rare are elegantly drawn, and described in a folio book, with his observations on them. As the variety of ancient marbles had engaged his attention, and he found so little said of them with respect to their natural history, it was one of his motives, iti visiting Italy, to furnish himself with such materials as he was able to procure from books, and learned men, relating to them. He collected specimens of the most curious, and had drawings, finely painted, of the most remarkable monuments of the ancient marbles; they are bound up in a folio volume, with all the observations he could gather relating to their natural history and antiquity. His cabinet of medals, his collection of antiquities of various kinds, and most elegant books of the finest engravings, are ‘instances of the fine taste with which he has enriched his library and cabinet with the spoils of Italy. This short but imperfect memoir is candidly offered as a tribute due to a Jong friendship. It is wished it may excite an abler pen ’to do more justice to the memory of this great and good man. But it is humbly hoped that these hints will be accepted not only as a testimony of respect, but may also inform an inquisitive genius in these branches of science where he may be assisted with such valuable materials for the prosecution of his future studies.”

His cousin, Colonel William Lethieullier, who was also F. A. S. travelled into Egypt, and brought over a very perfect mummy, now in the British museum, with most of the colonel’s collections, the rest having been in Mr. Smart Lethieullier' s hands. A committee of the trustees waited on the colonel’s executors, Feb. 23, 1756, toreturn thanks for the valuable legacy of a fine mummy, and a curious collection of English antiquities. On this occasion Pitt Lethieullier; esq. nephew to the colonel, presented them with several antiquities, which he himself had collected during his residence at Grand Cairo.

, a voluminous writer of history, was born at Milan, May 29, 1630, of a family once of considerable distinction at Bologna. He was intended for the church, but was induced to make open profession of the protestant religion at Lausanne in 1657. This so pleased Guerin, an eminent physician, with whom he lodged, that he gave him his daughter for a wife; and Leti, settling at Geneva in 1660, passed nearly twenty years in that city employed on many of his publications. In 1674, the freedom of the city was presented to him, which had never before been granted to any stranger. Five years after he went to France, and in 1680, to England, where he was very graciously received by Charles II.; received a large present in money, and was promised the place of historiographer. On this he wrote his “Teatro Britannico,” a history of England; but, this work displeasing the court, he was ordered to quit the kingdom. Leti then went to Amsterdam, had the office of historiographer in that city, and died suddenly June 9, 1701, aged seventy-one. He was an indefatigable writer, and tells us in his “Belgic Theatre,” that three days in the week he spent twelve hours in writing, and six hours the other three days; whence the number of his works is prodigious. The greatest part are written in Italian; among which are, “The Nepotism of Rome,” 2 vols. 12mo; “The Universal Monarchy of Louis XIV.” 2 vols. 12mo; “The Life of Pope Sixtus V.” in Italian, Amsterdam, 1721, 3 vols. 12mo, plates; in French, 4to, or 2 vols. 12mo and in English by Farneworth. “The Life of Philip 11. king of Spain,” 6 vols. 12mo; “Of Charles V.”. Amsterdam, 1730, 4 vols. 12mo; “Of Queen Elizabeth,” Amsterdam, 1741, 2 vols. 12mo, plates; “History of Cromwell,” 1703, 2 vols. 12mo, plates; “Life of Giron, duke d'Ossone,” 3 vols. 12mo; “The French Theatre,*' 7 vols. 4to, a bad work;” The Belgic Theatre,“2 vols. 4to, equally bad;” The British Theatre, or History of England, 11 Amsterdam, 1684, 5 vols. 12mo; in which there is a capital portrait of queen Elizabeth. It was for this work that he was sent out of England. “L'ltalia regnante,” 4 vols. 12mo; “History of the Roman Empire in Germany,” 4 vols. 4to; “The Cardinalism of the Holy Church,” 3 vols. 12mo, a violent satire; “History of Geneva,” 5 vols. 12mo; “The just balance in which are weighed all the maxims of Rome, and the actions of the living cardinals,” 4 vols. 12mo; “The Historical Ceremonial,” 6 vols. 12mo; “Political Dialogues on the means used by the Italian Republics for their preservation,” 2 vols. 12mo “An Abridgment of Patriotic virtues,” 2 vols. 8vo “Fame jealous of Fortune a panegyric on Louis XIV,” 4to “A Poem on the enterprize of the Prince of Orange in England,” 1695, folio; “An Eulogy on Hunting,” 12mo; “Letters,” 1 vol. 12mo; “The Itinerary of the Court of Rome,” 3 vols. 8vo “History of the House of Saxony,” 4 vols. 4to “History of the House of Brandenburg,” 4 vols. 4to “The slaughter of the Innocent reformed,” 4to “The Ruins of the Apostolical See,” 1672, 12mo, &c. Although M. le Clerc, his son-in-law, has mentioned him with high encomiums, we know few writers of history who are less to be depended on, having debased all his productions with fable. It is impossible to give credit to him unless his facts can be supported by other authority. He, on some occasions, assumes all the dignity of conceited ignorance, and relates his fictions with all the confidence of a vain man, who thinks he cannot be contradicted. His aim indeed was to please rather than instruct, and he has, with his anecdotes, frequently amused and misled his readers. We know few more amusing works than his “Life of pope Sixtus V.” Granger, whose character of him we have partly adopted, relates that Leti being one day at Charles II.'s levee, the king said to him, “Leti, I hear you are writing the history of the court of England.” “Sir,” said he, “I have been for some time preparing materials for such a history.” “Take care,” said the king, “that your work give no offence.” “Sir,” replied Leti, “I will do what 1 can but if a man were as wise as Solomon, he would scarce be able to avoid giving some offence.” “Why then,” rejoined the king, “be as wise as Solomon, write proverbs, not tories.”

, a philosopher of considerable eminence in the fifth century B. C. the first propagator of the system of atoms, is said by Diogenes Laertius, who has written his life, to have been a native of Elea. He was a disciple of Zeno the Eleatic philosopher. Dissatisfied with the attempts of former philosophers to account for the nature and origin of the universe metaphysically, Leucippus, and his follower Democritus, determined to restore the alliance between reason and the senses, which metaphysical subtleties had dissolved, by introducing the doctrine of indivisible atoms, possessing within themselves a principle of motion; and although several other philosophers, before their time, had considered matter as divisible into indefinitely small particles, Leucippus and Democritus were the first who taught, that these particles were originally destitute of all qualities except figure and motion, and therefore may justly be reckoned the authors of the atomic system of philosophy. They looked upon the qualities, which preceding philosophers had ascribed to matter, as the mere creatures of abstraction; and they determined to admit nothing into their system, which they could not establish upon the sure testimony of the senses. They were also of opinion, that both the Eleatic philosophers, and those of other sects, had unnecessarily encumbered their respective systems, by assigning some external or internal cause of motion, of a nature not to be discovered by the senses. They therefore resolved to reject all metaphysical principles, and, in their explanation of the phenomena of nature, to proceed upon no other ground than the sensible and mechanical properties of bodies. By the help of the internal principle of motion, which they attributed to the indivisible particles of matter, they made a feeble and fanciful effort to account for the production of all natural bodies from physical causes, without the intervention of Deity. But, whether they meant entirely to discard the notion of a divine nature from the universe, is uncertain. This first idea of the atomic system was improved by Democritus, and afterwards carried to all the perfection which a system so fundamentally defective would admit of, by Epicurus. The following summary of the doctrine of Leucippus will exhibit the infant state of the atomic philosophy, and at the same time sufficiently expose its absurdity.

, an eminent oriental and classical scholar, was born at Utrecht, April 26, 1624, of reputable parents, who died when he was very young. He studied at the schools and university of Utrecht, and took his degree of master of arts in 1647. To his philosophical course, he then added the study of theology, and particularly the oriental languages, in which he made great proficiency. In 1649, he was admitted among the number of candidates for the ministry, and then went to Amsterdam to acquire a more perfect knowledge of the Hebrew, and of the Jewish customs, availing himself of the instructions of two learned Jews, one of whom, being an Arabian, gave him a favourable opportunity of adding that language to his stock. On his return to Utrecht in January 1650, he was licensed to teach the oriental languages, an honour which induced him to return once more to Amsterdam, to study the Talmud and the Rabbins. In July of the same year, the curators of the university of Utrecht appointed him professor extraordinary of Hebrew. He was required to give only two lectures per week, which, however, he increased to three, and included the oriental languages and theology; and when he received a call to a congregation in Flanders, the curators of the university, unwilling to part with a man of such ability, promoted him to the chair of professor in ordinary, which he filled with great reputation. In 1658 he travelled through the Palatinate and the neighbourhood, and afterwards visited France and England. On his return he married, and had a numerous family. Three of his sons attained considerable eminence, Rodolph as a physician, John William as a counsellor and burgomaster, and James as a divine. After long enjoying a good state of health, the result of temperance and exercise, he was attacked by the nephritic colic, which, afte'r tormenting him for some weeks, occasioned his death, Sept. 30, 1699, in his seventy-fifth year. He was a man of a frank, liberal temper, and benevolent he was very kind to foreign students, particularly those from Hungary, and used to be called the Father of the Hungarians. His manner of teaching was clear and methodical; and by that, and a strict discipline, he produced many eminent scholars.

, the founder of a valuable museum, was the son of sir D'Arcy Lever of Alkington, near Manchester. He finished his education at Corpus Christi college, Oxford; and on leaving the university went to reside with his mother, and afterwards settled at his family-seat, which he rendered famous by the best aviary in the kingdom. He next extended his views to all branches of natural history, and became at length possessed of one of the finest museums in the world, sparing no expence in procuring specimens from the most distant regions. This was removed to London about 1775, and opened for the public in Leicester-house, Leicester-square; but for want of suitable patronage, sir Ashton was in 1785 obliged to dispose of it by way of lottery, to his very great loss. It fell to the lot of a Mr. Parkinson, who built rooms on the Surrey side of Black-friars bridge for its reception, and did every thing in his power to render it interesting to the public, but after some years, was obliged to dispose of it by auction, when the whole of the articles were dispersed. Sir Ashton died in 1788, of an apoplectic attack while sitting with the other magistrates at Manchester.

, a celebrated divine of the sixteenth century, was born at Little Lever, in Lancashire, and educated at Cambridge, where after taking his degrees, he was chosen fellow, and then master of St. John’s college. He was ordained both deacon and priest in 1550, by bishop Ridley, and became a most eloquent and popular preacher in the reign of king Edward. He is, indeed, on his monument called by way of distinction, “preacher to king Edward.” Under his mastership St. John’s college greatly flourished, and in it the reformation gained so much ground, that on the commencement of the Marian persecution, he and twenty-four of the fellows resigned their preferments. Mr. Lever went abroad, and resided with the other exiles for religion at Francfort, where he in vain endeavoured to compose the differences which arose among them respecting church discipline and the habits. He resided also for some time in Switzerland, at a place called Arrow, where he was pastor to a congregation of English exiles. Here he became so much a favourer of Calvin’s opinions, as to be considered, on his return to England, as one of the chiefs of the party who opposed the English church-establishment. The indiscreet conduct of some of them soon made the whole obnoxious to government; and uniformity being strictly pressed, Mr. Lever suffered among others, being convened before the archbishop of Ydrk, and deprived of his ecclesiastical preferments. Many of the cooler churchmen thought him hardly dealt with, as he was a moderate man, and not forward in opposing the received opinions, Bernard Gilpin, his intimate friend, was among those who pitied, and expressed his usual regard for him. His preferments were a prebend of Durham, and the mastership of Sherburn hospital; Strype mentions the archdeaconry of Coventry, but is not clear in his account of the matter. He appears to have been allowed to retain the mastership of the hospital, where he died in July 1577, and was buried in its chapel. Baker in his ms collections gives a very high character of him as a preacher. “In the days of king Edward, when others were striving for preferment, no man was more vehement, or more galling in his sermons, against the waste of church revenues, and other prevailing corruptions of the court; which occasioned bishop Ridley to rank him with Latimer and Knox. He was a man of as much natural probity and blunt native honesty as his college ever bred; a man without guile and artifice; who never made suit to any patron, or for any preferment; one that had the spirit of Hugh Latimer. No one can read his sermons without imagining he has something before him of Latimer or Luther. Though his sermons are bold and daring, and full of rebuke, it was his preaching that got him his preferment. His rebuking the courtiers made them afraid of him, and procured him reverence from the king. He was one of the best masters of feis college, as well as one of the best men the college ever bred.” He was succeeded in the mastership of his hospital by his brother Ralph, whom some rank as a puritan, although his title seems doubtful. He was however, of less reputation than his brother. Mr. Thomas Lever’s printed works are a few “Sermons,” which, like Latimer’s, contain many particulars of the manners of the times and three treatises “The right way from the danger of sin and vengeance in this wicked world,” 1575 a “Commentary on the Lord’s Prayer” and “The Path-way to Christ.”

, a learned French writer, who spent a long life in the study of history and general literature, was born at Paris, March 28, 1736. Of his private life we have no account; and our authority apologizes for this by assuring us that it contained none of those incidents that are interesting in biography, and that he was known only by his numerous publications. He was, however, in the course of his life, professor of morals and history in the college of France, a member of the old academy of inscriptions and belles-lettres, a member of the institute of the class of ancient history, and a knight of the legion of honour. He died at Paris, March 12, 1812, leaving the following proofs of his talents and industry. 1. “Le reves d‘Aristobule, philosophe Grec, suivis d’un abrege de la vie de Formose, philosophe Francais,” Paris, 1761, 12mo. 2. “Choix-de poesies de Petrarque,” translated from the Italian, 1774, 8vo, reprinted in 1787, 2 vols. 12mo. This translation is faithful, but wants the spirit and graces of the original. 3. “L'homme moral,” Amst. 1775, a work which has been often reprinted, and is said to have been written at Petersburgh, for the use of the Russian youth. Its object seems to be to take a survey of man in the savage and social state, and during all the modifications of the latter; and its contents are a series of remarks on all subjects connected with happiness, not always profound, but often striking, lively, and agreeable. From its being printed oftener in Holland than in France, it is probable that this work, as well as the following, was written with more freedom of sentiment than was then agreeable. 4. “L‘homme pensant, ou Essai sur l’histoire de l'esprit humain,” Amst. 1779, 12mo. 5. “Histoire de Russie,” Paris, 1785, 5 vols. 12mo. This is esteemed a very accurate sketch of Russian history and was followed by a sequel, 6. “Histoire des differens peuples soumis a la domination des Russes,” 2 vols. Both were reprinted in 1800, with a continuation to the end of the reign of Catherine, 8 vols. 8vo. In this last, he offers a very able vindication of the conduct of that empress in the early part of her reign. 7. “Eloge historique de l'abbé Mably,” Paris, 1787, 8vo. This obtained the prize of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres. 8. “La France sous les cinq premier Valois,” Paris, 1788, 4 vols. 12mo. 9. “Dictionnaire des arts, de peinture, sculpture, et gravure,” Paris, 1792, 5 vols. 8vo. He compiled this dictionary in conjunction with Watelet, to whom our authority attributes the principal merit of it. 10. A translation, highly praised, of “Thucydides,” Paris, 1795, 4 vols. 4to. Levesque also contributed various essays to the memoirs of the institute, and wrote many of the articles in that collection of the ancient moralists which was published by Didot and Debure. Not long before his death he published “L‘etude de l’histoire de la Grece,” 4 vols. 8vo; not, as is said, a learned work, but a popular introduction to the knowledge of Grecian history.

, a learned Jew, and zealous defender of the opinions of that people, was born in London in 1740, and after a regular apprenticeship to a shoemaker, settled in that business; but, not succeeding in it, commenced hat-dresser; and in this new profession, though surrounded with domestic cares, still finding time for study, produced a volume on the “Rites and Ceremonies of the Jews,” 1783, 8vo. He next published “Lingua Sacra,” 3 vols. 8vo, containing an Hebrew Grammar with points, clearly explained in English, and a complete Hebrew-English Dictionary, which came out in numbers, 1785 1789. This performance, though by no means the most perfect of its kind that might be produced, is a great instance of industry and perseverance in a person who was confined all the time to a mechanical business to supply domestic wants. In 1787 he published his first “Letters to Dr. Priestley,” in answer to his “Letters addressed to the Jews,” inviting them to an amicable discussion of the evidences of Christianity; in which he says, “I am not ashamed to tell you that I am a Jew by choice, and not because I was born a Jew; far from it; for I am clearly of opinion that every person endowed with ratiocination ought to have a clear idea of the truth of revelation, and a just ground of his faith, as far as human evidence can go.” In 1789 he published his second “Letters to Dr. Priestley,” and also “Letters to Dr. Cooper, of Great Yarmouth,” in answer to his one great argument in favour of Christianity from a single prophecy; 2. to Mr. Bicheno; 3. to Dr. Krauter; 4. to Mr. Swain; 5. to Anti-Socinus, alias Anselm Bailey; occasioned by their Remarks on his first Letters to Dr. Priestley. In this year he published the “Pentateuch, in Hebrew and English,” with a translation of the notes of Lion Socsmaan, and the 613 precepts contained in the law, according to Maimonides. At the end of the same year, at the earnest request of the most considerable of the Portuguese Jews, he undertook to translate their prayers from Hebrew into English; which he accomplished in four years (though confined to his bed by illness twenty-seven weeks), the last of six volumes appearing in 1793. The first volume of his “Dissertations on the Prophecies” was also published in 1793; and in 1794 his Translation of the Service for the two first Nights of the Passover, as observed by all the Jews at this day, in Hebrew and English. In 1795 he published “Letters to Nathaniel Brassey Halhed, M. P. in answer to his Testimony of the Authenticity of the Prophecies of Richard Brothers, and his pretended mission to recall the Jews.” A second volume of his “Dissertations on the Prophecies” appeared in 1796, which he intended to complete in six volumes; and of which, in May 1797, more than half of the third volume was printed. In the beginning of 1797 he published a “Defence of the Old Testament,” in a series of letters addressed to Thomas Paine, in answer to his Age of Reason, part II. For the German Jews he translated their Festival Prayers, as he had done those of the Portuguese, in 6 vols. 8vo; a labour of four years. By all the synagogues in London Mr. Levi was regularly employed to translate the prayers composed on any particular occasion, as those used during the king’s illness in 1788, and the thanksgiving in 1789; with various others for the use of the several synagogues. He wrote also a sacred ode in Hebrew, 1795, on the king’s escape from assassination. On Nov. 14, 1798, he had a violent stroke of the palsy, which nearly deprived him of the use of his right hand. He died in July 1799, in the fifty-ninth year of his age, and was interred in the Jews’ burial-ground near Bethnal-green, with a Hebrew epitaph, of which the following is a translation “And David reposed with his fathers, and was buried. Here lieth a correct and proper person, of perfect carriage, who served the Lord all his days, turned away from evil, and was supported by his own industry all the days of his life; Rabbi David the son of Mordecai the Levjte, of blessed memory, who departed for the rtext world on the Sabbath night, 3d of Ab., and was buried with good reputation on Monday the fourth; the days of his life were 59 years. May his soul be enveloped with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Mayest tbon come to the grave at full age.”

, a learned English divine and antiquary, was the eldest son of John Lewis, wine-cooper, in the parish of St Nicholas, Bristol, where he was born, Aug. 29, 1675. His father dying while he was in his infancy, he was committed to the care of his maternal grandfather John Eyre, merchant of Poole in Dorsetshire, who instilled into his infant mind the first principles of religion. Losing this relation, however, before he was seven years old, he was taken into the house of the rev. Samuel Conant, rector of Liichet Matravers (an intimate acquaintance of his grandfather Eyre), and educated along with a nephew whom Mr. Conant was preparing for a public school. This was an assistance peculiarly acceptably to Mr. Lewis’s mother, who appears to have been left in circumstances which were not adequate to a liberal education. After remaining with Mr. Conant two years, he was placed under the instruction of the learned Mr. John Moyle, at the grammar-school of Winborne, in 1687, upon whose decease the year following, he was removed to Poole, but reaped little benefit there, until he was put under the care of Mr. John Russel, who was encouraged to establish a grammar-school there. Mr. Russel, finding him to be a youth of talents and industry, employed him as his assistant: and after his removal to Wapping in London, conr tinued his favours to him, placing him at the free-school of Ratcliffe-cross, belonging to the Coopers’ company.

Two years after, when he was about sixteen years old, Mr. Daniel Wigfall, a merchant, took him into his family as tutor to his sons, and after continuing here until 1694, he went to Oxford, and was admitted batteler of Exetercollege: but his scanty fortune not allowing him to reside constantly, he was recommended to Mr. William Churchey, then minister at Poole, to be assistant in the free-school of that town. By this gentleman’s indulgence in allowing him to keep his terms in the university, he proceeded A. B. in 1697, when he returned to Mr. Russel at Wapping, and was ordained deacon by bishop Compton soon after. In April following he took upon him the cure of Acryse in Kent, and lived at the same time in the family of Philip Papillon, esq. to whom his behaviour rendered him so acceptable, that although he had left the parish, and was then chaplain to Paul Foley, esq. upon the recommendation of Dr. Barton, prebendary of Westminster, yet, upon the death of the incumbent, he procured him a presentation from the lord chancellor Somers, upon which he was instituted Sept. 4, 1699. He now applied himself to re-, pair a dilapidated parsonage-house, as well as to discharge his pastoral duties with all diligence, particularly that of catechising the young, which he looked upon as a very important part of his ministry. While here, he soon after met with a singular instance of unfair dealing. Being appointed to preach at the archdeacon’s visitation at Canterbury in 1701, his sermon (on 2 Cor. vi. 4.) was lent to William Brockman, esq. upon his earnest request, wb.o printed it under the title of a “Summary,” &c. with a preface calculated to injure him. He found a kinder friend, however, in archbishop Tenison, who had heard a good character of him, and granted him the sequestration of the little rectory of Hawkinge, near Dover, in 1702, telling him at the same time, that he hoped he should live to consider him farther. It was at that time his acquaintance began with Mr. Johnson of Margate, who recommended him for his successor in that laborious cure; but his old friend and patron Mr. Papillon being unwilling to part with him, he excused himself to the archbishop at that time: afterwards, upon Mr. Warren’s resignation, he accepted it in 1705. On his becoming a member of the society for promoting Christian knowledge, he was desired to draw up a short and plain exposition of the Church Catechism, fit for the children educated in charity-schools; and this, which he executed to the entire satisfaction of the society, has passed through many editions. In 1706, archbishop Tenison collated him to the rectory of Saltwood with the chapel of Hythe, and the desolate rectory of Eastbridge; but, being here disturbed by a dispute with a neighbouring 'squire, his patron removed him to the vicarage of Mynstre, on the cession of Dr. Green, in March 1708, where he rebuilt the house, in a more elegant and commodious manner.

, an eminent lawyer in the early part of the seventeenth century, was the sixth and youngest son of Henry Ley, esq. of Tesfont Evias, in Wiltshire, and was born about 1552. In 1569 he entered of Brazen-nose college, Oxford, whence he removed to Lincoln’s-inn, studied the law, and was appointed Lent reader in 1601, after which his learning and abilities raised him to the highest rank of his profession. In 1603, he was made serjeant at law, and the year following chief justice of the king’s bench in Ireland; on the ancient history of which country he appears to have bestowed some attention, and collected with a view to publication, “The An.­nals of John Clynne, a Friar Minor of Kilkenny,” who lived in the reign of Edward III.; the “Annals of the Priory of St. John of Kilkenny,” and the “Annals of Multiferman, Rosse, and Clonmell.” All these he had caused to be transcribed, but his professional engagements prevented his preparing them for the press. They afterwards fell into the hands of Henry earl of Bath. Extracts from them are in Dublin college library.

, who was originally a printer in London, published several of the mathematical works of Samuel Foster, astronomical professor in Gresham college. He afterwards became an eminent author himself, and appears to have been the most universal mathematician of his time. He published many mathematical treatises in the seventeenth century. Among these his “Cursus Mathematicus” was esteemed the best system of the kind extant. His “Panarithmologia; or, Trader’s sure Guide,” being tables ready cast up, was long in use. It was formed upon a plan of his own, and has been adopted by Mr. Bareme in France. The seventh edition was published in 1741. We have no account of his birth or death.

"This little story of him was told me lately by a very knowing person, who had it from good hands; viz. ‘ That during his travels in Bretagny, in the time of our wars with France, he was taken up for a spy, confined for a few days to prison, and all his papers seized. The papers being examined by the priests and Jesuits, and found to be to them unintelligible, raised die greater suspicion. But the principal managers against him, receiving assurances, by letters from learned and respectable men in England, that he was only pursuing inquiries relating to the antiquities of Britain, and had not the least concern with state-affairs, honourably dismissed him.’ I wish I had more little anecdotes of this kind to add, relating to that truly great man. He would have done wonders if he bad lived to complete his designs; and posterity would have wondered, and thanked him.

“The ingenious and learned Mr. Thomas Richards (formerly a member of that college, and afterwards the most worthy rector of Lhanvyllin in North Wales) told me, in 1756,” that, in a year or two after his admission into the university, a consultation was held by the fellows of Jesus- college, about a proper person of that college, or any other native of Wales, (though of another college,) to answer the celebrated * Muscipula,‘ then lately published by the ingenious Mr. Holdsworth, of Magdalen-college, at the request, and by the direction, of Dr. Sacheverell. Those who knew, and had often observed, the collegiate exercises of Mr. Richards, were pleased to propose him, though of so low standing, as the fittest person that they could think of for such an undertaking. Mr. Lhuyd, being present, asked, ’ Has he the caput poeticum?‘ They assuring him that he usually wrote in a strong Virgilian verse, ’ Theji,‘ said Mr. Lhuyd, * I will give him a plan,’ which was that of the * Hoglandia,‘ since published and well known. Mr. Richards, as he told me (and a friend of his said the same), retired with leave, for about a week, out of college, taking lodgings at St. Thomas’s, and completed the poem. When finished, and corrected by Mr. Lhuyd, and Mr. Anthony Alsop, of Christ-church, Mr. Lhuyd drew up a preface, or dedication, in very elegant Latin, but in terms by much too severe, which made Mr. Richards very uneasy, for he must obey. Before the poem was sent to the press, Mr. Lhuyd died; Richards was then at liberty. He consulted with his friend Mr. Alsop (who was greatly offended with Dr. S.’s haughty carriage), and both together drew up the dedication as it now stands.

"The story of SacheverelPs indecent affront to Mr. Lhuyd is there set forth more at length, from an authentic account, which I had from a person who well knew the whole.

, a learned English antiquary in the sixteenth century, was son and heir of Mr. Robert Lhwyd alias Rossenhall of Denbigh in Denbighshire, by Joan his wife, daughter of Lewis Pigott. He was born at Denbigh, and was educated in the university of Oxford; but in what college is not known. It is certain, however, that after he had taken the degree of bachelor of arts, which was in 1547, he was commoner of Brasen-nose college; and in 1551 took the degree of master of arts as a member of that college; at which time he studied physic. Afterwards retiring to his own country, he lived mostly within the walls of Denbigh castle, but, Granger thinks, never practised as a physician, employing his time chiefly in his antiquarian researches. He died about 1570, and was interred near the church of Whitchurch near Denbigh; where a monument was erected to him. He had married Barbara daughter of George Lmnley, and sister of John lord Lumley, by whom he had issue Splendian and John, who both died without issue, Henry, who lived at Cheam in Surrey, and Jane the wife of Rob. Coytmore. Camden gives him a very great character, as one of the best antiquaries of his time; and be is by Daines Barrington esteemed very accurate in what relates to the history of Wales. He had a taste for the arts, particularly music, and executed the map of England for the “Theatrum Orbis.” He collected a great number of curious and useful books for his brother-in-law lord Lumley, which were purchased by James I. and became the foundation of the royal library. They are now a very valuable part of the British Museum.

His writings are, 1. “An Almanack and Kalendar; containing the day, hour, and minute, of the change of the moon for ever,” &c. 8vo. 2. “Commentarioli Britannicae Descriptionis Fragmentuni. Colon. Agrip.” 1572: of which a new edition was published by Mr. Moses Williams, under the title of “Humfredi Lhwyd, Armigeri, Britannicie Descriptionis Comrnentariolum: necnon de Monfi Insula, & Britannica Arce sive Armamentario Romano Disceptatio Epistolaris. Accedunt^raa Cambro-Britannicae. Accurante Mose Gulielmo, A.M. R. S. Soc.” Lond. 1731, 4to. Thi? was translated into English by Tho. Twyne, who entitled it, “The Breviary of Britain,” Lond. 1753, 8vo. 3. “De JVionfi Druidum Insula, Antiquitati sine restitutfi;” in a letter to Abraham Ortelius, April 5, 1568. 4. “De mentario Romano.” These two last are printed at the end of “Historic Britannicae Defensio; written by sir John Price,” Lond. 1573, 4to. 5. “Chronicon Wallisr, a Rege Cadtvalladero, usque ad Ann. Dom. 1294,” ms. in the Cottontail library. 6. “The History of Cambria, now called Wales, from Caradoc of Lancarvan, the Registers of Con­^ray and Stratflnr; with a Continuation, chiefly extracted from Mat. Paris, Nic. Trivet, &c.” He died before this was quite finished; but sir Henry Sidney, lord -president of Wales, having procured a copy of it, employed Dr. David Powel to prepare it for the press, who published it under this title: “The Historic of Cambria, now called Wales; a part of the most famous yland of Britaine; written in the Brytish language above two hundred years past; translated into English by H. Lloyd, gent, corrected, augmented, and continued out of Records and best approved Authors,” Lond. 1584, 4to. Our author translated also, 7. “The Treasure of Health; containing many profitable Medicines, written by Peter Hispanus.” To which were added, “The Causes and Signs of every Disease, with the Aphorisms of Hippocrates,” Lond. 1585. And 8. “The Judgment of Urines,” Lond. 1551, 8vo.

, a celebrated sophist of antiquity, was born of an ancient and noble family at Antioch, on the Orontes, in the year 314. Suidas calls his father “Phasganius” but this was the name of one of his uncles; the other, who was the elder, was named Panolbius. His great-grandfather, who excelled in the art of divination, had published some pieces in Latin, which occasioned his being supposed by some, but falsely, to be an Italian. His maternal and paternal grandfathers were eminent in rank and in eloquence; the latter, with his brother Brasidas, was put to death by the order of Dioclesian, in the year 303, after the tumult of the tyrant Eugenius. Libanius, the second of his father’s three sons, in the fifteenth year of his age, wishing to devote himself entirely to literature, complains that he met with some “shadoxvs of sophists.” Then, assisted by a proper master, he began to read the ancient writers at Antioch; and thence, with Jasion, a Cappadocian, went to Athens, and residing there for more than four years, became intimately acquainted with Crispinus of Heraclea, who, he says, “enriched him afterwards with books at Nicomedia, and went, but seldom, to the schools of Diophantus.” At Constantinople he ingratiated himself with Nicocles of Lacedosmon (a grammarian, who was master to the emperor Julian), and the sophist Bermarchius. Returning to Athens, and soliciting the office of a professor, which the proconsul had before intended for him when he was twenty- five years of age, a certain Cappadocian happened to be preferred to him. But being encouraged by Dionysius, a Sicilian who had been prefect of Syria, some specimens of his eloquence, that were published at Constantinople, made him so generally known and applauded, that he collected more than eighty disciples, the two sophists, who then filled the chair there, raging in vain, and Bermarchius ineffectually opposing him in rival orations, and, when he could not excel him, having recourse to the frigid calumny of magic. At length, about the year 346, being expelled the city by his competitors, the prefect Limenius concurring, he repaired to Nice, and soon after to Nicomedia, the Athens of Bithynia, where his excellence in speaking began to be more and more approved by all; and Julian, if not a hearer, was a reader and admirer of his orations. In the dame'city, he says, “he was particularly delighted with the friendship of Aristaenetus;” and the five years which he passed there, he styles “the spring or any thing else that can be conceived pleasanter than spring, of his whole life.” Being invited again to Constantinople, and afterwards returning to Nicomedia, being also tired of Constantinople, where he found Phoenix and Xenobius, rival sophists, though he was patronised by Strategius, who succeeded Domitian as prefect of the East, not daring on account of his rivals to occupy the Athenian chair, he obtained permission from Gallus Cassar to visit for four months, his native city Antioch, where, after Gallus was killed, in the year 354, he fixed his residence for the remainder of his life, and initiated many in the sacred rites of eloquence. He was also much beloved by the emperor Julian, who heard his discourses with pleasure, received him with kindness, and imitated him in his writings. Honoured by that prince with the rank of quaestor, and with several epistles of which six only are extant, the‘ last written by the emperor during’ his fatal expedition against the Persians, he the more lamented his death in the flower of Ms age, as from him he had promised himself a certain and lasting support both in the worship of idols and in his own studies. There was afterwards a report, that Liba­Ihus, with the younger Jamblichus, the master of Proclus, inquired by divination who would be the successor of Valens, and ia consequence with difficulty escaped his cruelty, Irenaeus attesting the innocence of Libanius. In like manner he happily escaped another calumny, by the favour of duke Lupicinus, when he was accused by his enemy Fidelis, or Fidustius, of having written an eulogium on the tyrant Procopius. He was not, however, totally neglected by Valens, whom he not only celebrated in an oration, but obtained from him a confirmation of the law against entirely, excluding illegitimate children from the inheritance of their paternal estates, which he solicited from the emperor, no doubt for a private reason, since, as Eunapius informs us, he kept a mistress, and was never married. The remainder of his life he passed as before mentioned, at Antioch, to an advanced age, amidst various wrongs and oppressions from his rivals and the times, which he copiously relates in his life, though, tired of the manners of that city, be had thoughts, in his old age, of changing his abode, as he tells Eusebius. He continued there, however, and on various occasions was very serviceable to the city, either by appeasing seditions, and calming the disturbed minds of the citizens, or by reconciling to them the emperors Julian and Theodosius. That Libanius lived even to the reign of Arcadius, that is, beyond the seventieth year of his age, the learned collect from his oration on Lucian, and the testimony of Cedrenus; and of the same opinion is Godfrey Olearius, a man not more respectable for his exquisite knowledge of sacred and polite literature than for his judgment and probity, in his’ ms prelections, in which, when he was professor of both languages in the university of his own country, he has given an account of the life of this sophist.

The writings of Libanius are numerous, and he composed and delivered various orations, as well demonstrative as deliberative, and also many fictitious declamations and disputations. Of these Frederic Morell published as many as he could collect in 2 vols. folio, in Greek and Latin. In the first vol. Paris, 1606, are XIII “Exercises” (Progymnasmala) XLIV “Declamations;” and in “Moral Dissertations” and in the second vol. Paris, 1627, are the “Life of Libanius,” and xxxvi other orations, most of them long and on serious subjects. This edition of Morcll having long been discovered to be very erroneous, the learned Reiske undertook a new edition, collated with six Mss. which he did not live to complete, but which was at last published by his widow in 1791—1797, 4 vols. 8vo. Of the productions of Libanius, Gibbon says that they are, for the most part, the vain and idle compositions of an orator who cultivated the science of words; the productions of a recluse student, whose mind, regardless of his contemporaries, was incessantly fixed on the Trojan war and the Athenian commonwealth.

In 1584 Liddel returned to Francfort, and again applied to physic, and at the same time instructed some pupils in various branches of mathematics and philosophy. In 1587, being obliged to leave Francfort on account of the plague, he retired to the university of Rostock, where his talents attracted the esteem of Brucseus, and Caselius, which last observes, that, as far as he knew, Liddel was the first person in Germany who explained the motions of the heavenly bodies according to the three different hypotheses of Ptolemy, Copernicus, and Tycho Brahe. With these learned men he lived more like a companion than a pupil; and Brucxus, himself an excellent mathematician, acknowledged that he was instructed by Liddel in the more perfect knowledge of the Copernican system, and other astronomical questions. It was probably during his residence here that Licldel became acquainted with Tycho Brahe. In 1590, having taken his master’s degree at Rostock, he returned once more to Francfort; but, hearing of the increasing reputation of the new university at Helmstadt, where his friend Caselius had accepted the chair of philosophy, he removed thither, and in 1591 was appointed to the first or lower professorship of mathematics, and in 1594 to the second and more dignified mathematical chair, which he filled with great reputation to himself and to the university. In 1596 he obtained the degree of doctor of medicine, and both taught and practised physic, and was employed as first physician at the court of Brunswick. His reputation being now at its height, he was several times chosen dean of the faculties, both of philosophy and physic, and in 1604, pro-rector of the university, the year before he resigned his mathematical professorship.

Dr. Liddel’s works are, 1. “Disputationum Medicinalium,” 1605, 4 vols. 4to, consisting of theses maintained by himself and his pupils at Helmstadt from 1592 to 1606. The copy in the library at Aberdeen is full of ms notes in his own hand. Manget mentions what appears to be a new edition, or a new arangement, of these theses, published at Helmstadt in 1720, 4to, under the title of “Universae Medicinae compendium.” 2. “Ars Medica, succincte et perspicue explicata,” Hamburgh, 1607, 8vo, reprinted at Lyons, 1624, by Serranus; and again at Hamburgh, 1628, by Frobenius, who acknowledges his obligations to Dr. Patrick Dun, principal of the Marischal College of Aberdeen, for the use of a copy corrected and enlarged by the author. 3. “De Febribus libri tres,” Hamburgh, 1610, 12mo, republished by Serranus, along with the “Ars Medica.” 4. “Tractatus de dente aureo,” &c. ibid. 1628, 12mo, in answer to Horstius’s ridiculous account of a boy who had a golden tooth. (See James Horstius). He appears to have undertaken this work out of regard to the reputation of the university of Helmstadt, which, Horstius being one of the professors, he thought might be affected by this imposture. 5. “Artis conservandi Sanitatem, libri duo, a C. D. doctore Liddelio defuncto delineati, opera et studio D. Patricii Dunaei, M. D. &c.” Aberdeen, 1631, 12mo. In the preface to this work Dr. Dun, who had studied physic at Helmstadt under Dr. Liddel, says, that having found the ms. among his papers, he thought it a duty he owed to the public and his old master, to complete and publish it. All these writings received the distinguished approbation of his colleagues and contemporaries, and have been mentioned with respect by succeeding authors.

LflEUTAUD (Joseph), a celebrated physician and anatomist, was born at Aix, in Provence, June 21, 1703. His family, long established at Aix, had produced many distinguished officers, ecclesiastics, lawyers, &c. He was at first intended by his parents for the church; but the reputation of his maternal uncle Garidel, the professor of medicine at Aix, gave him a bias to the study of medicine, and particularly botany, in which his researches and skill soon occasioned him to be promoted to the chairs of botany and anatomy at Aix, which his uncle had long filled. His lectures on anatomy were much attended, and by an audience comprising many persons not engaged in the study of medicine, and among others, the marquis d'Argens, the intimate friend of the king. M. Lieutaud published, in 1742, a syllabus of anatomy for the use of his pupils, entitled “Essais auatomiques, contenant l'Histoire exacte de toutes les parties qui composent le corps humaine;” it was several times reprinted, with improvements, and in 1777 was edited by M. Portal, in 2 volumes. He communicated also several papers on morbid anatomy, and on physiology, to the academy of sciences, of which he was elected a corresponding member. In 1749, however, he quitted his post at Aix, and went to Versailles, at the instance of the celebrated Senac, who then held the highest appointment at court, and who obtained for Lieutaud the appointment of physician to the royal infirmary. This act of friendship is said to have originated from the private communication of some errors, which Lieutaud had detected in a work of M. Senac, and which he did not deem it proper to publish. At Versailles he continued his anatomical investigations with unabated zeal, and was soon after his arrival elected assistant anatomist to the royal academy, to which he continued to present many valuable memoirs. He also printed a volume entitled “Elementa Physiologice,” &c. Paris, 1749, which had been composed for the use of his class at Aix. In 1755, he was nominated physician to the royal family; and twenty years afterwards, he obtained the place of first physician to the king, Louis XVI. In 1759 he published a system of the practice of medicine, under the title of *' Precis de la Medicine pratique,“which underwent several editions, with great augmentations, the best of which is that of Paris, 1770, in 2 vols. 4to. In 1766, he published a” Precis de la Matiere medicale,“in 8vo, afterwards reprinted in 2 vols. But his most important work, which still ranks high in the estimation of physicians, is that which treats of the seats and causes of diseases, ascertained by his innumerable dissections. It was entitled” Historia Anatomico-medica, sistens numerosissima cadaverum humanorum extispicia," Paris, 1767, in 2 vols. 4to. M. Lieutaud died September 6, 1780, after an illness of five days.

, a learned English divine, was born on the 19th or 29th of March, 1602, at Stoke upon Trent, in Staffordshire. His father was Thomas Lightfoot, vicar of Uttoxeter in that county . After having finished his studies at a school kept by Mr. Whitehead on Mortongreen, near Congleton in Cheshire, he was removed in 1617, to Cambridge, and put under the tuition of Mr. William Chappel, then fellow of Christ’s college there, and afterwards bishop of Cork in Ireland, who was also the tutor of Henry More, Milton, &c. At college he applied himself to eloquence, and succeeded so well as to be thought the best orator of the undergraduates in the uni versity. He also made an extraordinary proficiency in the Latin and Greek; but neglected the Hebrew, and even lost that knowledge he brought of it from school. His taste for the Oriental languages was not yet excited; and, as for logic, the study of it, as managed at that time among the academics, was too contentious for his quiet and meek disposition.

As soon as he had taken the degree of B. A. he left the university, and became assistant to his former master, Mr. Wbitehead, who then kept a school at Repton, in Derbyshire. After he had supplied this place a year or two, he entered into orders, and became curate of Norton under Hales, in Shropshire. This curacy gave an occasion of awakening his genius for the Hebrew tongue. Norton, lies near Bellaport, then the seat of sir Rowland Cotton, who was his constant hearer, made him his chaplain, and took him into his house. This gentleman being a perfect master of the Hebrew language, engaged Lightfoot in that study; who, by conversing with his patron, soon became sensible, that, without that knowledge, it was impossible to attain an accurate understanding of the Scriptures. He therefore applied himself to it with extraordinary vigour and success; and his patron removing, with his family, to reside in London, at the request of sir Allan Cotton, his uncle, who was lord-mayor of that city, he followed his preceptor thither. He had not been long in London before he conceived the design of going abroad for farther improvement; and with that view he went into Staffordshire, and took leave of his father and mother. Passing, however, through Stone in that county, he found the place destitute of a minister; and the pressing instances of the parishioners prevailed upon him to undertake that cure. He now laid aside all thoughts of going abroad, and having in 1628 become possessed of the living, he married the daughter of William Crompton, of Stone-park, esq. After a time, his excessive attachment to rabbinical learning occasioned another removal to London, for the sake of Sion-college-library, which he knew was well stocked with books of that kind. He therefore quitted his charge at Stone, and removed with his family to Hornsey, near London, where he gave the public a specimen of his ad-? vancement in those studies, by his “Erubhirn, or Miscellanies Christian and Judaical,” in 1629. He was now only 27 years of age, and appears to have been well acquainted with the Latin and the Greek fathers, as well as with Plutarch, Plato, and Homer, and seems also to have had some skill in the modern languages. These first fruits of his studies were dedicated to sir Rowland Cotton; who, in 1631, presented him to the rectory of Ashley, in Staffordshire.

At the restoration, he offered to resign the mastership of Catharine-hall to Dr. Spurstow, who declining it, another person t would have been preferred by the crown, in which the right of presentation lay. But, as what Lightfoot had done had been rather in compliance with the necessity of the times than from any zeal or spiritof opposition to the king and government, Sheldon, abp. of Canterbury, readily and heartily engaged to serve him, though personally unknown; and procured him a confirmation

As to his rabbinical learning, he was excelled by none, and had few equals; and foreigners who came to England for assistance in their rabbinical studies, usually paid their court to him, as one of the most eminent scholars in that branch. Among these were Frederic Miege and Theodore Haak, who were peculiarly recommended also to Dr. Pocock, with whom our author had a correspondence as also Dr. Marshal of Lincoln-college, in Oxford Samuel Clarke, keeper of the Bodleian library Dr. Bernard, of St. John’s; and the famous Buxtorf were all correspondents of his. Castell acknowledges his obligations to him, when he had little encouragement elsewhere. It is true, he is charged with maintaining some peculiar opinions t; of which he says, “Innocua, ut spero, semper proponens;” yet he bore the reputation of one of the most ingenious as well as learned of our English commentators, and has been of great service to his successors. He bequeathed his whole library of rabhinical works, oriental books, &c. to Harvard college, in America, where the whole were burnt in 1769. The doctor was twice married; his first wife, already mentioned, brought him four sons and two daughters. His eldest son, John, who was chaplain to Bryan Walton, bishop of Chester, died soon after that prelate. His second was Anastasius, who had also these additions to that name, Cotton us Jackson us, in memory of sir Rowland Cotton and sir John Jackson, two dear friends of our author; he was minister of Thundridge, in Hertfordshire, and died there, leaving one son. His third son was Anastasius too, but without any addition; he was brought up to trade in London. His fourth son was Thomas, who died young. His daughters was Joice and Sarah, the former of whom was married to Mr. John Duckfield, rector of Aspeden, in Hertfordshire, into whose hands fell the doctor’s papers, which he communicated to Mr. Strype. The other married Mr. Coclough, a Staffordshire gentleman. This lady died in 1656, and was interred in the church of Munden, in Hertfordshire. The doctor’s second wife was relict of Mr. Austin Brograve, uncle of sir Thomas Brograve, bart. of Hertfordshire, a gentleman well versed in rabbinical learning, and a particular acquaintance of our author. He had no issue by her. She also died before him, and was buried in Munden church.

Dr. Lightfoot’s works were collected and published first in 1684, in 2 vols. folio. The second edition was printed at Amsterdam, 1686, in 2 vols. folio, containing all his Latin writings, with a Latin translation of those which he wrote in English. At the end of both these editions there is a list of such pieces as he left unfinished. It is the chief of these, in Latin, which make up the third volume, added to the former two, in a third edition of his works, by John Leusden, at Utrecht, in 1699, fol. They were communicated by Mr. Strype, who in 1700 published another collection of these papers, under the title of “Some genuine Remains of the late pious and learned Dr. John Lightfoot.” This contains some curious particulars of his life.

, a distinguished botanist* was born at Newent, in the forest of Dean, Gloucestershire, Dec. 9, 1735. His father, Stephen Lightfoot, was a reputable yeoman or gentleman farmer, who died in 1769, with a very amiable character, expressed on a small marble monument in the parish church of Newent His son was educated at St. Crypt’s school,Jat Gloucester; from whence he became an exhibitioner in Pembroke-college, Oxford; where he continued his studies with much reputation, and took his master’s degree in July 1766. He was first appointed curate at Colnbrook, and afterwards at Uxbridgef which he retained to his dying day.

, a remarkable English enthusiast, was descended from an ancient family in the county of Durham, where his father, Richard Lilburne, was possessed of a handsome estate*, especially at Thickney-Purcharden, the seat of the family upon which he resided, and Lad this son, who was born in 1613. Being a younger child, he was designed for a trade; and was put apprentice at twelve years of age, to a wholesale clothier in London, who, as well as his father, was disaffected to the hierarchy. The youth, we are told, had a prompt genius and a forward temper above his years, which shewed itself conspicuously, not long after, in a complaint to the citychamberlain of his master’s ill-usage; by which, having obtained more liberty, he purchased a multitude of books favourable to his notions of politics and religion; and having his imagination warmed with a sense of suffering and resentment, he became at length so considerable among his party, as to be consulted upon the boldest of their undertakings against the hierarchy, while yet an apprentice.

last person who joined itsue in the an- judge* till at last it was ordered, at

He wrote several other pamphlets, before the long parliament granted him the liberties of the Fleet, Nov. 1640, which indulgence he likewise abused by appearing on May 3, 1641, at the head of a savage mob, who clamoured for justice against the earl of Stratford. Next day he was seized and arraigned at the bar of the House of Lords, for an assault upon colonel Lunsford, the governor of the Tower; but the temper of the times being now in his favour, he was dismissed, and the same day a vote passed in the House of Commons, declaring his former sentence illegal and tyrannical, and that he ought to have reparation for his sufferings and losses. This reparation was effectual, although slow. It was not until April 7, 1646, that a decree of the House of Lords passed for giving him two thousand pounds out of the estates of lord Cottington, sir Banks Windehank, and James Ingram, warden of the Fleet; and it was two years after before he received the money, in consequence of a petition to the House of Commons, when he obtained an ordinance for 3000l. worth of the delinquents’ lands, to be sold to him at twelve years purchase. This ordinance included a grant for some part of the sequestered estates of sir Henry Bellingham and Mr. Bowes, in the counties of Durham or Northumberland, from which he received about 1400l.; and Cromwell, soon after his return from Ireland, in May 1650, procured him a grant of lands for the remainder. This extraordinary delay was occasioned entirely by himself.

When the parliament had voted an army to oppose the king, Lilburne entered as a volunteer, was a captain of foot at the battle of Edge-hill, and fought well in the engagement at Brentford, Nov. 12, 1612, but being taken prisoner, was carried to Oxford, and would have been tried and executed for high treason, had not his parliamentary friends threatened retaliation. After this, as he himself informs us, he was exchanged very honourably above his rank, and rewarded with a purse of 300l. by the earl of Essex. Yet, when that general began to press the Scots’ covenant upon his followers, Lilburne quarrelled with him, and by Cromwell’s interest was made a major of foot, Oct. 1643, in the new-raised army under the earl of Manchester. In this station he behaved very well, and narrowly escaped with his life at raising the siege of Newark by prince Rupert; but at the same time he quarrelled with his colonel (King), and accused him of several misdemeanours, to the earl, who immediately promoted him to be lieutenant-colonel of his own regiment of dragoons. This post Lilburne sustained with signal bravery at the battle of Marston-moor, in July; yet he had before that quarrelled with the earl for not bringing colonel King to a trial by a court* martial; and upon Cromwell’s accusing his lordship to the House of Commons, Nov. 1644, Lilburne appeared before the committee in support of that charge. Nor did he rest until he had procured an impeachment to be exhibited in the House of Commons in August this year, against colonel King for high crimes and misdemeanours. Little attention being paid to this, he first offered a petition to the House, to bring the colonel to his trial, and still receiving no satisfaction, he published a coarse attack upon the earl of Manchester, in 1646. Being called before the House of Lords, where that nobleman was speaker, on account of this publication, he not only refused to answer the interrogatories, but protested against their jurisdiction over him in the present case; on which he was first committed to Newgate, and then to the Tower. He then appealed to the House of Commons; and upon their deferring to take his case into consideration, he charged that House, in print, not only with having done nothing of late years for the general good, but also with having made many ordinances notoriously unjust and oppressive. This pamphlet, which was called “The Oppressed man’s oppression,” being seized, he printed another, entitled “The Resolved man’s resolution,” in which he maintained “that the present parliament ought to be pulled down, and a new one called, to bring them to a strict account, as the only means of saving the laws and liberties of England from utter destruction,” This not availing, he applied to the agitators in the army; and at length, having obtained liberty every day to go, without his keeper, to attend the committee appointed about his business, and to return every night to the Tower, he made use of that indulgence to engage in some seditious practices. For this he was recommitted to the Tower, and ordered to be tried; but, upon the parliament’s apprehensions from the Cavaliers, on prince Charles’s appearing with a fleet in the Downs, he procured a petition, signed by seven or eight thousand persons, to be presented to the House, which made an order, in August 1648, to discharge him from imprisonment*, and to make him satisfaction for his sufferings. This was not compassed, however, without a series of conflicts and quarrels with Cromwell; who, returning from Ireland in

tering doctrine, which he applied with who are judges of law as well as fact,

singular address to the jury, that in October 26, 1649." them alone was inherent the judicial May 1650, and finding Lilburne in a peaceable disposition witli regard to the parliament, procured him the remainder of his grant for reparations above-mentioned. This was gratefully acknowledged by his antagonist, who, however, did not continue long in that humour; for, having undertaken a dispute in law, in which his uncle George Lilburne happened to be engaged, he petitioned the parliament on that occasion with his usual boldness in 1651; and this assembly fined him in the sum of 7000l. to the state, and banished him the kingdom. Before this, however, could be carried into execution, he went in Jan. 1651-2, to Amsterdam; where, having printed an apology for himself, he sent a copy of it, with a letter, to Cromwell, charging him as the principal promoter of the act of his banishment. He had also several conferences with some of the royalists, to whom he engaged to restore Charles II. by his interest with the people, for the small sum of 10,000l. but no notice was taken of a design which, had it been plausible, could never have been confided to such a man. He then remained in exile, without hopes of re-visiting England, till the dissolution of the long parliament; on which event, not being able to obtain a pass, he returned without one, in June 1657; and being seized and tried at the Old Bailey, he was a second time acquitted by his jury. Cromwell, incensed by this contempt of his power, which was now become despotic, had him curried to Portsmouth, in order for transportation; but the tyrant’s wrath was averted, probably by Lilburne* s brother Robert, one of his major-generals, * upon whose bail for his behaviour he was suffered to return. After this, he settled at Khham, in Kent, where he passed the short remainder of his days in tranquillity, giving, however, another proof of his versatile principles, by joining the quakers, among whom he preached, in and about Eltham, till his death, Aug. 29, 1657, in his forty- ninth year. He was interred in the then new burial place in Moor-fields, near the place now called Old Bedlam; four thousand persons attending his burial.

In the prologue to “Elmerick,” which was not acted till after the author’s death, it is said, that, when he wrote that play, he “was depressed by want,” and afflicteJ by disease; but in the former particular there appears to be evidently a mistake, as he died possessed of an estate of 60l. a year, besides other effects to a considerable value. The late editor of his works (Mr. T. Davies) in two volumes, 1775, 12mo, relates the following story, which, however, we cannot think adapted to convey any favourable impression of the person of whom it is told: “Towards the latter part of his life, Mr. Lillo, whether from judgment or humour, determined to put the sincerity of his friends, who professed a very high regard for him, to a trial. In order to carry on this design, he put in practice an odd kind of stratagem: ha asked one of his intimate acquaintance to lend him a considerable sum of money, and for this he declared he would give no bond, rior any other security, except a note of hand; the person to whom he applied, not liking the terms, civilly refused him. Soon after, Lillo met his nephew, Mr. Underwood, with whom he had been at variance some time. He put the same question to him, desiring him to lend him money upon the same terms. His nephew, either from a sagacious apprehension of his uncle’s real intention, or from generosity of spirit, immediately offered to comply with his request. Lillo was so well pleased with this ready compliance of Mr. Underwood, that he immediately declared that he was fully satisfied with the love and regard that his nephew bore him; he was convinced that his friendship was entirely disinterested; and assured him, that he should reap the benefit such generous behaviour deserved. In consequence of this promise, he bequeathed him the bulk of his fortune.” The same writer says, that Lillo in his person was lusty, but not tall; of a pleasing aspect, though unhappily deprived of the sight of one eye.

Lillo died Sept. 3, 1739, in the forty -seventh year of his age; and, a few months after his death, Henry Fielding printed the following character of him in “The Champion:” “He had a perfect knowledge of human nature, though his contempt of all base means of application, which are the necessary steps to great acquaintance, restrained his conversation within narrow bounds. He had the spirit of an old Roman, joined to the innocence of a primitive Christian: he was content with his little state of life, in which his excellent temper of mind gave him an happiness beyond the power of riches; and it was necessary for his friends to have a sharp insight into his want of their services, as well as good inclination or abilities to serve him. In short, he was one of the best of men, and those who knew him best will most regret his loss.”

, another dramatic writer, of lesi fame and merit, was born in the Wilds of Kent, about 1553, according to the computation of Wood, who says, “he became a student in Magdalen-college in the beginning of 1569, aged sixteen or thereabouts, and was afterwards one of the demies or clerks of that house.” He took the degree of B.A.April 27, 1573, and of M. A. in 1575. On some disgust, he removed to Cambridge; and thence went to court, where he was taken notice of by queen Elizabeth, and hoped to have been preferred to the post of master of the revels, but after many years of anxious attendance, was disappointed, and was forced to write to the queen fot some little grant to support him in his old age. Of his two letters, or petitions, to her, many copies are preserved in manuscript. In what year he died is unknown; but Wood says, he was alive in 1597. His attachment to the dramatic Muses produced nine dramatic pieces, none of which, however, have preserved their reputation in our times. Even Phillips, in his “Theatrum,” calls them “old-fashioned tragedies and comedies.” Besides these, Lilly has been celebrated for his attempt, which was a very unhappy one, to reform and purify the English language. For this purpose he wrote a book entitled “Euphues,” which met with a degree of success very unusual, and certainly not less unmerited, being almost immediately and universally followed; at least, if we may give credit to the words of Mr. Blount, who published six of Lilly’s plays together, in one volume in twelves. In a preface to that book he says, “our nation are in his debt for a new English, which he taught them * Euphues and his England ' began first that language all our ladies were his scholars and that beauty at court, which could not parley Euphuisme, that is to say, who was unable to converse in that pure and reformed English, which he had formed his work to be the standard of, was as little regarded as she which now there speaks not French.”

, a famous English astrologer, was born at Diseworth in Leicestershire, in 1602, and was put to school at Ashby-de-la-Zouch, in the same county; but, his father not being in circumstances to give him a liberal education, as he intended at Cambridge, he was obliged to quit the school, after learning writing and arithmetic. Being then, as his biographers inform us, of a forward temper, and endued with shrewd wit, he resolved to push his fortune in London, where he arrived in 1620; and where his immediate necessities obliged him to article himself as a servant to a mantua-maker, in the parish of St. Clement Danes. In 1624, he was assistant to a tradesman in the Strand; who, not being able to write, employed him (among other domestic offices) as his book-keeper. He had not been above three years in this place, when, his master dying, he addressed and married his mistress, with a fortune of 1000l. In 1632, he turned his mind to astrology; and applied to one Evans, a worthless Welsh clergyman, who, after practising that craft many years in Leicestershire, had come to London, and, at this time, resided in Gunpowder-alley. Here Lilly became his pupil, and made such a quick progress, that he understood, in the cant of his brethren, how “to set a figure” perfectly in seven or eight weeks; and, continuing his application with the utmost assiduity, gave the public a specimen of his attainments and skill, by intimating that the king had chosen an unlucky horoscope for the coronation in Scotland, 1633.

In 1634, having procured a manuscript, with some alterations, of the “Ars Notoria” of Cornelius Agrippa, he became so infatuated by the doctrine of the magical circle, and the invocation of spirits, as not only to make use of a form of prayer prescribed there to the angel Salmonaeus, and to fancy himself a favourite of great power and interest with that uncreated phantom, but even to claim a knowledge of, and a familiar acquaintance with, the partieular guardian angels of England, by name Salmael and Malchidael. After this he treated the more common mystery of recovering stolen goods, &c. with great contempt, claiming a supernatural sight, and the gift of prophetical predictions, and seems to have known well how to profit by the credulity of the times. Such indeed was his fame, as to produce the following notable story. When one Ramsay, the king’s clock maker, being informed that there was a great treasure buried in the cloister of Westminster-abbey, obtained the dean’s (Dr. Williams, bishop of Lincoln), leave to search for it with the divining or Mosaical* rods, he applied to Lilly for his assistance. Lilly, with one Scot, who pretended to the use of the said rods, attended by Ramsay and above thirty persons more, went into the cloister by night, and, observing the rods to tumble over one another on the West side of the cloister, concluded the treasure lay hid under that spot; but, the ground being' dug to the depth of six feet, and nothing found but a coffin, which was not heavy enough for their purpose, they proceeded, without opening it, into the abbey. Here they were alarmed by a storm, which suddenly rose, and increased to such a height, that they were afraid the West end of the church would have been blown down upon them; the rods moved not at all; the candles and torches, all but one, were extinguished, or burned very dimly. Scot was amazed, looked pale, and knew not what to think or do; until Lilly gave directions to dismiss the chcinons, which when done, all was quiet again, and each man returned home. Lilly, however, took care not to expose his skill again in this manner, though he was cunning enough to ascribe the miscarriage, not to any defect in the art itself, but to the number of people who were present at the operation and derided it; shrewdly laying it down for a rule, that secrecy and intelligent operators, with a strong confidence and knowledge of what they are doing, are necessary requisites to succeed in this work.

In the mean time he buried his first wife, purchased a moiety of thirteen houses in the Strand, and married a second wife, who, joining to an extravagant temper a termagant spirit, which all his art could not lay, made him both poor and miserable. With this lady he was obliged to retire in 1637, to Hersham in Surrey, where he continued till Sept. 1641; and now seeing a prospect of advantage from the growing confusion of the times, and the prevalence of enthusiasm and credulity of all kinds, he returned to London. Here having purchased several curious books in his art, which were found in pulling down the house of another astrologer, he perused them with incessant diligence, and, in 1644, published his “Merlinus Anglicus Junior,” and several other astrological books. He had contracted an intimacy, the preceding year, with Bulstrode Whitelocke, esq. who was afterwards his friend and patron; and, in 1645, devoted himself entirely to the interests of the parliament, after the battle of Naseby, though he had before rather inclined to the king’s party. In 1647, upon the breaking out of the quarrel between the parliament and army, whose head quarters were at Windsor, he was sent for, together with Booker, another astrologer, by Fairfax, the general, who addressed him in these terms: “That God had blessed the army with many signal victories, and yet their work was not finished; that he hoped God would go along with them, until this work was done; that they sought not themselves, but the welfare and tranquillity of the good people, and the whole nation; and, for that end, were resolved to sacrifice both their own lives and fortunes; that he hoped the art, which they (Lilly and Booker) studied, was lawful and agreeable to God’s word; that he understood it not, but did not doubt they both feared God, and therefore had a good opinion of them.” To this speech Lilly returned the following answer: “My lord, I am glad to see you here at this time: certainly both the people of God, and all others of this nation, are very sensible of God’s mercy, love, and favour unto them, in directing fhe parliament to nominate and elect you general of their armies, a person so religious, so valiant. The several unexpected victories obtained under your excellency’s conduct will eternize the same unto all posterity. We are confident of God’s going along with you and your army, until the great work, for which he ordained you both, is fully perfected; which we hope will be the conquering and subversion of yours and the parliament’s enemies; and then a quiet settlement, and firm peace over all the nation, unto God’s glory, and full satisfaction of tender consciences. Sir, as for ourselves, we trust in God, and, as Christians, believe in him; we do not study any art, but what is lawful and consonant to the scriptures, fathers, and antiquity! which we humbly desire you to believe.” This audience, in November, seems to have been occasioned by a suspicion of his attachment to the royal party, of which he had afforded some ground, by receiving an application from the king, then in custody of the army at Hampton-court; for, in August preceding, when his majesty had framed thoughts of escaping from the soldiery, and hiding himself somewhere near the city, he sent, as Lilly tells us, Mrs. Whorwood, to know in what quarter of the nation he might be safely concealed, till he thought proper to discover himself. Lilly, having erected a figure, said, the king might be safely concealed in some part of Essex about twenty miles from London, where the lady happened to have a house fit for his majesty’s reception, and went away next morning to acquaint him with it. But the king was gone away in the night Westward, and surrendered himself at length to Hammond, in the Isle of Wight; and thus the project was rendered abortive. He was again applied to by the same lady, in 1648, for the same purpose, while the king was at Carisbrook- castle; whence having laid a design to escape by sawing the iron bars of his chamber-window, Mrs. Whorwood came to our author, and acquainted him with it. Lilly procured a proper saw, made by one Farmor, an ingenious locksmith, in Bow-lane, Cheapside, and furnished her with aquafortis besides; by which means his majesty had nearly succeeded, but his heart failing, he proceeded no farther. About September, the same lady came a third time to Lilly, on the same errand. The parliament-commissioners were now appointed to treat with his majesty; on which, our astrologer, after perusing his figure, told the lady the commissioners would be there such a day, appointed the day and hour when to receive them, and directed, as soon as the propositions were read, to sign them, and make haste with all speed to come up with the commissioners to London, the army being then far distant from London, and the city enraged stoutly against them. The king is said to have promised he would do so, but was diverted from it by lord Say.

All this while our astrologer continued true to his own interest, by serving that of the parliament party, from whom he received this year, 1648, fifty pounds in cash, and an order from the council of state for a pension of 100l. perann. which was granted to him for furnishing them with a perfect knowledge of the chief concernments of France. This he obtained by means of a secular priest, with whom he had been formerly acquainted, and who now was confessor to one of the French secretaries. Lilly received the pension two years, when he threw it up, with the employment, in disgust on some account or other. He read public lectures upon astrology, in 1648 and 1649, for the improvement of young students in that art and succeeded so well both as a practitioner and teacher, that we find him, in 1651 and 1652, laying out near 2000l. for lands and a house at Hersham. During the siege of Colchester, he and Booker were sent for thither, to encourage the soldiers, which they did by assuring them that the town would soon be taken, which proved true, and was perhaps not difficult to be foreseen. In 1650 he published that the parliament should not continue, but a new government arise, agreeably thereto; and in the almanack for 1653, he also asserted, that the parliament stood upon a ticklish foundation, and that the commonalty and soldiery would join together against them. On this he was called before the committee of plundered ministers; but, receiving notice before the arrival of the messenger, he applied to speaker Lenthal, always his friend, who pointed out the offensive passages, which he immediately altered; and attended the committee next morning with six copies printed, which six alone he acknowledged to be his. By this trick he escaped after having been only detained thirteen days in custody of the serjeant at arms. This year he was engaged in a dispute with Mr. Thomas Gataker, and, before the expiration of the year, he lost his second wife, to his great joy, and married a third in October following. In 1655 he was indicted at Hicks’s-hall, for giving judgment upon stolen goods, but acquitted: and, in 1659, he received, from the king of Sweden, a present of a gold chain and medal, worth above 50l. on account of his having mentioned that monarch with great respect in his almanacks of 1657 and 1658.

, an eminent English grammarian, was born at Odiham, in Hampshire, about 1468. After a good foundation of school-learning, he was sent to Magdalen -college, Oxford, and admitted a demy there at the age of eighteen. Having taken the degree of B. A. he quitted the university, and went, for religion’s sake, to Jerusalem, as Pits, and after him Wood, Tanner, and others have asserted; but Bale, from whom Pits copied, gives no such reason for Lily’s journey. It is indeed most probable, that he travelled eastward with an intention to acquire some knowledge of the Greek language, especially as he continued five years in the island of Rhodes with no other design. At Rhodes he found several learned men who had taken refuge there, under the protection of the knights, after the taking of Constantinople; and here he became acquainted with the domestic life and familiar conversation of the Greeks. He went thence to Rome; and improved himself farther in the Latin and Greek tongues under John Sulpitius and Pomponius Sabinus. On his arival in England, in 1509, he settled in London, and taught a private grammar-school, being the first teacher of Greek in the metropolis. In this he had so much success and reputation, that he was appointed first-master of St. Paul’s school. by the founder, Dr. Culet, in 1510. This laborious and useful employment he filled for the space of twelve years; and in that time educated a great many youths, some of whom proved the greatest men in the nation, as Thomas Lupset, sir Anthony Denny, sir William Paget, sir Edward North, John Leland, &c. He died of the plague at London in February 1523, aged 54, and was buried in the north yard of St. Paul’s. He is highly praised by Erasmus for his uncommon knowledge in the languages, and admirable skill in the instruction of youth. He was very intimate with sir Thomas More, to whose Latin translations of several Greek epigrams are prefixed some done by Lily, printed with this title, “Progymnasmata Thorns Mori & Gulielmi Lilii, Sodalium,” Basil, 1518, by Frobenius; and again in 1673, ibid. Lily, by his wife Agnes, had two sons; and a daughter, who was married to his usher John Rightwise, who succeeded his father-in-law in the mastership of St. Paul’s school, and died in 1532.

Lily had two sons, George and Peter. George was born in London, and bred at Magdalen-college, in Oxford; but, leaving the university without a degree, went to Rome, where he was received into the patronage of cardinal Pole, and became eminent for several branches of learning. Upon his return, he was made canon of St. Paul’s, and afterwards prebendary of Canterbury. He published the first exact map of Britain, and died in 1559. He wrote “An^lorum Regum Chronices Epitome,” Venice, 1548, Francf. 1565, Basil, 1577. To which are added, “Lancastrian & Eboracensis [Famil.] de Regno Contentiones, & Regum Anglise genealogia” “Elogia Virorum illustrium, 1559,” 8vo; “Catalogus, sive Series Pontificum Romanorum;” besides the “Life of Bishop Fisher,” ms. in the library of the Royal Society. Peter, his second son, was a dignitary in the church, of Canterbury, and father of another Peter Lily, D. D, This other was some time fellow of Jesus-college in Cambridge afterwards a brother of the Savoy-hospital in the Strand, London prebendary of St. Paul’s; and archdeacon of Taunton. He died in 1614, leaving a widow, who published sooie of his sermons.

, a celebrated professor of divinity in Holland, of the Arminian persuasion, was of a good family, originally of Maestricht, and born at Amsterdam, June 19, 1633. He passed the first years of his life in his father’s house, going thence daily to school; and then, attending the public lectures, became the disciple of Gaspar Barlaeus in ethics, of Gerard John Vossius in history, and of Arnold Sanguerd in philosophy. This foundation being laid, he applied himself to divinity under Stephen Curcellseus, who succeeded Simon Episcopius in that chair, among the remonstrants. From Amsterdam he went to Utrecht, and frequented the lectures of Gilbert Voetius, and other divines of the reformed religion. In May 1654, he returned to Amsterdam, and made his first probationsermon there in Oct. following. He passed an examination in divinity in August 1655; and was admitted to preach publicly, as a probationer, which he did first at Haerlem. The same year he was invited to be stated minister of Alcmaer, but declined it, not thinking himself yet qualified for that important task. In 1657 he published a course of sermons in Dutch, by Episcopius, his greut uncle by the mother’s side, and the same year was invited to be minister of the remonstrants at Gouda, where there was a numerous congregation of that sect. He accepted this vocation, and exercised the ministerial function in that town till he was called to Amsterdam.

Controversiarum in Fcederato Belgio de Dutch, under the title of the “ Comviva voce, and afterwards in writing, with Isaac Orobio, -a Jew of Seville in Spain, who had made his escape out of the inquisition, and retired to Amsterdam, where he practised physic with great reputation. This dispute produced a piece by our author, entitled” Collatio arnica de Veritate Religionis Christiana cum erudito Judaso.“” A friendly conference with a learned Jew concerning the Truth of the Christian Religion." In it he shewed, that a Jew can bring no argument of any force in favour of Judaism which may not be made to militate strongly in favour of Christianity. Orobio, however, contended that every man ought to continue in the religion, be what it would, which he professed, since it was easier to disprove the truth of another religion than it was to prove his own; and upon this principle he averred, that, if it had been his lot to be born of parents who worshiped the sun, he saw no reason why he should renounce their religion and embrace another. To this piece against Orobio, Limborch added a small tract against Uriel Acosta, a Portuguese deist, in which Limborch answers very solidly his arguments, to shew that there is no true religion besides the religion of nature. (See Acosta.) Shortly after, Limborch published a little piece of Episcopius, in Flemish, containing an account of a dispute between that remonstrant and one William Borne, a Romish priest, shewing, that the Roman church is not exempt from errors, and is not the sovereign judge of controversies. In 1692 the book of sentences passed in the inquisition at Thoulouse, in France, coming into the hands of a friend, and containing all the sentences passed in that court from 1307 to 1323, Limborch resolved to publish it, as it furnished him with an occasion of adding the history of that dreadful tribunal, drawn from the writings of the inquisitors themselves *. In 1693 our author had the care of a new edition, in one large folio volume, of the sermons of Episcopius, in Dutch; to

Having pursued the strictest temperance through life, he preserved the vigour of his mind, and health of his body, to a considerable age, but in the autumn of 1711 he was seized with the St. Anthony’s fire which, growing more violent in the winter, carried him oft, April So, 1713. His funeral oration was spoken by John Le Clerc, who gives him the following character: “Mr, Limborch had many friends among the learned, both at home and abroad, especially in England, where he was much esteemed, particularly by archbishop Tillotson, to whom his history of the inquisition was dedicated, and Mr. Locke. With Mr, Locke he first became acquainted in Holland, and after-> wards held a correspondence by letters, in which, among other things, he has explained the nature of human liberty, a subject not exactly understood by Mr. Locke. He was of an open sincere carriage, which was so well tempered with humanity and discretion as to give no offence. In his instructions, when professor, he observed the greatest perspicuity and the justest order, to which his memory, which retained whatever he had written, almost to a word, contributed very much; and, though a long course of teaching had given him an authority with those about him, and his advanced age had added a reverence to him, yet he was never displeased with others for differing from him, but would both censure, and be censured, without chagrin. Though he never proposed the understanding of languages as the end of his studies, yet he had made large advances in them, and read over many of the ancient and modern writers, and would have excelled in this part of literature, if he bad not preferred that which was more important. He bad all the qualifications suitable to the character of a divine. Above all things, he had a love for truth, and pursued the search of it, by reading the Scriptures with the best commentators. As a preacher, his sermons were methodical and solid, rather than eloquent. If he had applied himself to the mathematics he would undoubtedly have excelled therein; but he had no particular fondness for that study, though he was an absolute master of arithmetic. He was so perfectly acquainted with the history of his own country, especially for 150 years, that he even retained the most minute circumstance?, and the very time of each transaction; so that scarce any one could deceive him in that particular. In his manner he was grave withput pride or sullenness, affable without affectation, pleasant and facetious, upon occasion, without sinking into a vulgar lowness, or degenerating into malice or ill-nature. By these qualifications he was agreeable to all who conversed with him; and his behaviour towards his neighbours was such, that all who knew him, or had any dealings with him, ever commended it.”

, one of the most eminent physicians and scholars of his age, descended from the Linacres of Li nacre-hall in the parish of Chesterfield, Derbyshire, was born at Canterbury about 1460. Having completed his school-education, under William de Sellingj a very eminent master, in his native city, he entered at Oxford, and was chosen fellow of All Souls’ college in 1484. Being desirous of farther advancement in learning, he accompanied De Selling into Italy, whither the latter was sent on an embassy to the court of Rome by Henry VII. De Selling left him at Bologna, with strong recommendations to Politian, one of the most elegant Latinists in Europe; and removing thence to Florence, Linacre acquired the favour of that munificent patron of literature, Lorenzo de Medicis, who granted him the privilege of attending the same preceptors with his own sons; an opportunity, by which he knew how to profit; and under Demetrius Chalcondylas, who had fled from Constantinople when it was taken by the Turks, he acquired a perfect knowledge of the Greek language. He then went to Rome, and studied medicine and natural philosophy under Hermolaus Barbaras. He applied particularly to the works of Aristotle and Galen, and is said to have been the first Englishman who made himself master of those writers by perusing them in the original Greek. He also translated and published several of Galen’s tracts into most elegant Latin, and along with Grocyn and William Latimer, undertook a translation of Aristotle, which, however, they left imperfect. On his return to England, he was incorporated M. D. at Oxford, which degree he had taken at Padua, gave temporary lectures on physic, and taught the Greek language in that university. His reputation soon became so high, that king Henry VII. called him to court, and entrusted him with the care both of the health and education of his son, prince Arthur. He is said also to have instructed princess Catherine in the Italian language. He was made successively physician to the kings Henry VII., Henry VIII., and Edward VI., and to the princess Mary.

In the reign of Henry VIII. indeed, he appears to have Stood above all rivalship at the head of his profession; and he evinced his attachment to its interests, as well as to the public good, by various acts; but especially by founding two lectures on physic in the university of Oxford, and one in that of Cambridge. That at Oxford was left to Merton college, and the Cambridge lecture was given to St. John’s, at which college it is said by Wood and Knight that Linacre studied for some time. The endowment of both is the manor of Tracys, or Tracies, in Kent; but although he bequeathed these at his death in 1524, and the lectures were actually read even in his life-time, they were not established until December 1549, by Tunstall, bishop of Durham. Linacre also may be reputed the founder of the royal college of physicians in London. Regretting that there was no proper check upon illiterate monks and empirics, licences being easily obtained by improper persons, when the bishops were authorised to examine and license practitioners in an art of which they could not be competent judges, Linacre obtained letters patent in 1518 from Henry VIII. constituting a corporate body of regularly bred physicians in London, in whom was vested the sole right of examining and admitting persons to practise within the city, and seven miles round it; and also of licensing practitioners throughout the whole kingdom, except such as were graduates of Oxford or Cambridge, who by virtue of their degrees were independent of the college, except within London and its precincts. The college had likewise authority given to it to examine prescriptions and drugs in apothecaries’ shops. Linacre was the first president of the new college, and continued in the office during the remaining seven years of his life; and, at his death, he bequeathed to the college his house in Knight-rider-street, in which its meetings were held.

In his literary character, Linacre stands eminently distinguished; as he was one of the first, in conjunction with Colet, Lily, Grocyn, and Latimer, who revived, or rather introduced, classical learning in this island. Translations from the Greek authors into Latin were the chief occupations of the literati of those times; and Linacre, as we have already observed, conferred a benefit on his profession, by translating several of the most valuable pieces of Galen. These were the treatises, “De Sanitate tuenda,” in six books, which was printed at Cambridge in 1517, and dedicated to king Henry VIII.; “De Morbis curandis,” in fourteen books, printed at Paris in 1526; three books “De Temperamentis,” and one “De inaequali Temperie,” first printed at Cambridge in 1521, and inscribed to pope Leo X. A* copy of this on vellum, which Linacre presented to Henry VIII. is now in the Bodleian. There is another edition, without date or printer’s name. “De naturalibus Facaltatibus,” three books, together with one book “De Pulsuum Usu,” without date, but they were reprinted by Colinaeus in 1528, as well as his posthumous translation of the four books “De Morborum Symptomatibus.” In these versions Linacre exhibited a Latin style so pure and elegant, as ranked him among the finest writers of his age. In the polish of his style he was rather fastidious, and his friend Erasmus describes him as “Vir non exacti tantum, sed severi judicii;” and Huet, in his learned treatise “De claris Interpretatoribus,” gives him the pra?se of extraordinary elegance and chasteness of style, but intimates that he occasionally sacrifices fidelity to these qualities.

, a learned divine, of St. MaryVhall at Oxford, officiated for many years as minister of the nonjuring society in Trinity-chapel, Aldersgate-street, and is said to have been, their last minister. He was also for some time a corrector of the press to Mr. Bowyer the printer. He finished a long and useful life, June 21, 1768, at the age of eighty-two; and was buried in Islington church-yard. Mr. Lindsay published “The Short History of the Regal Succession,” &c. with “Remarks on Whiston’s Scripture Politics,” &c. 1720, 8vo which occurs in the Bodleian Catalogue. His valuable translation of Mason’s “Vindication of the Church of England,” 1726, (reprinted in 1728,) has a large and elaborate preface, containing “a full and particular Series of the Succession of our Bishops, through the several Reigns since the Reformation,” &c. He dates the second edition from “Islington, 13 Dec. 1727.” In 1747, he published, in the same size, “Two Sermons preached at Court in 1620, by Francis Mason;” which he recommends, “as well for their own intrinsic value, as to make up a complete Collection of that learned Author’s Works.” He had a nephew, who died curate of Waltham abbey, Sept. 17, 1779.

In the mean time he was sent as lion king, with sir John Campbel of Laudon, in 1535, to the emperor, to demand in marriage one of the princesses of his house. The king, however, not being satisfied with the portraits of the princesses presented to him, or perhaps, as Mr. Chalmers thinks, being attracted by a more useful connection with France, sent Lindsay, in 1536, to that country to demand in marriage a daughter of the house of Vendome; but the king himself, arriving the year following, made choice of Magdalene of France, who died in about two months after her marriage; and this lamentable event occasioned Lindsay’s next poem, the “Deploratioun of the Deith of quene Magdalene.” The king, however, married again in 1538, and Lindsay’s talents were called forth in the rejoicings and ceremonies consequent to that event, and afterwards on the birth of a prince. During the remainder of the reign of James V. he appears to have retained his majesty’s favour, and to have been frequently employed in his character of herald; but few of these incidents seem of sufficient importance to be detached from his biographer’s narrative. During the regency, he appears to have espoused the cause of the reformers, and after the assassination of cardinal Beaton, wrote his “Tragedie of the late Cardinal,” to strengthen the prejudices of the public against that ecclesiastic.

In 1548 he was sent, as lion herald, to Christian, king of Denmark, to solicit ships, for protecting the Scottish coasts against the English, and to negociate a free trade, particularly in grain: the latter purpose only was accomplished, but at Copenhagen, Lindsay had an opportunity of becoming acquainted with the literati of Denmark. He at length returned to his usual occupations, and was probably no more employed in such distant embassies. About this time he published the most pleasing of all his poems, “The Historic and Testament of Squire Meldrum.” In 1553 he finished his last and greatest work, “The Monarchic.” When he died, seems a matter of great uncertainty. His latest and best-informed biographer is inclined to place his death in or about 1557; but others say that he lived till 1567. It is rather singular that a man of so much celebrity, a great public officer, one of the reformers, or who at least contributed to the reformation, and the most popular poet of his time, should have died in such obscurity, without even a tradition as to when or where he was buried. Little of his personal character can now be known, but what is to be gleaned from his writings. Hfc entered with great zeal into the religious disputes of his time, but is supposed to lean rather to the Lutheran than Calvinistic principles of reformation; his satires, however, were powerfully assisting in exposing the vices of the clergy, and produced a lasting etiect on the minds of the people. We shall not enter very minutely into his character as a poet. In his works, says Mr. Ellis, we do not often find either the splendid diction of Dunbar, or the prolific imagination of Gawin Douglas. Perhaps, indeed, the “Dream” is his only composition which can be cited as uniformly poetical; but his various learning, his good sense, his perfect knowledge of courts, and of the world, the facility of his versification, and above all, his peculiar talent of adapting himself to readers of all denominations, will continue to secure to him a considerable share of that popularity, for which he was originally indebted to the opinions he professed, no less than to his poetical merit. The most ample information respecting Lindsay, his personal history, and works, may be found in the very accurate edition of the latter published in 1806, by George Chalmers, esq. in 3 vols. 8vo. It has been justly remarked that if the learned editor had executed no more than the glossary prefixed to this edition, he would have been amply entitled to the gratitude both of English and Scotch scholars. A more elaborate, learned, and satisfactory production of the kind has certainly not appeared since that of Ruddiman.

, a Socinian writer, was born at Middlewich, in Cheshire, June 20th, 1723, old style. His father, Mr. Robert Lindsey, was an opulent proprietor of the salt-works in that neighbourhood; his mother’s name was Spencer, a younger branch of the Spencer family, in the county of Buckingham. Theophilus was the second of three children, and so named after his godfather, Theophilus earl of Huntingdon. He received the rudiments of grammar-learning at Middlewich, and from his early attachment to books, and the habitual seriousness of his mind, he was intended by his mother for the church. He lost some time by a change of schools, until he was put under the care of Mr. Barnard of the free-school of Leeds, under whom he made a rapid progress in classical learning. At the age of eighteen he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, where, by exemplary diligence and moral conduct, he obtained the entire approbation of his tutors. As soon as he had finished his studies at college, taken his first degree, and had been admitted to deacon’s orders, he was nominated by sir George Wheler to a chapel in Spital-square London. Soon after this, he was, by the recommendation of the earl of Huntingdon, appointed domestic chaplain to Algernon duke of Somerset. The duke, from a great regard for his merit, determined to procure him a high rank in the church, but an early death deprived Mr. Lindsey of his illustrious patron. In 1754, be accompanied the present duke of Northumberland to the continent, and on his return he supplied, for some time, the temporary vacancy of a good living in the north of England, called Kirkby-Wisk: here he became acquainted with Mr. archdeacon Blackburne, and in 1760 married his daughter-in-law. From Kirkby Mr. Lindsey went to Piddletown, in Dorsetshire, having been presented to the living of that place by the earl of Huntingdon: this, through the interest of the same patron, he exchanged, in 1764, for the vicarage of Catterick, in Yorkshire. Here he resided nearly ten years, an exemplary pattern of a primitive and conscientous pastor, highly respected and beloved by the people committed to his charge. Besides his various and important duties as a parish clergyman, Mr. Lindsey was ever alive, and heartily active, in every cause in which a deviation from the formularies and obligations of the church was considered as necessary. With this view, in 1771 he zealously co-operated with Mr. archdeacon Blackburne, Dr. John Jebb, Mr. Wyvil, and others, in endeavouring to obtain relief in matters of subscription to the thirty-nine articles. Mr. Lindsey had, probably, for some years, entertained doubts with respect to the doctrine of the Trinity, and other leading topics of the established faith; and these pressed so heavy upon him that he could no longer endure to remain in a church, partaking of its emoluments, which he could not deserve, and preaching its doctrines, which he could not believe. He therefore, in November 1773, wrote to the prelate of his diocese, informing him of his iateiuion to quit the church, and signifying, that in a few days he should transmit to him his deed of resignation. The bishop endeavoured to persuade him to remain at his post, but he had made up his mind that duty required the sacrifice, and he was resolved to bear the consequences. When the act was done, he said he felt himself delivered from a load which had long lain heavy upon him, and at times nearly overwhelmed him. Previously to his quitting Catterick, Mr. Lindsey delivered a farewell address to his parishioners, in which he stated his motives for quitting them in a simple and very affecting manner, pointing out the reasons why he could no longer conduct, nor join in their worship, without the guilt of continual insincerity before God, and endangering the loss of his favour for ever. He left Catterick about the middle of December, and after visiting some friends in different parts of the country, he arrived in London in January 1774, where he met with friends, who zealously patronized the idea which he entertained of opening a place of worship, devoted entirely to unitarian principles. A large room was at first fitted up for the purpose in Essex-street in the Strand, which was opened April 17, 1774. The service of the place was conducted according to the plan of a liturgy which had been altered from that used in the established church by the celebrated Dr. Samuel Clarke, whose conscience was not quite so delicate as that of Mr. Lindsey. Mr. Lindsey published the sermon which he preached on the opening of his chapel, to which was added an account of the liturgy made use of. About the same time he published his “Apology,” of which several editions were called for in the course of a few years. This was followed by a still larger volume, entitled “A Sequel to the Apology,” which was intended as a reply to his various opponents, and likewise to vindicate and establish the leading doctrines which he professed, and on account of which he had given up his preferment in the church. This work was published in 1776; and in 1778 he was enabled, by the assistance of his friends, to build the chapel of Essex-street, and to purchase the ground on which it stands. Till the summer of 1793, Mr. Lindsey, with the aid of his friend the Rev. Dr. Disney, conducted the services of the place, upon strict unitarian principles, to a numerous congregation. He then resigned the whole into the hands of his coadjutor, notwithstanding the, earnest wishes of his hearers that he should still continue a part of the services, Though he had quitted the duties of the pulpit, he continued to labour in the cause, by his publications, till he had attained his 80th, year. In 1802, he published his last work, entitled “Conversations on the Divine Government, shewing that every thing is from God, and for good to all.” The professed object of this piece is to vindicate the Creator from those gloomy notions which are too often attached to his providence, and to shew that the government of the world is the wisest that could have been adopted, and that afflictions and apparent evils are permitted for the general good. From this principle Mr. Lindsey derived consolation through life, and upon it he acted in every difficult and trying scene. On his death-bed he spoke of his sufferings with perfect patience and meekness, and when reminded, by a friend, that he doubtless was enabled to bear them with so much fortitude in the recollection of his favourite maxim, that “Whatever is, is right; w “No,” said he with an animation that lighted up his countenance, “Whatever is, is best.” This was the last sentence which he was able distinctly to articulate: he died Novembers, 1808. Besides the works already referred to, he published two dissertations: 1. On the preface to St. John’s Gospel; 2. On praying to Christ:” An Historical View of the State of the Unitarian Doctrine and Worship from the Reformation to our own Times;“and several other pieces. Among controversial writers Mr. Lindsey takes a place as his” Vindiciae Priestleianae,“and his” Examination of Mr. Robinson’s Plea for the Divinity of Christ," will shew. Two volumes of his Sermons have been published since his death.

Mr. Lindsey was a man of mild and amiable manners, and very highly respected by every person who knew him. As a writer on the side of unitarianism, it cannot be said that he brought many accessions of new matter and argument, but his honourable conduct in the resignation of his preferment rendered him peculiarly an ornament to the sect he joined, and the loss of such a man might be justly regretted by the church he left.

, a Dutch painter, or at least one who painted much in the Dutch manner, was born at Frankfort on the Maine, in 1625, and learned his art in Holland, but afterwards went to Koine, where he studiously observed every thing that was curious in art or nature, and continued at Rome till he was twenty-five years of age. His usual subjects are fairs, mountebanks, seaprospects, naval engagements, and landscapes. His landscapes are enriched with antiquities, ruins, animals, and elegant figures; his sea-fights are full of expression, exciting pity and terror; and all his objects are well-designed. His skies are generally light, and thinly clouded, and his management of the aerial perspective is extremely judicious; his keeping is usually good; his distances of a clear bluish tint; and the whole together is masterly, producing an agreeable effect. In painting figures or animals, he had uncommon readiness, and on that account he was employed by several eminent artists to adorn their landscapes with those objects; and whatever he inserted in the works of other masters, was always well adapted to the scene and the subject. His pencil is free, his touch clean and light, and his compositions are in general esteem. It may be observed, that he was particularly fond of introducing into most of his compositions, pieces of architecture, the remains of elegant buildings, or the gates of the sea-port towns of Italy; embellished with statues, placed sometimes on the pediments and cornices, and sometimes in niches. He also excelled in representing Italian fairs and markets, inserting in those subjects abundance of figures, well grouped and designed, in attitudes suitable to their different characters and occupations; and although )ie often repeated the same subjects, yet the liveliness of liis imagination, and the readiness of his invention, always enabled him to give them a remarkable variety. He died in 1687.

, a French advocate and political writer, was born at Rheims, July 14, 1736. His father was one of the professors of the college of Beauvais, at Paris, and had his son educated under him, v who made such proficiency in his studies as to gain the three chief prizes of the college in 1751. This early celebrity was noticed by the duke de Deux-Pont, then at Paris, who took him with him to the country; but Linguet soon left this nobleman for the service of the prince de Beavau, who employed him as his aide-de-camp in the war in Portugal, on account of his skill in mathematics. During his residence in that country, Linguet learned the language so far as to be able to translate some Portuguese dramas into French. Returning to France in 1762, he was admitted to the bar, where his character was very various; but amongst the reports both of enemies and friends, it appears that of an hundred and thirty causes, he lost only nine, and was allowed to shine both in oiatory and compo*­sidon. He had the art, however, of making enemies by the occasional liberties he took with characters; and at one time twenty-four of his brethren at the bar, whether from jealousy or a better reason, determined that they would take no brief in any cause in which he was concerned, and the parliament of Paris approved this so far as to interdict him from pleading. We are not sufficiently acquainted with the circumstances of the case to be able to form an opinion on the justice of this harsh measure. It appears, however, to have thrown Linguet out of his profession, and he then began to employ his pen on his numerous political writings but these, while they added to his reputation as a lively writer, added likewise to the number of his enemies. The most pointed satire levelled at him was the “Theory of Paradox,” generally attributed to the abbe Morellet, who collected all the absurd paradoxes to be found in Linguet’s productions, which it must be allowed are sufficiently numerous, and deserve the castigation he received. Linguet endeavoured to reply, but the laugh was against him, and all the wits of Paris enjoyed his mortification. His “Journal,” likewise, in which most of his effusions appeared, was suppressed by the minister of state, Maurepas; and Linguet, thinking his personal liberty was now in danger, came to London; but the English not receiving him as he expected, he went to Brussels, and in consequence of an application to the count de Vergeunes, was allowed to return to France. He had not been here long, before, fresh complaints having been made of his conduct, he was, Sept. 27, 1780, sent to the Bastille, where he remained twenty months. Of his imprisonment and the causes he published a very interesting account, which was translated into English, and printed here in 1783. He was, after being released, exiled to Rethel, but in a short time returned to England. He had been exiled on two other occasions, once to Chartres, and the other to Nogent-le-Kotrou. At this last place, he seduced a madame But, the wife of a manufacturer, who accompanied him to England. From England he went again to Brussels, and resumed his journal, or “Annales politiques,” in which he endeavoured to pay his court to the emperor Joseph, who was so much pleased with a paper he had written on his favourite project of opening the Scheldt, that he invited him to Vienna, and made him a present of 1000 ducats. Linguet, however, soon forfeited the emperor’s favour, by taking part with Varider Noot and the other insurgents of Brabant. Obliged, therefore, to quit the Netherlands, he came to Paris in 1791, and appeared at the bar of the constituent assembly as advocate for the colonial assembly of St. Domingo and the cause of the blacks. In February 1792, he appeared in the legislative assembly to denounce Bertrand de Moleville, the minister of the marine; but his manner was so absurd, that notwithstanding the unpopularity of that statesman, the assembly treated it with contempt, and Linguet indignantly tore in pieces his memorial, which he had been desired to leave on the table. During the reign of terror, he withdrew into the country, but was discovered and brought before the revolutionary tribunal, and condemned to death June 27, 1794, for having in his works paid court to the despots of Vienna and London. At the age of fifty-seven he went with serenity and courage to meet his fate. It is not very easy to form an opinion of Linguet’s real character. His being interrupted in his profession seems to have thrown him upon the public, whose prejudices he alternately opposed and flattered. His works abound in contradictions, but upon the whole it may be inferred that he was a lover of liberty, and no inconsiderable promoter of those opinions which precipitated the revolution. That he was not one of the ferocious sect, appears from his escape, and his death. His works are very numerous. The principal are, 1. “Voyage au labyrinthe du jardin du roi,” Hague, (Paris,) 1755, 12mo. 2. “Histoire du siecle d'Alexandre,” Paris, 1762, 12mo. 3. “Projet d‘un canal et d’un pont sur les cotes de Picardie,” 1764, 8vo. 4. “Le Fanatisme de Philosophes,” 1764, 8vo. 5. “Necessit6 d‘une reforme dans l’administration de la justice et des lois civiles de France,” Amst. 1764, 8vo. 6. “La Dime royale,” 1764, reprinted in 1787. 7. “Histoire des Revolutions de l'empire Remain,” 1766, 2 vols. 12mo. This is one of his paradoxical works, in which tyranny and slavery are represented in the most favourable light. 8. “Theorie des Lois,” 1767, 2 vols. 8vo, reprinted in 1774. 9. “Histoire impartiale des Jesuites,” 1768, 8vo. 10. “Hardion’s Universal History,” vols. 19th and 20th. 11. “Theatre Espagnole,” 1770, 4 vols. 12mo. 12. “Theorie du Libelle,” Amst. (Paris), 1775, 12mo, an a,nswer to the abbe Morellet. 13. “Du plusheureux gouvernment,” &c. 1774, 2 vols. 12mo. 14. “Essai philosophique sur le Monachisme,” 1777, 8vo. Besides these he wrote several pieces on the revolution in Brabant, and a collection of law cases.

, an eminent mnsic professor and organist, long resident at Bath, where he had served an apprenticeship under Chilcot, the organist of that city, was a studious man, equally versed in the theory and practice of his art. Having a large family of children, in whom he found the seeds of genius had been planted by nature, and the gift of voice, in order to cultivate this, he pointed his studies to singing, and became the best singing-master of his time, if we may judge by the specimens of “his success in his own family. He was not only a masterly player on the organ and harpsichord, but a good composer, as his elegies and several compositions for Drury-lane theatre evinced. His son Thomas, who was placed under Nardini at Florence, the celebrated disciple of Tartini, was a fine performer on the violin, with a talent for composition, which, if he had lived to develope, would have given longevity to his fame. Being at Grimsthorpe, in Lincolnshire, at the seat of the duke of Ancaster, where he often amused himself in rowing, fishing, and sailing in a boat on a piece of water, in a squall of wind, or by some accident, the boat was overset, and this amiable and promising youth was drowned at an early age, to the great affliction of his family and friends, particularly his matchless sister, Mrs. Sheridan, whom this calamity rendered miserable for a long time; during which, her affection and grief appeared in verses of the most sweet and affecting kind on the sorrowful event. The beauty, talents, and mental endowments of this” Sancta Caecilia rediviva," will be remembered to the last hour of all who heard, or even saw and conversed with her. The tone of her voice and expressive manner of singing were as enchanting as her countenance and conversation. In her singing, with a mellifluous-toned voice, a perfect shake and intonation, she was possessed of the double power of delighting an audience equally in pathetic strains and songs of brilliant execution, which is allowed to very tew singers. When she had heard the Agujari and the Danzi, afterwards madame le Brun, she astonished all hearers by performing their bravura airs, extending the natural compass of her voice a fourth above the highest note of the harpsichord, before additional keys were in fashion. Mrs. Sheridan died at Bristol in 1792.

Mrs. Tickel, her sister, was but little inferior to her in beauty and talents; and Mr. Linley’s other daughters continued to excite the admiration of all who knew them, in a manner worthy of the family from which they sprang.

, afterwards Von Linne', the most eminent of modern naturalists, was born at Rashult, in the province of Smaland, in Sweden, May 13th, 1707. His father, Nicholas Linnæus, was assistant minister of the parish of Stenbrohult, to which the hamlet of Rashult belongs, and became in process of time its pastor or rector; having married Christina Broderson, the daughter of his predecessor. The subject of our memoir was their first-born child. The family of Linnæus had been peasants, but some of them, early in the seventeenth century, had followed literary pursuits. In the beginning of that century regular and hereditary surnames were first adopted in Sweden, on which occasion literary men often chose one of Latin or Greek derivation and structure, retaining the termination proper to the learned languages. A remarkable Lindentree, Tilia Europæa, growing near the place of their residence, is reported to have given origin to the names of Lindelius and Tiliander, in some branches of this family but the above-mentioned Nicholas, is said to have first taken that of Linnæus, by which his son became so exlen--“sively known. Of the taste which laid the foundation of his happiness, as well as his celebrity, this worthy father was the primary cause. Residing in a delightful spot, on the banks of a fine lake, surrounded by hills and valleys, woods and cultivated ground, his garden and his fields yielded him both amusement and profit, and his infant son imbibed, under his auspices, that pure and ardent love of nature for its own sake, with that habitual exercise of the mind in observation and activity, which ever after marked his character, and which were enhanced by a rectitude of principle, an elevation of devotional taste, a warmth of feeling, and an amiableness of manners, rarely united in those who so transcendantly excel in any branch of philosophy or science, because the cultivation of the heart does by no means so constantly as it ought keep pace with that of the understanding. The maternal uncle of Nicholas Linnæus, Sueno Tiliander, who had educated him with his own children, was also fond of plants and of gardening, so that these tastes were in some measure hereditary. From his tutor he learned to avoid the error of the desultory speculators of nature; and his memory, like his powers of perception, was naturally good, and his sight was always remarkably acute. He does not appear, however, to have been very happy under this tutor, and at seven years of age grammar had but an unequal contest with botany, in the mind of the young student. Nor was he much more fortunate when removed, in 1717, to the grammar-school of Wexio, the master of which, as his disgusted pupil relates,” preferred stripes and punishments to admonitions and encouragements.“In 1722 he was admitted to a higher form in the school, and his drier studies were now allowed to be intermixed and sweetened with the recreations of botany. In 1724, being seventeen years of age, he was removed to the superior seminary or Gymnasium, and his destination was fixed for the church; but, having no taste for Greek or Hebrew, ethics, metaphysics, or theology, he devoted himself with success to mathematics, natural philosophy,and a scientific pursuit of his darling botany. The” Chloris Gothica“of Bromelius, and” Hortus Upsaliensis" of Rudbeck, which made a part of his little library, were calculated rather to fire than to satisfy his curiosity; while his Palmberg and Tillands might make him sensible how much still remained to be done. His own copies of these books, used with the utmost care and neatness, are now in sir James Smith’s library. Linnæus’ s literary reputation, therefore, made so little progress, that his tutors havino pronounced him a dunce, he would probably have been put to some handicraft trade, had not Dr. Hothmann, the lecturer on natural philosophy, taken him into his own house, with a view to the studv of physic, and given him a private course of instruction in physiology. He first suggested to Linnæus the true principles upon which botany ought to be studied, founded on the parts of fructification, and put the system of Tournefort into his hands, in the knowledge of which he made a rapid progress.

In 1727 Linnæus was matriculated at the university of Lund, and devoted himself to the study of medicine. He lodged at the house of a physician, Dr. Stobaeus, and haying accesfs to a library and museum of natural history, was indefatigable in his application, and Stobaeus being infirm in health and spirits, Linnæus was allowed occasionally to relieve him from the labours of his profession, and soon bocame a great favourite. In the ensuing summer he passed the vacation under his paternal roof, and meeting there with his former patron Rothmann, by his advice he quitted Lund for Upsal, as a superior school of medicine and botany. But in this situation, owing to his father’s poverty, he was reduced to great necessity, and although he came well recommended, could only obtain a royal scholarship, which was so insufficient for his maintenance, that he often wanted the necessaries of life. He nevertheless studied with great perseverance, and at last, in 1729, obtained a liberal patron in Dr. Olaus Celsius, professor of divinity, who met him by chance in that academic garden, the fame of which he was destined to immortalize. Dr. Celsius discovering his merit, took him under his protection, and soon recommended him to pupils, by which measure his finances were improved.

While under the roof of Dr. Celsius, he met with a review of Vaillant’s treatise on the sexes of plants, which first led him to consider the importance and various formation of the stamens and pistils, and thence to form a new scheme of arrangement founded on those essential organs. He drew up an essay in opposition to the librarian of the university, who had published a work “De nuptiis planturum i” and this performance being approved both by Celsius and Rudbeck, led the way to his being appointed in 1730 to lecture in the botanic garden, as an assistant to Rudbeck. He was also taken into Rudbeck’s house as tutor to his younger children, and ms leisure time was employed on some of those botanical works which he afterwards published in Holland during his stay there.

The frequent conversations of Rudbeck, concerning the natural history of Lapland, and the curiosities he had seen there, excited an irresistible desire in Linnæus to visit the same country. To this he was perhaps the more immediately prompted by some little circumstances which made his residence at Upsal uncomfortable. These were, the jealousy of Dr. Rosen, who was ambitious of succeeding Rudbeck whenever his professorships should become vacant, and who by his success as the only practising physician at Upsal, was likely to prove a formidable rival as well as some domestic chagrin, which he thus relates “The faithless wife of the librarian Norrelius lived at this time in Rudbeck’s bouse, and by her Linnæus was made so odious to his patroness, that he could no longer stay there.” In the end of 1731, he retired to his native place, and soon received, from the academy of sciences at Upsal, an appointment to travel through Lapland, under the royal authority, and at the expence of the academy. He accordingly set out from Upsal, May 12th, on this expedition; and after visiting the Lapland Alps on foot, and descending to the coast of Norway, of which he has given a most picturesque and striking description, returned by Tornea, and the east side of the Bothnian gulph, to Abo, and so to Upsal, which he reached on the 10th of October, having performed a journey of near 4000 English miles. The particulars of his interesting expedition have lately been given to the public, in an English translation of the original journey written on the spot, illustrated with wooden cuts from his own sketches, making two octavo volumes.

Having learned the art of assaying metals during ten days’ residence at the mines of Biorknas, near Calix, in the course of his tour, he next year gave a private course of lectures on that subject, which had never been taught at Upsal before. The jealousy of Rosen, however, still pursued him; and this rival descended so low as to procure, partly by intreaties, partly by threats, the loan of his manuscript lectures on botany, which Linnæus detected him in surreptitiously copying. Rosen had taken by the hand a young man named Wallerius, who afterwards became a distinguished mineralogist, and for whom he now procured, in opposition to Linnæus, the new place of adjunct, or assistant, in the medical faculty at Lund. But the basest action of Rosen, and which proved envy to be the sole source of his conduct, was, he obtained, through the archbishop’s means, an order from the chancellor to prevent all private medical lectures in the university. Linnæus, deprived of his only means of subsistence, is said to have been so exasperated as to have drawn his sword upon Rosen, an affront with which the latter chose to put up and Linnæus, after having for some time indulged feelings of passionate resentment, entirely subdued these; and Rosen, towards the close of his life, was glad of the medical aid of the man he had in vain endeavoured to crush.

Disappointed in his views of medical advancement, Linnaeus turned his thoughts more immediately to the subject of mineralogy. In the end of 1733, he had visited some of the principal mines of Sweden, and had been introduced to baron Reuterholm, governor of the province of Dalarne, or Dalecarlia, resident at Fahlun, at whose persuasion and expence he travelled through the pastern part of Dalecarlia, accompanied by seven of his ablest pupils, a journal of which tour exists in his library. At Fahlun he gave a course of lectures on the art of assaying, which was numerously attended; and here he first became acquainted with Browallius, then chaplain to the governor, afterwards bishop of Abo, who advised him to take his doctor’s degree, in order to pursue the practice of physic, and further recommended him to aim at some advantageous matrimonial connection. In pursuit of the first part of this advice, Linnaeus, having scraped together about 15l. sterling, now entered on his travels, with a view of obtaining his degree at the cheapest university he could find, and of seeing as much of the learned world as his chances and means might enable him to do. In the beginning of 1735 he set out, and after a short stay at Hamburgh and Amsterdam, he proceeded to Harderwyck, where, having offered himself *s a candidate, and undergone the requisite examinations, ce obtained his degree June 23. On this occasion he published and defended a thesis, entitled “Hypothesis nova de Febriuin Intermittentium Causâ,” in the dedication of which, to his “Mæceuates et Patrnes,” it is remarkable that, among the names of Rudbeck, Rothmann, StobacusV Moraius, &c. we find that of Rosen. The hypothesis here advanced, most correctly so denominated, is truly Boerhaavian. Intermitting fevers are supposed to be owing to fine particles of clay, taken in with the food, and lodged in the terminations of the arterial system, where they cause the symptoms of the disorder in question.

In Holland Linnæus became acquainted with Dr. John Frederick Gronovius, who assisted him in publishing the first edition of the celebrated “Systema Naturie,” consisting of eight large sheets, in the form of tables; which edition is now a great bibliothecal curiosity. He also procured access to the illustrious Boerhaave, who encouraged him to remain in Holland; but this advice could scarcely have been followed, had he not met with a patron in Burmann, of Amsterdam, who was then preparing his “Thesaurus Zeylanicus,” and who received Linnæus into his house as his guest for some months, during which period he printed his “Fundamenta Botanica,” a small 8vo, which contains the very essence of botany, and has never been superseded or refuted. After he had been a few months under Burmann’s roof, he was introduced by Boerhaave toi Mr. George Clifford, an opulent banker, who had a capital garden at Hartecamp, and invited Linnæus to superintend it. This situation, which he accepted, appears to have been in all respects agreeable and profitable to his studies, and here he wrote and printed his “Flora Lapponica.” In 1736, after having written his “Musa Cliffortiana,” Linnaeus was sent by Mr. Clifford to England, and was introduced to the lovers and teachers of natural science at Oxford and London, Shaw, Martyn, Miller, and Collinson, &c. They admired his genius, and valued his friendship, and supplied him with books and plants, both for his own herbarium, and the garden of his patron at Hartecamp.

Linnæus remained at Leyden till the spring of 1738, when he had an interesting interview with the great Boerhaave, then on his death-bed. Linnæus’s departure, however, from Leyden, was prevented by a very formidable intermittent fever. The skill of Van Swieten, and the renewed attentions of the amiable Clifford, who received him again under his roof with the most liberal and indulgent kindness, after some weeks restored him so far, that he was able, though still weak, to set out on his journey, carrying with him an introductory letter from Van Royen to Anthony de Jussieu, the physician, who made him acquainted with his brother, the famous Bernard de Jussieu. He inspected the botanic garden, the herbariums of Tournefort, Vaillant, the Jussieus, &c. visited the neighbourhood of Fontainbleau, formed an acquaintance with Reaumur and other distinguished naturalists, and was admitted a corresponding member of the academy of sciences.

How he conversed with Reaumur and others, who knew no language but their own, and how he contracted so close a friendship with Mr. Collinson at London, it is not easy to conceive. He confesses a peculiar inaptitude, and certainly a blatneable indifference, for the learning of languages, declaring in his diary that in all his travels he learnt “neither English, French, German, Laplandish, nor even Dutch, though he stayed in Holland three whole years. Nevertheless, he found his way every where, well and happily.” By the journal of his Lapland tour, and other manuscripts, it appears that Latin was sufficiently familiar to him; and as some fastidious critics have censured the style of the “Amojniuues Academicae,” it is fair to remark that the essays which compose those volumes are chiefly written by the pupils whose inaugural dissertations they were, and are therefore improperly quoted as the works of our author.

These Herculean literary labours, combined with the practice of physic, were more than the bodily constitution of Linnæus could support. He was attacked with the stone, and had also, from time-to time, returns of gout, but he considered the wood strawberry as a specific for both disorders, and they never greatly interfered with his comfort or his duties. On the 27th of April, 1753, he received, from the hand of his sovereign, the order of the Polar Star, an honour which had never before been conferred for literary merit. A still more remarkable compliment was paid him not long after by the king of Spain, who invited him to settle at Madrid, with the offer of nobility, the free exercise of his religion, and a splendid botanical appointment. This proposal, however, he declined, from an attachment to his own country, and in November 1756, he was raised to the rank of Swedish nobility, and took the name of Von Linné".

Linnæus had by his wife Sarah Elizabeth, who survived to extreme old age, two sons and four daughters. His eldest son Charles succeeded him in the botanical professorship. The younger, John, died March 7, 1757, in the third year of his age. His eldest daughter, Elizabeth Christina, is recorded as having discovered a luminous property in the flowers of the nasturtium, tropaeolum majus, which are sometimes seen to flash like sparks of fire in the evening of a warm summer’s day. Of the other daughters we know nothing materially worthy of record.

, or Von Linne' (Charles), the oldest, and only surviving son of the preceding, was born January 20, 1741, at the House of his maternal grandfather, at Fahlun. His father was anxiously desirous of his excelling in natural history, more particularly botany; and committed him, when about the age of nine or ten, t the more particular care of some of his own most favourite pupils. By them he was taught the names of the plants in the Upsal garden, and such of the principles of natural science as were suited to his period of life, as well as to converse habitually in Latin. He appears to have given satisfaction to his father, who procured for him, at the age of eighteen, the appointment of Demonstrator in the botanic garden, an office then first contrived on purpose for him. Having learned to draw from nature, he became an author at the age of twenty-one, publishing in 1762 his first “Decas Plantarum Rariorum Horti Upsaliensis,” the plates of which, in outline only, were drawn by his own hand, and are sufficiently faithful and useful, if not ornamental, while the descriptions are full and scientific. In 1763 another “Decas,” or collection of ten species, came out on the same plan, but, for whatever reason, he printed no more numbers under this title. In 1767, however, he published at Leipsic ten more plates and descriptions, like the above, entitled “Plantarum Rariorum Horti Upsaliensis Fasciculus Primus,” but no second fasciculus appeared. In 1763 he was nominated adjunct professor of botany, with a promise, hitherto unexampled, that after his father’s death he should succeed to all his academical functions. In 1765 he took his degree of doctor of physic, and began to give lectures.

His progress would probably have been happy, if not brilliant, but for the conduct of his unnatural mother, who, not content with dishonouring her husband’s bed, and making his home as uncomfortable as she could, by the meanest parsimony and disgusting petty tyranny, conceived a hatred for her only son, which she displayed by every affront and persecution that her situation gave her the means of inflicting on his susceptible and naturally amiable mind. According to Fabricius, she forced her husband, who by such a concession surely partook largely of her guilt and meanness, to procure the nomination of his pupil Solander to be his future successor, in preference to his own son; and it was a part of her plan that he should marry her eldest daughter. Solander, however, disdained both the usurpation and the bait, refusing to leave England; and the misguided father recovered his senses and authority, causing his son, as we have said above, to receive this truly honourable distinction. The mind and spirit of the young man nevertheless still drooped; and even when he had attained his thirtieth year, he would gladly have escaped from his miseries and his hopes together. The authority of the king was obliged to be exerted, at his father’s solicitation, to prevent his going into the army. This measure of the parent was happily followed up by kindness and encouragement in his botanical pursuits, to which treatment the son was ever sensible, and he revived from his despondency before his father’s death, which happened when he was thirty-seven years of age. Though obliged by his mother to purchase, at her own price, the library, manuscripts, herbarium, &c. which he ought by every title to have inherited, he rose above every impediment, and betook himself to the useful application of the means now in his hands, for his own reputation and advancement. His father had already prepared great part of a third botanical appendix, or “Mantissa;” from the communications of Mutis, Kcenig, Sparmann, Forster, Pallas, and others. Hence originated the “Supplementum Plantarum,” printed at Brunswick, under the care of Ehrhart in 1781. The ingenious editor inserted his own new characters of some genera of mosses; which Hedwig has since confirmed, except that some of the names have been justly rejected. This sheet was, in an evil hour, suppressed by the mandate of Linnæus from London, where, at that period, the subject of generic characters of mosses was neither studied nor understood, whatever superior knowledge was displayed concerning their species. The plants of the “Supplementum” are admitted into the fourteenth edition of the “Systema Vegetabilium” by Murray, and figures of some of the most curious have been published by sir J. Smith, in his “Plantarum Icones ex Herbario Linnæano.” Three botanical dissertations also appeared under the presidency of the younger Linnæus, on grasses, on lavandula, and the celebrated Methodus muscorum, which last was the work, and the inaugural thesis, of the present professor Swartz of Stockholm. These form a sequel to the 186 similar essays, which most of them compose the seven volumes of the Amcenitates Academicae, the rest being published by Schreber in three additional ones.

, a painter, called from his dress “the Turk,” was born at Geneva, in 1702. He went to Paris to study in 1725, and thence accompanied the marquis de Puisieux to Rome, where the earls of Sandwich and Besborough engaged him to accompany them to Constantinople. There he became acquainted with sir Everard Fawkener, our ambassador, who persuaded him to come to England, where he remained two years. He painted admirably in miniature, and in enamel, though he seldom practised the last, but he is best known by his crayons. The earls of Harrington and Besborough have some of his most capital works. His portraits, however, were so exact as to displease those who sat to him, for he never could conceive the absence of any imperfection or mark in the face that presented itself. Such a man could not be long a favourite, and therefore, according to lord Orford, although he had great business the first year, he had very little the second, and went abroad. It is said that he owed much of his encouragement to his making himself conspicuous by adopting the manners and habits of the Levant He came to England again in 1772, and brought a collection of pictures of different masters, which he sold by auction; and some pieces of glass painted by himself with surprizing effect of light and shade, but more curious than useful, as it was necessary to darken the room before they could be seen to advantage. He staid two years likewise on this visit. He went to the continent afterwards, but we find no account of his death. He carried his love of truth with him on all occasions; and we are told that at Venice and Milan, and probably elsewhere, all but firstrate beauties were afraid to sit to him, and he would have starved if he had not so often found customers who were of opinion that they belonged to that class.

, an eminent historical painter, was born at Florence, probably about the beginning of the fifteenth century, as he was a scholar of, and of course nearly contemporary with, Massaccio. At the age of sixteen, being entered a noviciate in the convent of Carmelites at Florence, he had there an opportunity of seeing that extraordinary artist at work upon the astonishing frescoes with which he adorned the chapel of Brancacci, in the church there; and being eager to embrace the art, such was his success, that after the death of his master, it was said by common consent, that the soul of Massaccio still abode with Fra. Filippo. He now forsook the habit of his convent, and devoted himself entirely to painting; but his studies were for a time disturbed by his being unfortunately taken, while out on a party of pleasure, by some Moors, and carried prisoner to Barbary; where he remained in slavery eighteen months. But having drawn, with a piece of charcoal, the portrait of his master upon a wall, the latter was so affected by the novelty of the performance, and its exact resemblance, that, after exacting a few more specimens of his art, he generously restored him to his liberty. On his return home he painted some works for Alphonso, king of Calabria. He employed himself also in Padua; but it was in his native city of Florence that his principal works were performed. He was employed by the grand duke Cosmo di Medici, who presented his pictures to his friends; and one to pope Eugenius IV. He was also employed to adorn the palaces of the republic, the churches, and many of the houses of the principal citizens; among whom his talents were held in high estimation. He was the first of the Florentine painters who attempted to design figures as large as life, and the first who remarkably diversified the draperies, and who gave his figures the air of antiques. It is to be lamented that such a man should at last perish by the consequences of a guilty amour he indulged in at Spoleto; where he was employed at the cathedral to paint the chapel of the blessed virgin. This is differently told by different writers, some saying that he seduced a nun who sat to him for a model of the virgin, and others that the object of his passion was a married woman. In either case, it is certain that he was poisoned by the relations of the lady whose favours he was supposed to enjoy. Lorenzo di Medici erected a marble tomb in the cathedral to his memory, which Politian adorned with a Latin epitaph. His son Lippi Filippo, was renowned for excellent imitations of architectural ornaments. He died in 1505, at the age of forty-five. There was also a Florentine painter, Lorenzo Lippi, born in 1606, and likewise a great musician and a poet. In the latter character he published “II Malmantile racquistato,” which is considered as a classical work in the Tuscan language. He died in 1664.

, a very learned critic, was born at Isch, a country-seat of his father, between Brussels and Louvain, Oct. 18, 1547. He was descended from ancestors who had been ranked among the principal inhabitants of Brussels. At six years of age he was sent to the public school at Brussels, and soon gave proofs of uncommon parts. He tells as himself in one of his letters, that he acquired the French language, without the assistance of a master, so perfectly as to be able to write it before he was eight years old. From Brussels he was sent, at ten years old, to Aeth; and, two years after, to Cologne, where at the Jesuits’ college he prosecuted his literary and philosophical studies. Among the ancients, he learned the precepts of morality from Epictetus and Seneca, and the maxims of civil prudence from Tacitus. At sixteen, he was sent to the university of Louvain; and having now acquired a knowledge of the learned languages, applied himself to the civil law; but his principal delight was in belles lettres and ancient literature; and, therefore, losing his parents, and becoming his own master before he was eighteen, he projected a journey to Italy, for the sake of cultivating them. Before, however, he set out, he published three books of various readings, “Variarum Lectionum Libri tres,” which laid the foundation of his literary fame; and his dedication of them to cardinal Perenettus, a great patron of learned men, served to introduce him to the cardinal, on his arrival in 1567, at Rome, where he lived two years with him, was nominated his secretary, and treated with the utmost kindness and generosity. His time he used to employ in the Vatican, the Farnesian, the Sfortian, and other principal libraries, which were open to him, and where he carefully collated the manuscripts of ancient authors, of Seneca, Tacitus, Plautus, Propertius, &c. His leisure hours he spent in inspecting the most remarkable antiquities, or in cultivating the acquaintance of the literati then residing at Rome, Antonius Muretus, Paulus Manutius, Fulvius Ursinus, Hieronymus Mercurialis, Carolus Sigonius, Petrus Victorius, and others, from whose conversation he could not fail to reap advantage and encouragement in his studies.

In 1569 he returned to Louvain, and spent one year in habits of dissipation, very unsuitable to his character, and defensible only as he says by pleading the heat of youth. Sensible of his folly, he resolved upon a journey to Vienna; but stopping at Dole, an university in the Franche Comt6, he relapsed into an excess which produced a fit of illness. On his recovery he pursued his journey to Vienna, and there fell into the acquaintance of Busbequius, and other learned men, who used many arguments to induce him to settle there; but the love of his own native soil prevailed, and he directed his course through Bohemia, Misnia, and Thuringia, in order to arrive at it. But being informed of the dangerous state of the Low Countries from the war, and that his own patrimony was laid waste by soldiers, he stopped at the university of Jena, where he was invested with the professorship of eloquence, and became a disciple of Luther. This latter circumstance obliging him to leave Jena, he arrived at Cologne, where he married a widow in 1574, by whom he had no children. During his stay at Cologne, he wrote his “Antiquae Lectiones,” which chiefly consist of emendations of Plautus; he also began there hf notes upon Cornelius Tacitus, which were afterwards souniversally applauded by the learned.

He then retired to his own native seat at Isch, intending to devote himself entirely to letters; but the war, which was still raging, disturbed his plans, and he was obliged to go to Louvain, where he resumed the study of the civil law, though with no intent to practise. At Louvain he published his “Epistolicae Quaestiones,*' and some other things; but, being again obliged to quit his residence, went to Holland, and spent thirteen years at Leyden, during which time he composed and published, what he calls, his best works. These are,” Electorum Libri duo;“” Satyra Menippaea;“” SaturnalSum Libri duo;“” Commentarii pleni in Cornelium Taciturn;“” De Constanti& Libri duo;“” De Amphitheatre Libri duo;“”Ad Valerium Maximum Notae“” Epistolarum Centuriae duae“” Epistolica Institutio“” De recta Pronunciatione Linguae Latinas“” Animadversiones in Senecos Tragoedias“” Animadversiones in Velleium Paterculum“”Politicorum Libri sex“” De una Religione Liber.“These he call his best works, because they were written, he says, in the very vigour of his age, and when he was quite at leisure;” in flore aevi, & ingenii in alto otio;“and he adds too, that his health continued good till the latter part of his life;” nee valetudo, nisi sub extremos annos, titubavit.“The intolerant principles, however, which he divulged here, raised so much indignation against him that he was obliged to retire suddenly and privately from Leyden, in 1590; and, after some stay at Spa, went and settled at Louvain, where he taught polite literature, as he had done at Leyden, with the greatest credit and reputation. He spent the remainder of his life at Louvain, though he had received powerful solicitations, and the offers of vast advantages, if he would have removed elsewhere. Pope Clement V11I. Henry IV. of France, and Philip IL of Spain, applied to him by advantageous proposals. Several cardinals would gladly have taken him under their protection and patronage; and all the learned in foreign countries honoured him in the highest degree. The very learned Spaniard, Arias Montanus, who, at the command of Philip II. superintended the reprinting the Complutensian edition of the Bible at Plantin’s press. had such a regard for him, that he treated him as a son rather than a friend, and not only admitted him into all his concerns, but even offered to leave him all he had. Lipsius, nevertheless, continued at Louvain, and, among others, wrote the following works” De Cruce Libri tres;“”De Militia Romana Libri quinque“” Poliorceticon Libri quinque“” De Magnitudine llomana Libri quatuor“” Dissertatiuncula & Commentarius in Plinii Panegyricum;“” Manuductio ad Stoicam Philosophiam," &c. All his works have been collected and printed together, in folio, more than once. The best edition is that of Vesel, 1675, 4 vols. fol. usually bound in eight. His critical notes upon ancient authors are to be found in the best editions of each respective author; and several of his other pieces have, for their peculiar utility, been reprinted separately.

Lipsius died at Louvain, March 23, 1606, in his 59th year, and left, says Joseph Scaliger, the learned world and his friends to lament the loss of him. Lipsius is said to have been so mean in his countenance, his dress, and his conversation, that those who had accustomed themselves to judge of great men by their outward appearance, asked, after having seen Lipsius, whether that was really he. But the greatest blot in his character was his inconstancy with regard to religion. He was educated a Roman Catholic, but professed the Lutheran religion while he was professor at Jena. Afterwards returning to Brabant, he appeared again a Roman Catholic; but when he accepted a professor’s chair in the university of Leyden, he published what was called Calvinism. At last, he removed from Leyden, and went again into the Low Countries, where he adopted the extreme bigotry of the Roman communion. This is obvious from his credulous and absurd accounts of the holy virgins, in his “Diva Virgo H aliensis,” &c. and “Diva Schemiensis,” &c. in both which he admits the most trifling stories, and the most uncertain traditions. Some of his friends endeavoured to represent how greatly all this would diminish the reputation he had acquired; but he was deaf to their expostulations. He even went so far as to dedicate a silver pen to the Holy Virgin of Hall; and on this occasion wrote some verses which are very remarkable, both on account of the elogies he bestows on himself, and of the extravagant worship he pays to the Virgin. By his last will, he left his gown, lined with fur, to the image of the same lady. With these superstitions he joined an inconsistency of a more serious nature; for when, as we have already noticed, he lived at Leyden in an outward profession of the reformed religion, he gave his public approbation of the persecuting principles which were exerted, throughout all Europe, against the professors of it, maintaining that no state ought to suffer a plurality of religions, nor shew any mercy towards those who disturbed the established worship, but pursue them with fire and sword, it being better that one member should perish rather than the whole body “dementias non hie locus ure, seca, ut membrorum potius aliquod quam totum corpus corrumpatur.” When attacked for these principles and expressions, he endeavoured to explain them in a very evasive manner, pretending that the words ure and seca were only terms borrowed from chirurgery, not literally, to signify fire and sword, but only some effectual remedy. All these evasions are to be met with in his treatise * f De una Religione," the worst of his writings. His works in general turn upon subjects of antiquity and criticism. In his early pieces he imitated, with tolerable success, the style of Cicero; but afterwards chose rather to adopt the concise and pointed manner of Seneca and Tacitus. For this corruption of taste he was severely censured by Scioppius and Henry Stephens; but his example was followed by several contemporary writers. On this innovation Huet justly remarks, that although the abrupt and antithetical style may obtain the applauses of unskilful youth, or an illiterate multude, it cannot be pleasing to ears which have been long inured to genuine Ciceronian eloquence.

, historiographer and censor royal, and the first of a family of men of considerable eminence in France, was born Nov. 5, 1644, at Vaucouleurs. He gave private lectures on history and geography at Paris, and had not only the principal lords of the court among his pupils, but the duke of Orleans, afterwards regent of France, who always retained a particular value for him, and gave him frequent proofs of his esteem. He died at Paris, May 2, 1720, aged 76, leaving twelve children, of whom three sons will form the subject of the ensuing articles. His works are, “Relation historique du Roiaume de Siam,” 1684, 12mo; “An Abridgement of the Universal History,” 1731, 7 vols. 12mo-, and a Genealogical and Historical Atlas, on engraved plates.

, brother of the preceding, and an astronomer, promoted the interests of science, by some very hazardous journeys and voyages. In 1726 he went to Russia with his brother Joseph, who had been appointed astronomer to the academy of sciences at Petersburg. Lewis, at this time, made excursions beyond the utmost boundaries of the immense Russian empire. He took several journeys to the coasts of the Icy sea, to Lapland, and the government of Archangel, to determine the situation of the principal places by astronomical observations. He afterwards traversed a great part of Siberia, with M. Muller and M. Gmelin, professors of the academy at Petersburg. In 1741 he proceeded alone to Kamtschatka, and thence to Cape Beering, to examine the unknown northern coasts of America, and the seas between them and the Atlantic continent. He died in the same year. On account of his great merit he obtained a seat in the academy of sciences, and was the author of some papers in the “Memoirs” of that learned body, and of the academy of sciences at Petersburg.

, younger brother of the preceding, was born at Paris April 4, 1688, and at first educated under his paternal roof. He then pursued his studies at the Mazarine-college, where the eclipse of the sun in 1706 seems to have directed his attention to astronomy, for which he soon displayed so much genius, as to be admitted into the academy of sciences, to the memoirs of which he contributed many valuable papers. In 1715 he calculated the tables of the moon according to the theory of sir Isaac Newton. He also, in the course of his pursuits, made many observations on the spots of the sun, and from them formed a theory to determine the sun’s rotation on his axis. In 1720 he delivered a proposal to the academy for ascertaining in France the figure of the earth, and some years afterwards this was carried into execution. In 1724 he paid a visit to England, where he became acquainted with Newton and Halley, who shewed him every mark of respect, and Halley in particular highly gratified him by a present of a copy of his astronomical tables of the sun, moon, and planets, which he had printed in 1719, but which were not published for many years after. In. 1726 he was appointed astronomer royal in the imperial academy of sciences at Petersburg, where for twenty- one years he resided in the observatory-house built by Peter the Great, incessantly occupied in the improvement of astronomy and geography. During this period he published “Memoirs illustrative of the History of Astronomy,” 2 vols. 4to; and an atlas of Russia, first published in the Russian language, and afterwards in Latin. He constructed also a thermometer, differently graduated from those in use, the degrees beginning at the heat of boiling water, and thence increasing to 150, which was the freezing point. In 1747, after much ill-treatment on the part of the Russian government, he obtained his dismission, and arrived in Paris in September of the same year. He was then appointed professor of the mathematics at the college royal, in which situation he lived to render the greatest service to the interests of science, by training up some learned pupils, among whom was the celebrated M. de la Lande. In 1743, his pupil, M. Monnier, took a voyage to Scotland to observe an annular eclipse of the sun, and on this subject De Lisle published a large advertisement, which was reckoned a complete treatise on annular eclipses. He afterwards entered more fully on the consideration of the theory of eclipses, and he communicated a part of his researches on the subject to the academy in 1749. He was so expert in calculations, that he made many founded on the observations of Greenwich, Berlin, Scotland, and Sweden. In 1750 and 1753 he published “New charts of the Discoveries of admiral de Fonte, or Fuente, made in 1640, and those of other navigators, Spanish, Portuguese, English, Dutch, French, and Russian, in the Northern seas, with, explications.” In 1753 appeared his map of the world, in which he represented the effect of the parallaxes of Mercury in different countries, in order to point out the proper places for making such observations on the then expected transit, as should furnish a method of determining the distance of the sun, in a manner similar to that applied by Halley to the transit of Venus. Another work of his, published in the Transactions of the Academy, was on the comet of 1758, which was visible several months; but he was principally attentive to the one predicted by Di% Halley, forty years before, which was first seen in January 1759, He gave an account of his observations on that comet irr the first volume of the “Mercure,” for July of that year. He was afterwards assiduously engaged on the transit of Venus, expected in 1761, in order to correct the error of Halley, and thus prevent persons from undertaking long voyages unnecessarily for the sake of observing it. He had, some years previously to this, been appointed astronomical geographer to the marine, and his business was to collect and arrange the plans and journals of naval captains, and to extract from them whatever might be found beneficial to the king’s service in this department. His majesty now purchased, with a pension- for life, all M. de Lisle’s rich astronomical and geographical collections, which were added to the Mss. in the depot. In 1758, JDeginning to decline, he withdrew as much as he could from public life, leaving the care of his observations to M. Messier, while M. de la Lamle was appointed his coadjutor at the college royal. He went to reside at the abbey of St. Genevieve, where he spent his time partly in devotional exercises, and partly in study, devoting the greatest part of his income to- acts of benevolence and charity. He died on the 11th of July 1768, in the eighty-first year of his age. As a man of science his merits are very great, and in private life he was distinguished by unaffected piety, pure morals, undeviating integrity, and most amiable manners.

As this study introduced him to the acquaintance of Mr. Lloyd, keeper of the Ashmolean museum at Oxford, he enriched that collection with several altars, coins, and other antiquities, together with a great number of valuable natural curiosities. He also sent several observations and experiments, in various branches of natural philosophy, to the same friend; who communicating some of them to the royal society, our author was recommended, and elected a fellow. In 1684, resolving by the advice of his friends to remove to London, he was created doctor of physic, by diploma, at Oxford; the chancellor himself recommending him as a person of exemplary loyalty, of high esteem among the most eminent of his profession, of singular merit to that university in particular, by having enriched their museum and library with presents of valuable books, both printed and manuscript, and of general merit to the literary world by several learned books which he published. Soon after this, he was elected fellow of the college of physicians.

In 1698, he attended the earl of Portland in his embassy from king William to the court of France; and having the pleasure to see his “Synopsis Conchyliorum” in the king’s library, he presented that monarch with a second edition of the treatise, much improved, in 1699, not long after his return from Paris. Of this journey he published an account, with observations on the state and curiosities of that metropolis; which, containing some things of a trifling nature, was pleasantly ridiculed by Dr. Wm. King, in another, entitled “A Journey to London.” In 1709, upon the indisposition of Dr. Hannes, he was made second physician in ordinary to queen Anne; in which post he continued to his death, Feb. 2, 1711-12. He was buried in Claphamchurch, near the body of his wife Hannah, who died in 1695, leaving six children. One of his daughters, who died in 1758, was the wife of the rev. Owen Evans, of St. Martin’s, Canterbury. Besides the books already mentioned, he published, 1. “Historiae Animalium Angliae tres Tractatus,” &c. 1678. 2. “John Goedertius of Insects,” &c. 1682, 4to. 3. The same book in Latin. 4. “De Fontibus medicalibus AnglitE,” Ebor. 1682. There is an account of most of these in Phil. Trans. Nos. 139, 143, 144, and 166. 5. “Exercitatio anatomica, in qua de Cochleis agitur,” &c. 1694, 8vo. 6. “Cochlearum & Limacum Exercitatio anatomica; accedit de Variolis Exercitatio,” 1695, 2 vols. 8vo. 7. “Conchy liorum Bivalvium utriusque Aquae Exercitatio anatom. tertia,” &c. 1696, 4to. 8. “Exercitationes medicinales,” &c. 1697, 8vo. In his medical writings he is rather too much attached to hypotheses, and preserves too great a reverence for ancient and now untenable doctrines; but his reputation is well founded on his researches in natural history and comparative anatomy.

, LL. D. an English divine and poet, was educated upon the royal foundation at Etonschool, where, under the care of that learned and excellent master. Dr. Snape, his school-exercises were much admired, and when his turn came, he was elected to King’s college, Cambridge, in 1716, with equal applause. Here he took his degrees of A. B. 1720, A.M. 1724, and LL.D. 1728. Having some talent for poetry, he had not been long at the university, before he diverted a school-fellow, whom he had left at Eton, with a humourous poem on the subject of his various studies, and the progress he had made in academical learning, which was followed by his more celebrated one “on a spider.” Dr. Morell, the editor of his “Discourses,” and his biographer, procured a genuine copy of them, as transcribed by a gentleman then at Eton school from the author’s own writing, with such remains as could be found of a Pastoral Elegy, written about the same time by Mr. Littleton, on the death of R. Banks, scholar of the same college. The two former are now correctly printed in the edition of Dodsley’s Poems of 1782, edited by Isaac Reed. Dr. Morell found also a poetical epistle sent from school to Penyston Powney, esq.; but as this was scarcely intelligible to any but those who were then at Eton, he has not printed it. In 1720 Mr. Littleton was recalled to Eton as an assistant in the school; in which office he was honoured and beloved by his pupils, and so esteemed by the provost and fellows, that on the death of the rev. Mr. Malcher, in 1727, they elected him a fellow, and presented him to the living of Mapledurham, in Oxfordshire. He then married a very amiable woman, Frances, one of the daughters of Barnham Goode, who was under-master of Eton school. In June 1730, he was appointed chaplain in ordinary to their majesties. Though an admired preacher and an excellent scholar, he seems to have been little ambitious of appearing in print. He died of a fever in 1734, and was buried in his own parish church of Mapledurham, leaving behind him a widow and three daughters; for whose benefit, under the favour and encouragement of queen Caroline, his “Discourses” were first printed by Dr. Morell, with an account of the author, from which the above particulars are taken. Dr. Burton, Mr. Littleton’s successor in the living of Mapledurham, afterwards married his widow, as we have noticed in his Jife. 1 -.;.

, a celebrated English judge, descended of an ancient family, was the eldest son of Thomas Westcote, of the county of Devon, esq. by Elizabeth, daughter and sole-heir of Thomas Littleton or Lyttleton, of Frankley in Worcestershire, in compliance with whom she consented that the issue, or at least the eldest son, of that marriage should take the name of Lyttleton, and bear the arms of that family. He was born about the beginning of the fifteenth century at Frankley. Having laid a proper foundation of learning at one of the universities, he removed to the Inner-Temple; and, applying himself to the law, became very eminent in that profession. The first notice we have of his distinguishing himself is from his learned lectures on the statute of Westminster, “de donis conditionalibus,” “of conditional gifts.” He was afterwards made, by Henry VI. steward or judge of the court of the palace, or marshalsea of the king’s household, and, in May 1455, king’s serjeant, in which capacity he went the Northern circuit as a judge of the assize. Upon the revolution of the crown, from the house of Lancaster to that of York) in the time of Edward IV. our judge, who was now made sheriff of Worcestershire, received a pardon from that prince; was continued in his post of king’s serjeant, and also in that of justice of assi/r for the same circuit. This pardon passed in 1462, the second year of Edward IV.; and, in 1466, he was appointed one of the judges of the court of Common Pleas. The same year, he obtained a writ to the commissioners of the customs of London, Bristol, and Kingston-upon-Hull, enjoining them to pay him a hundred and ten marks annually, for the better support of his dignity; a hundred and six shillings and eleven pence farthing, to furnish him whh a furred robe; and six shillings and six-pence more, for another robe called Li num. In 1473, we find him residing near St. Sepulchre’s church, London, in a capital mansion, the property of the abbot of Leicester, which he held on lease at the yearly rent of 1 <'>.-. In 1475 he was created, among others, knight of the Hath, to grace the solemnity of conferring that order upon the king’s eldest son, then prince of Wales, afterwards Edward V. He continued to enjoy the esteem of his sovereign and the nation, on account of his profound knowledge of the laws of England, till his death, Aug. 23, 1481, the day after the date of his will. He was then said to be of a good old age, but its precise length has not been ascertained. He was honourably interred in the cathedral church of Worcester, where a marble tomb, with his statue, was erected to his memory; his picture was also placed in the church of Frankley; and another in that of Hides-Owen, where his descendants purchased a good estate. He married, and had three sons, William, Richard, and Thomas. Kichard, bred to the law, became eminent in thut profession; and it was for his use that our judge drew up his celebrated treatise on tenures or titles, which will probably hand his name down to the latest posterity. The judge’s third son, Thomas, was knighted by Henry VII. for taking Lambert Simnel, the pretended earl of Warwick. His eldest son and successor, sir William Littleton, after living many years in great splendour, at Frankley, died in 1508; and from this branch the late celebrated lord Lyttelton of Frankley co. Worcester, who was created a baron of Great Britain, Nov. 1756, derived his pedigree; but who, owing to the alteration in the spelling of the name (which, however, appears unnecessary) will occur in a future part of this work.

In this station he preserved the esteem of both parties for some time, and the two houses of parliament agreed to return their thanks by him to the king, for passing the triennial bill, and that of the subsidies; but, as he concurred in the votes for raising an army, and seizing the militia, in March 1641, measures very hostile to the royal cause, the king sent an order from York to lord Falkland, to demand the seal from him, and to consult about a successor with Hyde, afterwards earl of Clarendon; but this last step prevented the former order from being put into execution. Hyde, who always entertained a great regard for the keeper, had, upon his late behaviour, paid him a visit at Exeter-house, on which occasion the keeper freely disclosed his mind, lamenting that he had been removed from the common-pleas, of which court he was acquainted with the business aud the persons with whom he had to deal, to an higher office, which involved him with another sort of men, and in affairs to which he was a stranger; and this without his having one friend among them, to whom he could confide any difficulty that occurred to him. Adverting likewise to the unhappy state of the king’s affairs, he said that the party in hostility to the court “would never have done what they had already, unless they had been determined to do more: that he foresaw it would not be long before a war would break out, and of what importance it was, in that season, that the great seal should be with his majesty; that the prospect of this necessity had made him comply to a certain degree with that party; that there had lately been a consultation, whether, in case the king might send for him, or the great seal be taken from him, it were advisable to keep it in some secure place, where the keeper should receive it upon occasion, they having no mind to disoblige him: that the knowledge of this had induced him to vote as he did in the late debates; and by that compliance, which he knew would give the king a bad impression of him, he had gained so much credit with them, that he should be able to preserve the seal in his own hands till his majesty should demand it, and then he would be ready to wait on the king with it, declaring that no man should be more willing to perish with and for his majesty than himself.” Mr. Hyde acquainted lord Falkland with this conference; and, being confident that the lord-keeper would keep his promise, recommended to advise his majesty to write a kind invitation to the keeper to come to York, and bring the seal with him, rather than, think of giving it to any other person. The advice was embraced by the king, who, though he still had his doubts of Littleton’s sincerity, was influenced by the reasons assigned; and accordingly the seal was sent to York on the f2d, and followed by the keeper on the 23d of May, 1642. But, notwithstanding this piece of service and eminent proof of his loyalty, at the risk of his life, he could never totally regain the king’s confidence, or the esteem of the court-party. He continued, however, to enjoy his post, in which he attended his majesty to Oxford, was there created doctor of laws, and made one of the king’s privycouncil, and colonel of a regiment of foot in the same service, some time before his death, which happened Aug. 27, 1645, at Oxford. His body was interred in the cathedral of Christ church; uu which Qccasioa a funeral oration was pronounced by the celebrated Dr. Hammond, then orator to the university. In May 1683, a monument was erected there to his memory, by his only daughter and heiress, the lady Anne Lyttelton, widow of sir Thomas Lyttelton; and the same year came out his “Reports,” in folio, which, however, Mr. Stevens, in his introduction to lord Bacon’s Letters, edition 1702, p. 21, thinks were not composed by him, many of the cases being the same verbatim as in Hetley’s reports. Lord Clarendon says of sir Edward Littleton, that “he was a man of great reputation in the profession of the law, for learning, and all other advantages which attend the most eminent men. He was of a very good extraction in Shropshire, and inherited a fair fortune and inheritance from his father. He was a handsome and a proper man, of a very graceful presence, and notorious courage, which in his youth he had manifested with his sword. He had taken great pains in the hardest and most knotty part of the law, as well as that which was most customary; and was not only ready and expert in the books, but exceedingly versed in records, in studying and examining whereof he had kept Mr. Selden company, with whom he had great friendship, and who had much assisted him: so that he was looked upon as the best antiquary of his profession, who gave himself up to practice; and, upon the mere strength of his abilities, he had raised himself into the first of the practisers of the common law courts, and was chosen recorder of London before he was called to the bench, and grew presently into the highest practice in all the other courts, as well as those of the law.” Whitelocke also observes, that he was a man of courage, and of excellent parts and learning. But we fear he cannot be altogether acquitted of unsteadiness in some parts of his conduct, although it must at the same time be owned that when he found he could no longer retain the seal with credit, he delivered it, with his own hands, to his unhappy sovereign, and died firmly attached to his cause.

He was twice married; first to Anne, daughter of Johiv Lyttelton, by whom he had a son and two daughters, who all died infants. His second wife was the lady Sidney Calverley, relict of sir George Calverley of Cheshire, and daughter of sir William Jones, judge of the king’s-bench, by whom he had the above-mentioned Anna, whose son Edward died in 1664, and lies interred in the Temple church. In the south window of the Inner Temple hall, is a fine shield of the keeper’s arms, with fifteen quarterings, distinguished by a crescent within a mullet, which shews him to have been a second son of the third house.

, a rigid but pious presbyter of the church of Scotland, was born in 1603. In 1617, he was sent to the college of Glasgow, where he remained until he passed M. A. in 1621. After this, he exercised the ministry in various places, as occasion oflered, till 1628, when he was, by the sentence of the general assembly, sent to Ancrum in Teviot-dale. He was twice suspended by bishop Down, and was one of those who tendered the covenant to king 'Charles II. a little before he landed in Scotland. In 1663, as he would not subscribe or take the oath of allegiance, he was banished out of the kingdom, and retired into Holland, where he preached to the Scots’ congregation at Rotterdam till his death, Aug. 9, 1672, His works are “Letters from Leith, 1663, to his Parishioners at Ancrum;” “Memorable Characteristics of Divine Providence;” and a “Latin Translation of the Old Testament,” not published.

This ridiculous story, which has been repeated in the former editions of this Dictionary, as well as in other accounts of Livy, took its rise from the ignorance or knavery of those who reported it; and having been refuted by Gudius, and more fully by Morhof (“De Livii Patav.” cap. iii.), ought long ago to have been displaced. The epitaph at Padua was, when written without the contractions, “Vivus fecit Titus Livius, Livice Titi filise quartae, libertus Halys, concordialis Patavi, sibi et suis omnibus;” i. e. This monument was erected by himself and his family by Titus Livius Halys, the freedman of Livia, a daughter of one Titus Livius, who probably lived many ages after the historian. Halys was his name, while he continued in servitude, and Titus Livius the name of his patron or master, which he assumed, as was usual in those cases, when he received his freedom. He had perhaps borne some office in the temple of Concordia at Padua, which might possibly have stood in the place where the epitaph was discovered, and hence the title Concordialis. But the monks of the fifteenth century, who valued themselves on having discovered the bones of the celebrated historian, attended only to the name of Titus Livius; never reflecting, that this was a common name, and might have belonged to twenty others; that in the Augustan age, dead bodies were usually burnt, and not buried within the walls of cities; and that, admitting Livy had been buried, it was very improbable that any of his bones should have remained unconsumed in the ground above 1400 years.

The encomiums bestowed upon Livy, by both ancients and moderns, are great and numerous. Quinctiliau speaks of him in the highest terms, and thinks that Herodotus need not take it ill to have Livy equalled with him. In general, probity, candour, and impartiality, are what have distinguished Livy above all historians. Neither complaisance to the times, nor his particular connexions with the emperor, could restrain him from speaking so well of Pompey, as to make Augustus call him a Pompeian. This we learn from Cremutius Cortlus, in Tacitus, who relates also, much to the emperor’s honour, that this gave no interruption to their friendship. Livy, however, has not escaped censure as a writer. In the age in which he lived, Asinius Pollio charged him with Patavinity, a word variously explained by writers, but generally supposed to relate to his style. The most common opinion is, that Pollio, accustomed to the delicacy of the language spoken in the court of Augustus, could not bear with certain provincial idioms, which Livy, as a Paduan, used in various places of his history. Pignorius is of a different opinion, and considers Patavinity as relating to the orthography of certain words, in which Livy used one letter for another, according to the custom of his country, writing “sibe” and “quase” for “sibi” and “quasi;” which he attempts to prove by several ancient inscriptions. Chevreau maintains, that it does not concern the style, but the principles of the historian: the Paduans, he says, preserved a long and constant inclination for a republic, and were therefore attached to Pompey; while Pollio, being of Caesar’s party, was naturally led to attribute to Livy the sentiments of his countrymen, on account of his speaking well of Pompey. It seems remarkable that there should exist such difference of opinion, when Quinctilian, who must be supposed to know the true import of this Patavinity, has referred it entirely to the language of our author. MorhofPs elaborate treatise, however, is highly creditable to his critical skill. The merit of Livy’s history is so well known, as to render it unnecessary to accumulate the encomiums which modern scholars have bestowed on him. With these the school -boy is soon made acquainted, and they meet the advanced scholar in all his researches. His history was first printed at Rome, about 1469, by Sweynheym and Pannartz, in folio. Of this rare edition, lord Spencer is in possession of a fine copy; but the exquisite copy on vellum, formerly in the imperial library at Vienna, now belongs to James Edwards, esq. of Harrow; and is perhaps the most magnificent volume of an ancient classic in the world. Of modern printing the best editions are, that of Gronovius, “cum Notis variorum & suis, Lugd. Bat. 1679,” 3 vols. 8vo; that of Le Clerc, at “Amsterdam, 1709,” 10 vols. 12mo that of Crevier, at “Paris, 1735,” 6 vols. <Ko of Prakenborch, Auist. 1738, 7 vols. 4to of Ruddiman, Edinburgh, 1751, 4 vols. 12mo; of Homer, Lond. 1794, 8 vols. 8vo and that of Oxford, 1800, 6 vols. 8vo. Livy has been translated into every language. The last English translation was that of George Baker, A. M. 6 vols. 8vo, published in 1797, which was preceded by that of Philemon Holland, in 1600; that of Bohun, in 1686; and a third, usually called Hay’s translation, though, no such name appears, printed in 1744, 6 vols. 8vo.

, a loyal biographer and historian of the seventeenth century, the son of Hugh Lloyd, was born at Pant Mawr, in the parish of Trawsvinydd, in Merionethshire, Sept. 28, 1625. He was educated in grammar learning at the free-school at Ruthen in Denbighshire, and in 1652 became a servitor of Oriel college, Oxford, at which time, and after, he performed the office of janitor. He took one degree in arts, and by the favour of the warden and society of Merton college, was presented to itie rectory of Ibston near Watlington in Oxfordshire, in May 1658. Next year be took his master’s degree, and after a short time, resigned Ibston, and went to London, where he was appointed reader of the Charter-house. Afterwards he retired to Wales, and became chaplain to Dr. Isaac Barrow, bishop of St. Asaph, who, besides several preferments in his diocese, gave him a canonry in the church of St. Asaph, in August 1670. On Aug. 14, 1671, he was made vicar of Abergeley, and on the same day, as is supposed, prebend of Vaynol in the church of St. Asaph, at which time he resigned his canonry. He afterwards exchanged Abergeley for the vicarage of Northop in Flintshire, where he settled and taught the free-school, until his health began to decay. He then returned, probably to try the effect of his native air, to Pant Mawr, where he died Feb. 16, 1691, and was buried there.

Mr. Lloyd, even by Wood’s account, left an excellent character behind him: “he was a very industrious and zealous person, charitable to the poor, and ready to do good offices in his neighbourhood; he commonly read the service every day in his church at Northop, when he was at home, and usually gave money to such poor children as would come to him to be catechised.” As an author, however, Wood appears to have been a little jealous of Lloyd; speaks of him as being “a conceited and confident per­*on;” who “took too much upon him to transmit to posterity the memoirs of great personages;” by which “he obtained among knowing men not only the character of a most impudent plagiary, but a false writer, and a mere scribbler, especially upon the publication of his * Memoirs,' wherein are almost as many errors as lines.” “At length,” adds Wood, “having been sufficiently admonished of his said errors, and brought into trouble for some extravagancies in his books, he left off writing, retired to Wales, and there gave himself up to the gaining of riches.” That all this is not true, modern inquirers of reputation, who have repeatedly referred to Lloyd, seem to be convinced: he is in truth a compiler, like others of his contemporaries; but, although he must rank greatly under, he certainly belongs to the same class with Fuller and Wood himself. la his style he partakes more of the former than the latter, and having titled the subject of his pen “Worthies,” he is, s, a little too anxious to support their claim, and regardless- of those circumstances which form ajust, if not a perfect, character. Lloyd has preserved many minutiae of eminent men, not to be found, or not easily, to be found, elsewhere. These remarks apply to his two principal works, so often quoted by modern biographers, “The Statesmen and favourites of England since the Reformation, &c.” 166.5, 8vo, reprinted in 1670; and his “Memoirs of the Lives, &c.” of persons who suffered for their loyalty during the rebellion, Lond. 1668, folio. This last is the more valuable of the two, and is so far from deserving the character Wood has given, of containing as “many errors as lines,” that, while we admit it is not free from errors, we have found it in general corroborated by contemporary writers, and even by Wood himself. Of the first of these works, an edition was published by Charles Whitworth, esq. in 1766, 2 vols. 8vo, with additions from other writers, with a view to restore the light and shade of character. “Mr. Lloyd,” says an anonymous critic, “is professedly the white-washer of every character and personage that falls under his brush, particularly of the loyalists of Charles I. and II.; but his editor has seamed it with some sable strokes, some drawn from lord Herbert, and some from his own stores, which are supplied from Rapin, and other republican writers of little credit and less abilities. The true merit of Lloyd is, that notwithstanding the sameness of most of his characters, he serves them up to his readers so differently dressed, that each seems to be a new dish, and to have a peculiar relish.”

Lloyd’s other publications were: 1. “Modern Policy compleated, or the public actions and councils, '&c. of General Monk,” Lond. 1660, 8vo. 2. “The Pourtraictuue of his sacred Majesty Charles II. &c.” ibid. 1660, 8vo. 3. “The Countess of Bridgwater’s Ghost, &c.” Lond. 1663, a character of this amiable lady, published, as Wood allows, “to make her a pattern for other women to imitate;” but we can scarcely credit what he adds, that “the earl being much displeased that the memory of his lady should be perpetuated under such a title, and by such an obscure person, who did not do her the right that was <Jue, he brought him into trouble, and caused him to suffer six months imprisonment /” We have not seen this work; but had it been a libel instead of a panegyric, which last appears to have been the author’s honest intention, it could not have been punished with more severity. 4. “Of Plots, &c.” Lond. 1664, 4to, published under the name of Oliver Foulis. 5. “The Worthies of the World, &c.” an abridgment of Plutarch, ibid. 1665, 8vo. 6. “Dying and Dead men’s Living Words; or a fair warning to a careless world,” 1665, and 1682, 12mo. 7. “Wonders no miracles; or Mr. Valentine Greatrack’s Gift of Healing examined, &c.” ibid. 1665, 4to. 8. “Exposition of the Catechism and Liturgy, &c.” 9. “A Treatise on Moderation,” 1674.

, a learned English writer in the seventeenth century, was son of Mr. George Lloyd, minister of Wonson or Wonsington near Winchester, and grandson of Mr. David Lloyd, vicar of Lockford near Stockbridge in Hampshire. He was born at Hoi ton in Flintshire in 1634, and educated at Wykeham’s school near Winchester, and admitted a scholar of Wadham college, Oxford, from Hart-hall, October 20, 1653. He afterwards became a fellow of Wadham, and July 6, 16.58, took the degree of roaster of arts. In 1665, when Dr. Blandford, warden of that college, became bishop of Oxford, our author was appointed chaplain to him, being about that time rector of St. Martin’s church in Oxford, and continued with the bishop till he was translated to the see of Worcester in 1671. The year following, the rectory of St. Mary Newington, in Surrey, falling void, the bishop of Worcester presented Mr. Lloyd to it, who kept it to his death, which happened Nov. 27, 1680. He was interred in the chancel of the church there, leaving behind him the character of an harmless quiet man, and an excellent philologist. His “Dictionarium Historicum,” &c. although now obsolete, was once reckoned a valuable work. The first edition was published at Oxford in 1670, folio. The second edition was printed at London in 1686, folio, under the fMlowing title: “Dictionarium Historicum, geographicum, poeticum, gentium, hominum, deorum gentilium, regionum, insularum, locorum, civitatum, aequorum, fluviorum, sinuum, portuum, promontoriorum, ac montium, antiqua recentioraque, ad sacras & profanas historias, poetarumque fabulas intelligendas nccessaria, Nomina, quo decet erdine, complectens & illustrans. Opus admodum utile & apprime necessarium; a Carolo Stephano inchoatum; ad incudem vero revocatum, innumerisque pene locis auctum & emaculatum per NicolaumV.Lloydium, Collegii Wadhami in celeberrima Academia Oxoniensi Socium. Editio novissima.” He left several unpublished Mss. consisting principally of commentaries and translations. He had a younger brother, John, somewhat of a poet, who appears to have shared the friendship and esteem of Addison.

, a modern poet, was born in Westminster in 1733. His father, Dr. Pierson Lloyd, was second master of Westminster-school, afterwards chancellor of York, and portionist of Waddesdon in Bucks. His learning, judgment, and moderation, endeared him to all who partook of his instructions during a course of almost fifty years spent in the service of the public at Westminster-school. He had a pension from his majesty of 500l. conferred upon him in his old age, which was ordered to be paid without deduction, and which he enjoyed until his death, Jan. 5, 1781.

Robert was educated at Westminster-school, where unfortunately he had for his associates Churchill, Thornton, Column, and some others, to whose example his erroneous life may be ascribed. In 1751, he stood first on the list of Westminster scholars who went to Trinity college, Cambridge, at the same time that his school-fellow Colman obtained the same rank among those sent to Oxford. In 1755, he took the degree of bachelor, and in 1761 that of master of arts. While at the university, he wrote several pf his smaller pieces, and acquired the reputation of a lively and promising genius. But his conduct was marked by so many irregularities, as to induce his father to wish him more immediately under his eye; and with the hope of reclaiming him to sobriety and study, he procured him the place of usher at Westminster-school. His education had amply qualified him for the employment, but his inclination led him to a renewed connection with such companions as deemed themselves exempt from the duties and decencies of moral life.

In 1762, he attempted to establish a periodical work, “The St. James’s Magazine,” which was to be the depository of his own efVusions, aided by the contributions of his friends. The latter, however, came in tardily; Churchill, from whom he had great expectations, contributed nothing, although such of his poems as he published during the sale of the magazine, were liberally praised. Thornton gave a very few prose essays, and poetical pieces were furnished by Denis and Emily, two versifiers of forgotten reputation. Lloyd himself had none of the steady industry which a periodical work requires, and his magazine was often made up, partly from books, and partly from the St. James’s Chronicle, of which Colman and Thornton were proprietors, and regular contributors. Lloyd also translated some of Marmontel’s tales for the Magazine, and part of a French play, in order to fix upon Murphy the charge of plagiarism. This magazine, after existing about a year, was dropped for want of encouragement, as far as Lloyd was concerned; but was continued for some time longer by Dr. Kenrick. Lloyd’s imprudence and necessities were now beyond relief or forbearance, and his eretlitors confined him within the Fleet prison, where he afforded a melancholy instance of the unstable friendship of wits. Dr. Kenrick informs us that “even Thornton, though his bosom friend from their infancy, refused to be his security for the liberty of the rules; a circumstance which, giving rise to some ill-natured altercation, induced this quondam friend to become an inveterate enemy, in the quality of his most inexorable creditor.” It was probably during his imprisonment, that he published a very indifferent translation of Klopstock’s “Death of Adam.” After that, his “Capricious Lovers,” a comic opera, was acted for a few nights at Drury-lane theatre. This is an adaptation of Favart’s Ninette a la Cour to the English stage, but Lloyd had no original powers in dramatic composition. Churchill and Wilkes are said to have afforded him a weekly stipend from the commencement of his imprisonment until his final release. How this was paid we knownot. Wilkes had been long out of the kingdom, and Churchill, who left Lloyd in a jail when he went to France, bequeathed him a ring only as a remembrance*. It is more probable that his father assisted him on this occasion, although it might not be in his power to pay his debts. He had in vain tried every means to reclaim him from idleness and intemperance, and had long borne “the drain or burthen” which he was to his family. The known abilities of this unhappy son, “rendered this blow the more grievous to so good a father,” who is characterized by bishop Newton as a man that “with all his troubles and disappointments, with all the sickness and distress in his family, still preserved his calm, placid countenance, his easy cheerful temper, and was at all times an agreeable friend and companion, in all events a true Christian philosopher.”

ap edition of his collected poems. Frqm 1763. loved to associate. In his friendships he was warm, constant, and grateful, *' more sinned against than sinning;“and it would be difficult to find an apology for the conduct of those prosperous friends to whose reputation he had contributed in no inconsiderable degree by his writings. Among these, however, Hogarth appears to have been unjustly ranked. An irreconcileable quarrel had long subsisted between this artist and Churchill’s friends; and, much decayed in health, Hogarth languished for some time at Chiswick, where he died nearly two months before Lloyd. The news of Churchill’s death being announced somewhat abruptly to Lloyd, while he was sitting at dinner, he was seized with a sudden sickness, and saying” I shall follow poor Charles,“took to his bed, from which he never rose. He died December 1$, 1764, and his remains were deposited, without ceremony t on the 19th, in the churchyard of St. Bride’s parish. Ten years afterwards his poetical works were published in two handsome volumes, by Dr. Kenrick, who prefixed some memoirs, written in a negligent manner, and without a single date of birth, death, events, or publications. His poems have been added to the works of the” English Poets," although he certainly merits no very distinguished rank. His chief excellence was the facility with which he wrote a number of smooth and pleasing lines, tinctured with gay humour, on any topic which presented itself. But he has no where attempted, or afforded m much reason to think that by any diligence or effort he could have attained, the higher species of his art. He has neither originality of thought, or elegance of expression. It has been observed that those poets who have been degraded by the licentiousness of their lives, have rarely surpassed the excellence, of whatever degree, which first brought them into notice. Lloyd, however, had not the excuse which has been advanced in some recent instances. He was neither spoiled by patronage, nor flattered into indolence by injudicious praise and extravagant hopes. The friends of his youth were those of his mature years; and of the few whom he lost, he had only the melancholy recollection that some of them had quitted him from shame, and some from ingratitude.

The “Actor” was his most favoured piece, and which. he never surpassed; but it sunk before the “Rosciad.” The rest of his poems are effusions addressed to friends on subjects which relate principally to himself, and with a distinction which friends only would think valuable. Mr. Wilkes’s character of Lloyd represents him as “mild and affable in private life, of gentle manners, and very engaging in conversation. He was an excellent scholar, and an easy natural poet. His peculiar excellence was the dressing up an old thought in a new, neat, and trim mantier. He was contented to scamper round the foot of Parnassus on his little Welsh poney, which seems never to have tired. He left the fury of the winged steed and the daring heights of the sacred mountain to the sublime genius of his friend Churchill.” Although Lloyd followed Churchill in some of his prejudices, and learned to rail at colleges, and at men of prudence, we find him generally good-tempered and playful. His satire is seldom bitter, and probably was not much felt. Having consented to yield the palm to Churchill, the world took him at his word, and his enemies, if he had any, must have been, those who were very easily provoked.

, a very learned English bishop, was originally of Welsh extraction, being grandson of David Lloyd of Henblas, in the isle of Anglesey. He was born at Tilehurst, in Berkshire, in 1627, of which place his father, Mr. Richard Lloyd, was then vicar, and also rector of Sunning, in the same county. Having been carefully instructed by his father in the rudiments of grammar and classical learning, he understood Greek and Latin, and something of Hebrew, at eleven years of age; and was entered, in 1638, a student of Oriel college, in Oxford, whence, the following year, he was elected to a scholarship of Jesus college. In 1642 he proceeded B. A. and left the university, then garrisoned for the use of the king; but, after the surrender of it to the parliament, he returned, was chosen fellow of his college, and commenced M. A. in 1646. In 1649 he was ordained deacon by Dr. Skinner, bishop of Oxford, and afterwards became tutor to the children of sir William Backhouse, of Swallowfield, in Berkshire. In 1654, upon the ejection of Dr. Pordage by the Presbyterian committee, he was presented to the rectory of Bradfield, in the same county, by Elias Ashmole, esq. patron of that living in right of his wife; but this right being disputed by Mr. Fowler and Mr. Ford, two ministers at Reading, who endeavoured to bring in Dr. Temple, pretending the advowson was in sir Humphrey Forster, he chose to resign his presentation to Mr. Ashmole, rather than involve himself in a contest. In 1656 he was ordained priest hy Dr. Brownrig, bishop of Exeter, and the same year went to Wadham college, in Oxford, as governor to John Backhouse, esq. a gentleman-commoner, with whom he continued till 1659. In Sept. 1660, he was incorporated M. A. at Cambridge; and, about the same time, made a prebendary of Rippon, in Yorkshire. In 1666 he was appointed king’s chaplain; and, in 1667, was collated to a prebend of Salisbury, having proceeded D. D. at Oxford in the act preceding. In 1668 he was presented by the crown to the vicarage of St. Mary’s in Reading; and, the same year, was installed archdeacon of Merioneth, in the church of Bangor, of which he was made dean in 1672. This year he obtained also a prebend in the church of St. Paul, London. In 1674 he became residentiary<of Salisbury; and, in 1676, he succeeded Dr. Lamplugh, promoted to the see of Exeter, in the vicarage of St. Martin’s in the Fields, Westminster; upon which occasion he resigned his prebend of St. Paul’s.

* Coleman at that time wrote to the those that require it, on conditions pope’s internuncio thus: “There is prejudicial to the authority of the pope, but one thing to be feared (whereof! and so to persecute the rest of them with have a great apprehension) that ran more appearance of justice, and ruin hinder the success of our designs; which the one half of them more easily than is, a division among the catholics them- the whole body at once.” And carselves; by propositions to the parlia- dinal Howard delivered it as their ment to accord their conjunction to judgment at Rome. ' Division of CaAll suspicion, however, of his principles vanished in James IPs reign, when the nation saw him one of the six prelates, who, with archbishop Sancroft, were committed to the Tower in June 1688, for resisting his majesty’s order to distribute and publish in all their churches the royal declaration for liberty of conscience; and about the end of the same year, having concurred heartily in therevolution, he was made lord almoner to king William III. In 1692 he was translated to the see of Litchfield and Coventry, and thence to Worcester in 1699. He continued in the office of lord almoner till 1702, when, together with his son, having too warmly interested himself in the election for the county of Worcester, a complaint was made to the House of Commons, and a resolution passed of addressing the queen “to remove William lord bishop of Worcester from being lord almoner to her majesty; and that Mr. Attorney General do prosecute Mr. Lloyd, the lord bishop of Worcester’s son, for his said offence, after his privilege as a member of the lower house of convocation is out.” In consequence of this vote, an address Was presented to the queen, with which her majesty complied, and dismissed the bishop from his office.

Besides the “Considerations,” &c. mentioned above, he wrote, 1. “The late Apology in behalf of Papists, reprinted and answered, in behalf of the Royalists,” 1667, 4to. 2. “A seasonable Discourse, shewing the necessity of maintaining the Established Religion in opposition to Popery,” 1672, 4to, which passed through five editions in the following year. 3. “A reasonable Defence of the Seasonable Discourse,” &c. 1673, 4to, in answer to the earl of Castlemain’s observations on the preceding article. 4. “The difference between the Church and the Court of Rome considered,” 1673, 4to. All the preceding were published without the author’s name, nor were they at first acknowledged by, though generally attributed to him. They were reprinted in 1689, 4to. 5. “An Alarm for Sinners,” 1679, 4to. This was published by our author when dean of Bangor, from an original copy containing the confession, prayers, letters, and last words of Robert Foulks, vicar of Stanton-Lucy, in Shropshire, who was executed at Tyburn, in 1678, for the murder of a natural child; and whom Dr. Lloyd and Dr. Buraet attended during his imprisonment. 6. Various occasional Sermons, printed separately. 7. “An historical account of Church Government,” 1684, 8vo. 8. “A Letter to Dr. William Sherlock, in vindication of that part of Josephus’s History, which gives an account of Jaddua the high priest’s submitting to Alexander the Great,” 1691, 4to. 9. “A Discourse of God’s ways of disposing Kingdoms,” 1691, 4to. 10. “The Pretences of the French Invasion examined,” &c. 1692, 4to. 11. “A Dissertation upon Daniel’s 70 Weeks,” the substance of which is inserted in the chronology of sir Isaac Newton. 12. An exposition of the same subject, left printed imperfect, and not published. 13. *‘ A Letter upon the same subject, printed in the ’ Life of Dr. Humphrey Prideaux,' p. 288, edit. 1758,“8vo. 14.” A System of Chronology,“left imperfect, but out of it his chaplain, Benjamin Marshall, composed his” Chronological Tables,“printed at Oxford, 1712, 1713. 15.” A Harmony of the Gospels,“partly printed in 4to, but left imperfect. 16.” A Chronological account of the Life of Pythagoras,“&c. 1699. 17. He is supposed to have had a hand in a book published by his son at Oxford, 1700, in folio, entitled” Series Chronologica Olympiadum,“&c. He wrote also some” Explications of some of the Prophecies in the Revelations,“and added the chronological dates at the head of the several columns, with an index to the Bible, and many of the references and parallel places, first printed in the fine edition of the Bible published in folio, under the direction of archbishop Tenison, in 1701. He left a Bible interlined with notes in short hand, which was in the possession of Mr. Marshall, his chaplain, who married a relation, and would have published these notes had he met with encouragement, as Whiston informs us, who always, even in his index, calls Dr. Lloyd” the great bishop,“and in speaking of Wasse says,” one more learned than any bishop in England since bishop Lloyd."

, a native of Porto, in Portugal, who lived towards the end of the thirteenth century, is the supposed author of the celebrated romance of Amadis de Gaul. Very little is known of his life, and his romance is fallen into deserved oblivion.

He seems first to have appeared as an author in 1657, during the interregnum, by the publication of his “little consort of three parts for viols or violins, consisting of pavans, ayres, corants, sarabands, in two several varieties, the first twenty of which are for two trebles and a base.” Some of his compositions appear in the second part of John Playford’s continuation of Hilton’s “Catch that catch can,” in 1667; and among them the most pleasing of Lock’s compositions, “Never trouble thyself about times or their turnings,” a glee for three voices. He was the first Who attempted dramatic music for the English stage, if we except the masques that were performed at court, and at the houses of the nobility, in the time of Charles I. and during the reign of Charles II. When musical dramas were first attempted, which Dryden calls heroic plays and dramatic operas, Lock was employed to set most of them, particularly the semi-operas, as they were called, the Tempest, Macbeth,] and Psyche, translated from the French of Moliere, by Shadwell. The Tempest and Psyche were printed in 1675, and dedicated to James duke of Monmouth. There is a preface of some length by Lock, which, like his music, is rough and nervous, exactly corresponding with the idea which is generated of his private character, by the perusal of his controversy with Salmon, and the sight of his picture in the music-school at Oxford. It is written with that natural petulance which probably gave birth to most of the quarrels in which he was involved. It includes, however, a short history of these early attempts at dramatic music on our stage, in which, as in the most successful representations of this kind in later times, the chief part of the dialogue was spoken, and recitative, or musical declamation, which seems to be the true criterion and characteristic of Italian operas, but seldom used, unless merely to introduce some particular airs and choruses. Upon examining this music, it appears to have been very much composed on Lulli’s model. The melody is neither recitative nor air, but partaking of both, with a change of measure as frequent as in any old French opera which we ever saw.

, one of the greatest philosophers this country has produced, was the son of John Locke, of Pensford, a market-town in Somersetshire, five miles from Bristol, by Anne his wife, daughter of Edmund Keen, or Ken, of Wrington, tanner. His father, who was first a clerk only to a neighbouring justice of the peace, Francis Baber, of Chew Magna, was advanced by col. Alexander Popham, whose seat was near Pensford, to be a captain in the parliament’s service. After the restoration, he practised as an attorney, and was clerk of the sewers in Somersetshire *. Although our philosopher’s age is not to be found in the registers of Wrington, which is the parish church of Pensford, it has been ascertained that he wasborn there Aug. 29, 1632. By the interest of col, Popham, he was admitted a scholar at Westminster, whence in 1652 he was elected to Christ church, Oxford. Here he took the degree of B. A. in 1655, and that of M. A. in 1658; but although he made a considerable progress in the usual course of studies at that time, he often said that what he learned was of little use to enlighten and enlarge his mind. The first books which gave him a relish for the study of philosophy, were the writings of Des Cartes, whom he always found perspicuous, although he did not always approve of his sentiments.

After taking his degrees in arts, he applied for some time to the study of physic, not so much, we are told, with a view to public practice, as for the benefit of his own constitution, which was but weak. But he must have made his skill more generally known than this amounts to, for we find that among the learned in his faculty who had a good opinion of his medical knowledge, the celebrated Dr. Sydenham, in his work on acute diseases, gives him the following high encomium “You know,” says he, "how much my method has been approved of by a person who has examined it to the bottom, End who is our common friend; I mean Mr. John Locke, who, if we consider

* /But an intelligent writer, who ap- minority, and the other our celebrated pears to have had access to the best metaphysician. See Gent. Mag. vol. authorities, asserts that Mr. Locke’s LXII. See also a letter on the same father was killed at Bristol in 1645, subject, in vol. LXIX. p. Ul. leaving two sons, one who died in his his genius, and penetrating and exact judgment, or the purity of his morals, has scarce any superior, and few equals now living." Hence he was often saluted by his acquaintance with the title, though he never took the degree, of doctor, which we think would have been the case had he intended medicine as a profession, or had not been diverted from it by other studies and avocations f.

After this cure, his lordship, by frequent conversations, discovered qualities in Locke, which made him regard his medical skill as the least of his merits; and foreseeing the bent of his talents, advised him to apply himself to the study of political and religious topics, on which his lordship seems often to have consulted him. By his acquaintance with this nobleman, he was introduced to some persons of eminence, such as Villiers duke of Buckingham, lord Halifax, and other noblemen of wit and parts, who were all charmed with his conversation, and more so, it appears, than he was sometimes with theirs. One day, three or four of these lords having met at lord Ashley’s when Mr. Locke was there, after some compliments, cards were brought in, before scarce any conversation had passed between them. Mr. Locke looked upon them for some time while they were at play, and taking his pocket book began to write with great attention. One of the lords asked him what he was writing: “My lord,” said he, “I am endeavouring to profit as far as I am able, in your company; for having waited with impatience for the honour of being in an assembly of the greatest geniuses of this age, and at last having obtained the good fortune, I thought I could not do better than write down your conversation; and indeed I have set down the substance of what has been said for this hour or two.” This rebuke appears to have been taken in good part; the company quitted their play, and passed the rest of their time in a. manner more suitable to the rational character.

In 1668, he attended the earl and countess of Northumberland into France; but the earl’s death did not allow him to remain long in that country. On his return, Mr. Locke lived, as before, at lord Ashley’s, who was then chancellor of the exchequer, but made frequent visits to Oxford, in the prosecution of his studies, as well as for change of air, which appeared to be necessary to his health. While he was at lord Ashley’s, he had the care of the education of that nobleman’s eldest son, who was then about sixteen years of age. This province he executed with great care, and to the full satisfaction of his noble patron. The young lord being of a weakly constitution, his father wished to see him married, lest the family should be extinct by his death; and as he thought him too young to make a proper choice for himself, he not only consulted Mr. Locke on the subject, but even requested he would make a suitable choice for the youth. This was an affair of some delicacy, and no small risk; for, although lord Ashley did not regard fortune, yet he conditioned for a lady of a good family, an agreeable temper, and a fine person; of good education, and of good understanding, and whose conduct would be different from that of the generality of court-ladies. In all these respects Mr.Xocke had the happiness to succeed, and the marriage was fruitful. The eldest son, afterwards the author of the “Characteristics,” was committed to the care of Mr. Locke in his education, and his pupil, when lord Shaftesbury, always spoke of Mr. Locke with the highest esteem, and manifested on all occasions a grateful sense of his obliga r tions to him, but there are some passages in his works, in which he speaks of Mr. Locke’s philosophy with great severity. It will not, however, be thought a very serious objection to Mr. Locke, that his philosophy did not give entire satisfaction to lord Shaftesbury.

In 1670, and the year following, our author began to form the plan of his celebrated “Essay on Human Understanding,” at the earnest request of Mr. Tyrrell, Dr. Thomas, and some other friends, who met frequently in his chamber to converse together on philosophical subjects; but his employments and avocations prevented him from finishing it then. In 1668 he had been elected a fellow of the royal society, and appears to have been now looked up to as a man of superior talents, and an authority in those pursuits to which he more particularly addicted himself. In 1672, his patron Lord Ashley, being created earl of Shaftesburj', and lord high chancellor of England, appointed Mr. Locke secretary of the presentations to benefices; which place he held until 1673, when his lordship resigned the great seal. As he had been the confidant of this statesman in his most secret affairs, he now assisted his lordship in publishing some treatises, which were designed to excite the people to watch the Roman catholics, and to oppose the arbitrary measures of the court.

During his residence in Holland, he was accused at court of having written certain tracts against the government of his country, which were afterwards discovered to be the production of another person; and upon that suspicion he was deprived of his studentship of Christ-church. This part of Mr. Locke’s history requires some detail. The writer of his life in the Biographia Britannica (Nicoll) says that “being observed to join in company with several English malcontents at the Hague, this conduct was communicated by our resident there to the earl of Sunderland, then secretary of state; who acquainting the king therewith, his majesty ordered the proper methods to be taken for expelling him from the college, and application to be made for that purpose to bishop Fell, the dean; in obedience to this command, the necessary information was given by his lordship, who at the same time wrote to our author, to appear and answer for himself on the first of January ensuing, but immediately receiving an express command to turn him out, was obliged to comply therewith, and, accordingly, Air. Locke was removed from his student’s place on the 15th of Nov. 1684.” This account, however, is not correct. All that lord Sunderland did, was to impart his majesty’s displeasure to the dean, and to request his opinion as to the proper method of removing Mr. Locke. The dean’s answer, dated Nov. 8, contains the following particulars of Mr. Locke, and of his own advice and proceedings against him. “I have,” says the dean, “for divers years had an eye upon him; but so close has his guard been on himself, that after several strict inquiries, I may confidently affirm there is not any man inthe college, however familiar with him, who had heard him speak a word either against or so much as concerning the government; and although very frequently, both in public and private, discourses have been purposely introduced to the disparagement of his master, the earl of Shaftesbury, his party and designs, he never could be provoked to take any notice, or discover in word or look the least concern. So that I believe there is not a man in the world so much master of taciturnity and passion. He has here a physician’s place (he had taken the degree of B. M. in 1674) which frees him from the exercise of the college, and the obligations which others have to residence in it; and he is now abroad for want of health.”

Thus far we might suppose the dean had advanced enough in behalf of the innocence of Mr. Locke. What follows, however, will be read with regret, that so good a man as bishop Fell should have given such advice. “Notwithstanding this, I have summoned him to return home, which is done with this prospect, that if he comes not back, he will be liable to expulsion for contumacy; and if he does, he will be answerable to the law for that which he shall be found to have done amiss. It being probable that, though he may have been thus cautious here, where he knew himself suspected, he has laid himself more open at London, where a general liberty of speaking was used, and where the execrable designs against his majesty and government were managed and pursued. If he don't r^­turn by the first of January, which is the time limited to him, I shall be enabled of course to proceed against him to expulsion. But if this method seems not effectual or speedy enough, and his majesty, our founder and visitor, shall please to command his immediate remove, upon the receipt thereof, directed to the dean and chapter, it shall accordingly be executed.” In consequence of this, a warrant came down to the dean and chapter, dated Nov. 12, in these words: “Whereas we have received information of the factious and disloyal behaviour of Locke, one of the students of that our college; we have thought fit hereby to signify our will and pleasure to you, that you forthwith remove him from his student’s place, and deprive him of all rights and advantages thereunto belonging, for which this shall be your warrant,” &c. And thus, on the 16th following, one of the greatest men of his time was, expelled the college at the command of Charles II. without, as far as ia known, any form of trial or inquiry. After the death of Charles II. William Penn, the celebrated quaker, who had known Mr. Locke at the university, used his interest with king James to procure a pardon for him) an J would have obtained it, if Mr. Locke had not said, that he had no occasion for a pardon, since he had not been guilty of any crime.

During this concealment Mr. Locke wrote his “Letter on Toleration,” in Latin, which was printed at Gouda, 1689, under the title “Epistola de Tolerantia, ad clarissimum virum T. A. R. P. T. o. L. A. (i. e. Theologiae apud remonstrautes professorem, tyrannidis osorem, Limburgium Amstelodamensem) scripta a. P. A. p. o. I. L. A. (i. e. Pacis amico, persecutions osore, Joanne Lockio Anglo). This letter was translated into English by Mr. Popple (who was nephew to Andrew Marvell, and author of the” Rational Catechism,") and printed twice in London, 1689, 4to, and 16l>0, 12mo. It involved Mr. Locke in a controversy with the rev. Jonas Proast, M. A. of Queen’s-college, Oxford; and some pamphlets passed between them, to the last of which, published by Mr. Proast, a short time before Mr. Locke’s death, the latter left a reply unfinished, which was published in his posthumous works. While at Amsterdam, Mr. Locke formed a weekly assembly, consisting of Limborch, Le Clerc, and others, for conversation upon important subjects, and had drawn up in Latin rules to be observed by them; but those conferences were much interrupted by the frequent changes he was obliged to make of his places of residence.

The revolution of 1688 at length restored Mr. Locke to England, to which he returned in the fleet which conveyed the princess of Orange. He now endeavoured to obtain his studentship of Christ-church, not that he had any design to return to college, but only that this would amount to a public testimony of his having been unjustly deprived of it. But when he found that the society could not be prevailed on to dispossess the person who had been elected in his room, and that they would only admit him a supernumerary student, he desisted from his claim.

In 1695 be published his treatise of “The reasonableness of Christianity, as delivered in the Scriptures,” written, it is said, in order to promote the scheme which king William III. had much at heart, of a comprehension with the dissenters. In this his argument is to prove, “that the Christian religion, as delivered in the Scriptures, free from all corrupt mixtures, is the most reasonable institution in the world;” and we allow that it would certainly appear so if men were agreed as to what are “corrupt mixtures,” which, it is well known, some writers have extended to those articles of belief which others not only find in the Scriptures, but consider as fundamental. On the appearance of this work, Mr. Locke found an opponent in Dr. John Edwards (see John Edwards), who considered his principles as verging towards Socinianism: and a defender ifi Mr. Samuel Bold. Mr. Locke also replied to Edwards.

In 1695, Mr. Locke was appointed one of the commissioners of trade and plantations, a place wprth 1000l. per annum. The duties of this post he discharged with great ability and diligence until 1700, when the increase of his asthmatic disorder, obliged him to resign it. On this occasion he acquainted no person with his intention, until he had given up his commission into the king’s hand. His majesty, who knew his worth, was very unwilling to part with him, and said he would be well pleased with his continuance in office, although he should give little or no attendance, and certainly would not wish him to remain in towji one day to the detriment of his health. But Mr. Locke told the king that he could not in conscience hold a place to which such a salary was annexed, without discharging the duties of it; and therefore he begged leave to resign it, which was accepted.

From this time, which was the year 1700, he lived altogether at Oates, and applied himself, without interruption, entirely to the study of the holy scriptures; and in this employment he found so much pleasure, that he regretted his not having devoted more of his time to it in the former part of his life. On one occasion, in answer to a young gentleman, who asked what was the shortest and surest way for a person to attain a true knowledge of the Christian religion? he replied, “Let him study the holy scripture, especially the New Testament. It has God for its author; salvation for its end; and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter.” In 1703 he suffered much from his asthmatic disorder, but the pangs of bodily complaint were alleviated by the kind attentions of lady Masham: still he foresaw that his dissolution was not far distant, and he could anticipate it without dread, and speak of it with perfect calmness and composure. After receiving the sacrament at home, in company with some friends, he told the minister, “that he was in perfect charity with all men, and in a sincere communion with the church of Christ, by what name soever it might be distinguished.” He lived some months after this, which he spent in acts of piety and devotion: when he was meditating on the wisdom and goodness of the Creator, he could not forbear crying out, *' Oh the depth of the riches of the goodness and knowledge of God:“what he felt himself on this subject he was anxious to infuse into the hearts of others. On the day previously to uis departure he said,” he had lived long enough, and was thankful that he had enjoyed a happy life but that, after all, he looked upon this life to be nothing but vanity,“or, as he expresses a similar sentiment, in a letter which he left behind him for his friend Mr. Anthony Collins, one that” affords no solid satisfaction but in the consciousness of doing well, and in the hopes of another life." He had no rest that night, and begged in the morning to be carried into his study,; where, being placed in an easy chair, he had a refreshing sleep for a considerable time. He then requested lady Masham to read aloud some of the psalms, to which he appeared exceedingly attentive, till feeling, probably, the approach of the last messenger, he begged her to desist, and in a few minutes expired, on the 28th of October 1704, in the 73d year of his age.

Of all Mr. Locke’s works, his “Essay on Human Understanding,” is that which has contributed most to his fame, and the reputation which it had from the beginning, and which it has gradually acquired abroad, is a sufficient testimony of its merit. There is perhaps no book of the metaphysical kind that has been so generally read by those who understand the language, or that is more adapted to teach men to think with precision, and to inspire them with that candour and love of truth, which is the genuine spirit of philosophy. He gave, Dr. Reid thinks, the first example in the English language of writing on such abstract subjects, with a remarkable degree of simplicity and perspicuity; and in this he has been happily imitated by others that came after him. No author has. more successfully pointed out the danger of ambiguous words, and the importance of having distinct and determinate notions in judging and reasoning. His observations on the various powers of the human understanding, on the use and abuse of words, and on the extent and limits of human knowledge, are drawn from attentive reflection on the operations of his own mind, the true source of all real knowledge on those subjects; and show an uncommon degree of penetration and judgment Such is the opinion of the learned and candid Dr. Reid, who says, “I mention these things that when I have occasion to differ from him, I may not be thought insensible of the merit of an author whom I highly respect, and to whom I owe my first lights in those studies, as well as my attachment to them.” Dr. Reid has ably pointed out what he thought defective in Locke’s system, which indeed has been more or less the subject of discussion in every work on metaphysics during the last century. The late Mr. Home Tooke, in his “Diversions of Purley,” differs from all others in advancing one of those singular opinions which are peculiar to that gentleman. He calls Locke’s Essay, merely “a grammatical treatise, or a treatise on words, or on language;” and says, that “it was a lucky mistake which Mr. Locke made when he called his book an Essay on the Human Understanding. For some part of the inestimable benefit of that book has, merely on account of its title, reached to thousands more than, I fear, it would have done, had he called it a Grammatical Essay. The human mind, or the human understanding, appears to be a grand and noble theme, and all men, even the most insufficient, conceive ttut to be a proper object for their contemplation, while inquiries into the nature of language are supposed to be beneath the concern of their exalted understanding.”

son of Stephen Locker, esq. or Lockier (for that was the family name in the reign of Charles II. as appears by the signature pf one of their ancestors to a lease in that reign), was of a gentleman’s family in Middlesex, where they possessed a considerable property, which, it is said, they lost, as many others did, by their loyalty. He was bred at MerchantTaylors’ school, whence he went to Merton-college, Oxford; after which he travelled abroad with his friend Mr. Twisleton, who was probably of the same college. He was entered at Gray’s Inn, where he studied the law in the same chambers formerly occupied by his admired lord Bacon; and having been called to the bar, was afterwards clerk of the companies of leather-sellers and clock-makers, and a commissioner of bankrupts. He married (the families being before related) miss Elizabeth Stillingfleet, who was remarkable for her many excellent qualities as well as personal charms. She was grand-daughter to the eminent bishop of Worcester by his lordship’s first wife, and sister to Benjamin Stillingfleet, esq. much distinguished by his ingenious writings and worthy character. By this lady, who died August 12, 1759, he had nine children. Mr. Locker is noticed by Dr. Johnson , in his Life of Addison, as eminent for curiosity and literature; as he is by Dr. Ward, in his Lives of the Gresham Professors, as a gentleman much esteemed for his knowledge of polite literature. He was remarkable for his skill in the Greek language; and attained the modern, which he could write very well, in a very extraordinary manner. Coming home late one evening, he was addressed in that language by a poor Greek, from the Archipelago, who had lost his way in the streets of London. Mr. Locker took him home, where he was maintained, for some time, by the kindness of himself and Dr. Mead; and, by this accidental circumstance, Mr. Locker acquired his knowledge of modern Greek. He almost adored lord Bacon; and had collected from original manuscripts and other papers, many curious things of his lordship’s not mentioned by others, which it was his intention to publish, but his death prevented it; however, this fell into such good hands, that the public are now in possession of them, as is mentioned in the last edition of lord Bacon’s works, by Dr. Birch and Mr. Mallet, 1765. Mr. Locker also wrote the preface to Voltaire’s Life of Charles XII. of Sweden, and translated the two first books; and Dr. Jebb the rest. He died, very much regretted, in May 1760, not quite a year after the loss of his amiable lady, which it was thought accelerated his own death. They both were buried in St. Helen’s church, Bishopsgate-street, London. Their son William, bred to the naval service, but a man of some literary talents, died lieutenant-governor of Greenwich-hospital, on December 26, 1800, at the age of seventy. Some particulars of him are to be found in our authority.

, a non-conformist divine, the son of William Lockyer of Glastonbury in Somersetshire, was born in that county in 1612, and in 162.9 studied in New-Inn hall, Oxford, where he took the degree of bachelor of arts. He afterwards went into holy orders, and had a cure, but siding with the presbyterian party, became a leading man in their committees, and other measures for reforming the church. He obtained, by the same interest, a fellowship of Eton* college, and in 1658 was made provost, but was ejected at the Restoration. He passed the remainder of his life at Woodford in Essex, where, as Wood says, he died “a wealthy man,” March 13, 1684-5; and was buried in St. Mary’s-church, Whitechapel. His works, of which Wood has given a very copious list, consist of sermons, and tracts of practical piety. Calamy, who gives but a slight account of him, says, that " his writings shew him to have been very zealous and affectionate; earnestly bent upon the conversion of souls.

, a dramatic poet, descended from a family which had its residence in Lincolnshire; but whether the doctor himself was born there, seems not very easy to be ascertained. Langbaine and Jacob, and, after them, Wincop and Chetwood, who, in the general, are little more than copiers, say that he was educated at Cambridge, but Wood informs us, that it was at Oxford, where he made his first appearance about 1573, and was afterwards a scholar under the learned Dr. Hobye, of Trinitycollege. Here he made very considerable advances in learning, dedicating his leisure time to the reading the poets of antiquity; and, having himself a turn to poetry, especially of the satirical kind, he became known by various compositions of that nature, which obtained him no 1 inconsiderable reputation as a wit and poet. Mr. Lodge, however, sensible how seldom the study of poetry yields a competent provision to its professors, after having taken one degree in arts, applied himself, with great assiduity, to the more profitable study of physic, and for further improvement went abroad. After staying a sufficient time at Avignon to be entitled to the degree of doctor in that university, he returned, and, in the latter end of queen Elizabeth’s reign, was incorporated in the university of Cambridge. He afterwards settled in London, where, by his skill and interest with the Roman Catholic party, in which persuasion, it is said, he was brought up, he attained great practice. In what year Dr. Lodge was born does not evidently appear; but be died in 1625, and had tributes paid to his memory by many of his contemporary poets, who have characterized him as a man of very considerable genius.

, a very learned oriental scholar, was the second son of sir Adam Loftus, and great grandson of Dr. Adam Loftus, who was archbishop of Armagh, then of Dublin, and one of the lords justices, and lord chancellor of Ireland. He was born in 1618, at Rathfarnam, near Dublin, a stately castle built by his ancestor the archbishop, and was educated in Trinity college, where he was admitted fellow- commoner in 1635. About the time he took his first degree in arts, the extraordinary proficiency he had made in languages attracted the notice of arciibishop Usher, who earnestly advised his father to send him to Oxford, where he might improve his oriental learning, a matter which that worthy prelate considered as highly important in the investigation of the history and principles of the Christian religion. Mr. Loftus was accordingly sent by his father to Oxford, and entered of University college, where he was incorporated B. A. in November 1639, About this time he commenced the study of the law, with a view to take his bachelor’s degree in that faculty, but at the persuasion of his friends in University college, took his degree of master of arts in 1641, and then returned to Ireland at the moment the rebellion broke out. His father, who was at that time vice-treasurer, and one of the privy council, procured a garrison to be placed in his castle of Rathfarnam, and gave the command of it to his son Dudley, who displayed his skill and courage, by defending the city from the incursions of the Irish inhabiting the neighbouring mountains. He was afterwards made one of the masters in chancery, vicargeneral of Ireland, and judge of the prerogative court and faculties, all which offices he held to the time of his death. He was also a doctor of the civil law, and esteemed the most learned of any of his countrymen in that faculty. Towards the latter part of his life, his talents and memory were very much impaired, and when about seventy-six years of age, he married a second wife, but died the year following, in June 1695, and was buried in St. Patrick’s church, Dublin.

Mr. Loftus’s greatest excellence lay in the knowledge of various languages, especially the oriental; and it is said, that when only twenty years of age, he was able to translate as many languages into English. Among archbishop Usher’s letters is one from him to that prelate, which, although short, shews his avidity to search out oriental books and Mss.; as well as his high respect and gratitude to Usher, who first directed his attention to the treasures of the Bodleian library. Yet his character in other respects does not correspond with his parts or learning. He was accounted, says Harris, an improvident and unwise man, and his many levities and want of conduct gave the world too much reason to think so. The same biographer mentions “a great, but free-spoken prelate,” who said of Mr. Loftus, that “he never knew so much learning in the keeping of a fool.”

His learning, indeed, and his industry appear very evident by his many writings. Besides the ^thiopic New Testament which he translated into Latin, at the request of Usher and Selden, for the Polyglot, and which procured him from Walton the character of “vir doctissimus, tain generis prosapia, quam linguaruoi orientalium scientia, nobilis,” he published, 1. “Logica Armeniaca in Latinam traducta,” Dublin, 1657, 12mo. 2. “Introductio in totam Aristotelis Philosophiam,” ibid. 1657, 12mo. 3. “The Proceedings observed in order to, and in the consecration of, the twelve Bishops in St. Patrick’s Church in Dublin, Jan. 27, 1660,” Lond. 1661, 4to. 4. “Liber Psalmorum Davidis ex Armeniaco idiotnate in Latinum traductus,” Dublin, 1661, 12mo. 5. “Oratio funebris habita post exuvias nuperi Rev. jbatris Joan. (Bramhall) archiepiscopi Armacbani,” ibid. 1663, 4to. 6. “The Speech of James duke of Ormond, made in a parliament at Dublin, Sept. 17, 1662, translated into the Italian,” ibid. 1664. 7. “Reductio litium de libero arbitrio, proedestinatione, et reprobatione ad arbitrium boni viri,” ibid. 1670, 4to. 8. “A, Book demonstrating that it was inconsistent with the English government, that the Irish rebels should be admitted to their former condition with impunity, by topics drawn from principles of law, policy, and conscience,” published under the name of Philo-Britannicus. 9. “Lettera esortatoria di mettere opera a fare sincera penitenza mandata alia signora F. M. L. P. &c.” 1667, 4to. This piece was written on account of a lady of Irish birth, with whom he was criminally connected, and whom he wished to pass for an Italian, as she was educated in Italy. Her name was Francisca Maria Lucretia Plunket. It was to her he wrote this exhortatory letter, which was followed soon after by, 10. “The Vindication of an injured lady, F. M. Lucretia Plunket, one of the ladies of the privy chamber to the queen mother of England,” Lond. 1667, J-to. i I Two pamphlets of the “Case of Ware and Shirley,” a gentleman who married an heiress against her will. 12. “A Speech delivered at the Visitation held in the diocese of Clogher, se.de vacant e, Sept. 27, 1671,” Dublin, 1671, 4to. 13. “The first marriage of Katherine Fitzgerald (now lady Decies), &c. asserted,” Lond. 1677, 4to. Readers of the present times will be surprised to be told, that this pamphlet relates to the marriage of lord Decies, aged eight years, to Katherine Fitz-gerald, aged twelve and a half. The little lady in about twenty months took another husband, Edward Villiers, esq. Mr. Loftus’s opinion was, that the first marriage was legal. His argument was answered by Robert Thomson, LL. D. in a pamphlet under the title of “Sponsa nondum uxor,” Lond. 1678, 4to. 14. “Several Chapters of Dionysius Syrus’s Comment on St. John the Evangelist, concerning the Life and Death of our Saviour,” Dublin, 4 to. 15. “The Commentary on the Four Evangelists, by Dionysius Syrus, out of the Syriac tongue.” 16. “Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistles, by Moses Bar-Cepha, out of the Syriac.” 17. “Exposition of Dionysius Syrus, on St. Mark,” Dublin, 1676, 4to, according to Harris, but by the Bodleian catalogue it would appear that most, if not all, the four preceding articles were published together in 1672. 18. “History of the Eastern and Western Churches, by Gregory Maphrino, translated into Latin from the Syriac.” 19. “Commentary on the general Epistles, and Acts of the Apostles, by Gregory Maphrino.” 20 “Praxis cultusdivini juxta ritus primoevorum Christianorum,” containing various ancient liturgies, &c. Dublin, 1693, 4to. 21. “A clear and learned Explication of the History of our Blessed Saviour, taken out of above thirty Greek, Syriac, and other oriental authors, by way of Catena, by Dionysius Syrus, translated into English,” Dublin, 1695, 4to. Harris mentions a few other translations from the Armenian, Arabic, and Syriac, but without date or place, and which probably were printed with some of the preceding.

, a polite scholar, and magistrate of some eminence in America, was born in Scotland about 1674. He was one of the people called Quakers, and accompanied William Penn in his last voyage to Pennsylvania. For many years of his life he was employed in public business, and rose to the offices of chief justice and governor of the province: but he felt always an ardour of study, and by husbanding his leisure hours, found time to write several treatises in Latin, of which one on the generation of plants, was translated into English by Dr. Fothergill. When advanced in years, he withdrew from the tumult of public business to the solitude of his country-seat, near Germantown, where he corresponded with the most distinguished literary characters of Europe. He also made a version of “Cicero de Senectute,” which was published with notes by the celebrated Dr. Franklin. Mr. Logan died in 1751, at the age of seventy-seven, leaving his library, which he had been fifty years in collecting, to the people of Pennsylvania. The following extract from his will affords a pleasing idea of his literary enthusiasm: " In my library, which I have left to the city of Philadelphia, for the advancement and facilitating of classical learning, are above an hundred volumes of authors in folio, all in Greek, with mostly their versions. All the Roman classics without exception. All the whole Greek mathematicians, viz. Archimedes, Euclid, Ptolemy, both his Geography, and Almagest, which I had in Greek (with Theon’s commentary in folio, above 700 pages) from my learned friend Fabricius, who published 14 volumes of his ‘ Bibliotheque Grecque,’ in 4to, in which, after he had finished his account of Ptolemy, on my inquiring of him

At what time he began to imitate his favourite models, is doubtful, but as an inclination to write poetry is generally precipitate, it is probable that he had produced many of his lesser pieces while at the university; and he had the advice and encouragement of Dr. John Main of Athelstoneford, a clergyman of classical taste, in pursuing a track which genius seemed to have pointed out. He had also acquired the friendship and patronage of lord Elibank, and of the celebrated Dr. Blair, who regarded him as a youth of promising talents, and unusual acumen in matters of criticism. By the recommendation of Dr. Blair, he was, in 1768, received into the family of Sinclair, as private tutor to the present baronet of Ulbster, the editor of those statistical reports which have done so much honour to the clerical character of Scotland. Here, however, Logan did not remain long, but returned to Edinburgh to attend the divinity lectures, with a view of entering into the church. Either by reading, or by the company he kept, he had already overcome the scruples which inclined his parents to dissent, and determined to take orders in the establishment.

In 1770, he published a volume under the title of “Poems on several occasions, by Michael Bruce,” a youth who died at the age of twenty-one, after exhibiting considerable talents for poetry. In this volume, however, Logan chose to insert several pieces of his own, without specifying them, a circumstance which has since given rise to a controversy between the respective friends of Bruce and Logan. In 1770, after going through the usual probationary periods, Logan was admitted a preacher, and in 1773 was invited to the pastoral charge at South Leith, which he accepted. His poems, which had been hitherto circulated only in private, or perhaps occasionally inserted in the literary journals, pointed him out as a proper person to assist in a scheme for revising the psalmody of the church. For this purpose he was, in 1775, appointed one of the committee ordered by the General Assembly (the highest ecclesiastical authority in Scotland), and took a very active part in their proceedings, not only revising and improving some of the old versions, but adding others of his own composition. This collection of “Translations and Paraphrases” was published in 1781, under the sanction of the General Assembly. About two years before this publication appeared, he had prepared a course of lectures on the philosophy of history, and had on this occasion consulted Drs. Robertson, Blair, Carlisle, and other eminent men connected with the university of Edinburgh, who seemed liberally inclined to promote his success. The first request, however, which he had to make, happened not to be within their power. He desired the use of a room in the college for the delivery of his lectures, but by the statutes no indulgence of that kind could be granted to persons teaching or lecturing on subjects for which regular professors were already appointed. He then hired a chapel, in which he delivered his first course of lectures in 1779 So, and his auditors, if not very numerous, were of that kind whose report was of great consequence to his fame. In his second course, he had a larger auditory, and attracted so much notice, that he entertained very sanguine hopes of being promoted to the professorship of history, which became vacant about this time.

Notwithstanding his failings, it is with pleasure we copy the following passage from the Life prefixed to the late; edition of his poems. “The end of Logan was truly Christian. When he became too weak to hold a book, he employed his time in hearing such young persons as visited him read the Scriptures. His conversation turned chiefly on serious subjects, and was most affecting and instructive. He foresaw and prepared for the approach of death, gave directions about his funeral with the utmost composure, and dictated a distinct and judicious will, appointing Dr. Donald Grant, and his ancient and steady friend Dr. Robertson, his executors, and bequeathing to them his property, books, and Mss. to be converted into money, for the payment of legacies to those relations and friends who had the strongest claims upon his affectionate remembrance in his dying moments.”

, a very useful, if not an eminent engraver, was a native of Dantzic, and born probably in 1635. He is said to have received some instructions from Simon Pass, in Denmark. Passing through Holland, he studied under Hondius, and came to England before the restoration. Being at Oxford, and making a drawing for himself of All-souls college, he was taken notice of, and invited to undertake plates of all the colleges and public buildings of that university, which he executed, and by which he first distinguished himself. He afterwards performed the same for Cambridge, where he is said to have hurt his eye-sight in delineating the fine chapel of King’s college. He also engraved on eleven folio plates, the academical habits of Oxford, from the doctor to the lowest servant. At Oxford he was much caressed, obtained a licence for vending his “Oxonia Illustrata,” for fifteen years, and on July 9, 1672, was matriculated as universityengraver, by the name of “David Loggan, Gedanensis.” He was the most considerable engraver of heads in his time, but their merit as work* of art has not been rated very high. His “Oxonia” and “Cantabrigia illustrata,” however, will perpetuate his name, and his correctness may still be traced in those colleges which have not undergone alterations. He married a Mrs. Jordan, of a good family near Witney, in Oxfordshire, and left at least one son, who was fellow of Magdalen-college, Oxford, and B. D. in 1707. Loggan died in Leicester-fields, where he had resided in the latter part of his days, either in 1693 or 1700, for Vertue gives both dates in different places.

This story is evidently of the same cast with that of Solomon, and was perhaps taken from it; but Lokman himself gives a different account of his perfections. Being seated in the midst of a number of people who were listening to him, a man of eminence among the Jews, seeing so great a crowd of auditors round him, asked him, “Whether he was not the black slave who a little before looked after the sheep of a person he named?” To which Lokman assenting; “How has it been possible,” continued the Jew, “for thee to attain so exalted a pitch of wisdom and virtue” Lokman replied, “It was by the following means by always speaking the truth, by keeping my word Inviolably, and by never intermeddling in affairs that did not concern me.” Accordingly, we find inscribed to him this apophthegm: “Be a learned man, disciple of the learned, or an auditor of the learned; at least be a lover of knowledge, and desirous of improvement.” Lokman, it is said, hud not only consummate knowledge, but was equally good and virtuous; and so many admirable qualifies could not always be held in slavery. His master giving him a bitter melon to eat, Lokman ate it all; when his master, surprised at his exact obedience, says, “Hovr was it possible for you to eat so nauseous a fruit?” Lokman replied, “I have received so many favours from you, that it is no wonder I should once in my life eat a bitter melon from your hand.” This generous answer struck the master to such a degree, that he immediately gave him his liberty.

It is said that he lived three hundred years, and died in the age of the prophet Jonas. He was buried not far from Jerusalem; and his sepulchre was to be seen not above a century ago, at Ramlah, a small town not far from Jerusalem, his remains being deposited near those of the seventy prophets who were starved to death by the Jews, and all died in one day. He was of the Jewish religion, and some time served in the troops of king David, with whom he had been conversant in Palestine, and was greatly esteemed by that monarch. The relics of his fables were published by Erpenius in Arabic and Latin, with his Arabic Grammar, at Leyden, 1636, 4to, and 1656, 4to, and Tannaquil Faber gave an edition of them in elegant Latin verse. Galland translated them into French, with those of Pilpay, in 1714, 2 vols. 12mo; and a new volume was translated into the same language by M. Cardonne, in 1778. There is a more recent French edition by Marcel, in 1799, 4to. The work seems rather a collection of ancient fables than the production of any one writer. From the similarity of many of them to those of JEsop, some have inferred that Lokman and Æsop were different names for the same person but Brucker thinks it more likely that the compiler of these fables had seen those of Æsop, and chose to insert some of them in his collection. Whoever was the writer, the fables afford no inelegant specvmen of the moral doctrine of the Arabians.

, well known by the title of Master or“the Sentences, was born at Novara, in Lombardy, whence he took his surname. He was educated at Bologna, and Rheims, under St. Bernard, and afterwards removed to Paris, where, as one of the professors in that university, he distinguished himself so much, that the canonry of Chartres was conferred upon him. He was some time tutor to Philip, son of king Lewis le Gros, and brother of Lewis the young; and was so much esteemed by him, that upon the vacancy of the bishopric of Paris, that noble personage, being intended for the see, declined it for the sake of Lombard, who was accordingly promoted to it about 1160, and died in 1164. He was interred in the church of Marcellus, in the suburb of that name, where his epitaph is still to be seen. His work of the Sentences, divided into four books, contains an illustration of the doctrines of the church, in a collection of sentences or passages taken from the fathers. This was so favourably received, that in a short time it was the only work taught in the schools, and the author was, by way of eminence, called the” Master of the Sentences,“and was accounted the chief of the scholastic divines. His work was first printed at Venice, 1477, fol. and innumerable commentaries have been written on it. In our own universities the being admitted” to read the Sentences“was, as may be frequently seen in Wood’s Athenae, a mark of great progress in study, for a greater veneration was paid to Lombard’s work than to the Scriptures. Bacon, in a letter to Clement IV. mentions this preference as an absurdity.” The bachelor,“says he,” who reads the Scriptures, gives place to the reader of the * Sentences,' who everywhere is honoured and preferred. The reader of the Sentences has his choice of the most eligible time, and holds a call and society with the religious; but the biblical reader has neither; and must beg for such an hour as the reader of the Sentences is pleased to assign him. He who reads the Lombardine thesis, may anywhere dispute and be esteemed a master; but he who reads the text of Scripture is admitted to no such honour: the absurdity of this conduct is evident," &C.

, was born in 1635, the son of that count de Brienne who was ambassador in England in 1624. He had the reversion of the secretary of state’s office which his father held, and was made counsellor of state in 1651, when a boy of sixteen, with permission to exercise this office when he should attain the age of twenty- five. During this interval, be travelled over Italy, Germany, and the north, to acquire a knowledge of the countries he was afterward to treat with, and on his return, although only twenty-three years old, the king permitted him to act as secretary of state; but after his wife’s death, in 1665, Louis XIV. obliged him to resign his post. M. de Lomenie then retired to the fathers of the oratory, and was sub-deacon, but left them, and went to the court of Christian Louis, duke of Mecklenburgh, in 1672. His residence at that court was the origin of all the troubles which he brought upon himself; for, having entertained a criminal passion for the princess of Mecklenburg, he had the audacity to acquaint her with it. She complained of this affront to Louis XIV. who ordered him to return to Paris, and confined him in the abbey of St. Germain-des-Prez, then at St. Benolt-sur- Loire, afterwards at St. Lazare, and lastly, at the abbey of St. Severin, at Chateau Landon, where he died, April 17, 1698. He left an account of his travels, in Latin,entitled “Itinerarinm,” 8vo, written with elegance and perspicuity. 2. “Recueil de Poesies diverses et Chre”­tiennes,“Paris, 1671, 3 vols. 12mo. 3.” Remarques sur les Regies de la Poésie Françoise,“which are at the end of the” Nouvelle Methode Latine“of Port Royal, the seventh edition, 8vo. M. de Châlons has borrowed, without any acknowledgment, almost the whole of these remarks, in his treatise” Des Regies de la Poésie Fransoise.“Lomenie also published a translation of the” Institutions of Thanlerus," 8vo and 12mo, &c. and left in ms. memoirs of his life, and some poems. It appears from his works, that he possessed wit and genius, but that a capricious, fickle, and inconstant disposition, joined to a depraved fancy, rendered them useless to him, ad in some measure to the world.

, a celebrated Russian poet, the great refiner of his native tongue, was the son of a person who trafficked in fish at Kolmogori: he was born in 1711, and was fortunately taught to read; a rare instance for a person of so low a station in Russia. His natural genius for poetry was first kindled by the perusal of a metrical translation of the Song of Solomon, by Polotski, whose rude compositions, perhaps scarcely superior to our version of the Psalms by Sternhold and Hopkins, inspired him with such an irresistible passion for the muses, that he fled from his father, who was desirous of compelling him to marry, and took refuge in the Kaikonospaski monastery at Moscow; there he had an opportunity of indulging his taste for letters, and of studying the Greek and Latin languages. In this seminary he made so considerable a progress in polite literature, as to be noticed and employed by the Imperial academy of sciences. In 1736 he was sent at the expence of that society, to the university of Marburgh in Hesse Cassel, where he became a scholar of the celebrated Christian Wolf, under whom he studied universal grammar, rhetoric, and philosophy. He continued at Marburgh four years, during which time he applied himself with indefatigable diligence to chemistry, which he afterwards pursued with still greater success, under the famous Henckel, at Freyberg, in Saxony. In 1741 he returned into Russia; was chosen in 1742 adjunct to the Imperial academy; and in the ensuing year, member of that society, and professor of chemistry. In 1760 he was appointed inspector of the seminary, then annexed to the academy; in 1764 he was gratified by the late empress Catherine with the title of counsellor of state; and died April 4 that year, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. Lomonozof excelled in various kinds of composition; but his chief merit, by which he bears the first rank among the Russian writers, is derived from his poetical compositions, the finest of which are his odes. The first was written in 1739, while he studied in Germany, upon the taking of Kotschin, a fortress of Crim Tartary, by marshal Munich. The odes of Lomonozof are greatly admired for originality of invention, sublimity of sentiment, and energy of language; and compensate for the turgid style, which in some instances have been imputed to them, by that spirit and fire which are the principal characteristics in this species of composition. Pindar was his great model; and if we may give credit to Levesque, a gentleman well versed in the Russian tongue, he has succeeded in this daring attempt to imitate the Theban bard, without incurring the censure of Horace: “Pindarum quisquis studet emulari,” &c. In this, as well as several other species of composition, he enriched his native language with various kinds of metre, and seems to have merited the appellation bestowed upon him, of the Father of Russian Poetry. A brief recapitulation of the principal works of Lomonozof, which were printed in 3 vols. 8vo, will serve to shew the versatility of his genius, and his extensive knowledge in various branches of literature.

, an eminent French historian and bibliographer, was born at Paris, April 19, 1665. His mother dying while he was very young, his father married again, and entrusted his education to one of his relations, a priest, who was director of the religious at Estampes. After he had been taught grammar and Latin for two or three years under this ecclesiastic, his father sent him to Malta, with a view to procure him admission among the clerks of the order of St. John of Jerusalem. He had scarcely arrived here when the plague broke out, to which he incautiously exposed himself; but although he escaped the contagion, he fancied that the air of Malta did not agree with him, and obtained leave of his superiors to return to Paris, where he might prosecute his studies in the classics, philosophy, and divinity. As he had not taken the vows in the order of St. John, he had no sooner completed his studies at home, than he entered into the congregation of the oratory. His year of probation being passed, he was sent to the college of Jully, where he taught mathematics, and went afterwards to the seminary of Notre Dame des Vertus, where he employed his leisure time in study, particularly of philosophy, which brought him acquainted with father Malbranche. On his return to Paris he was appointed to the care of the library belonging to the fathers of the oratory, a place for which he was admirably qualified, as he was not only acquainted with Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and the Chaldean, but with the Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and English languages, and had a very extensive knowledge of literary history, of books, editions, and printing. The continual pains, however, which he bestowed on this library, and on his own publications, undermined his constitution, which was originally delicate, and brought on a complaint in the chest, which proved fatal, Aug. 13, 1721, in the fifty. sixth year of his life. His time for many years had been divided between devotion and study; he allowed very little to sleep, and less to the table. Although a man of extensive knowledge, and often consulted, he was equally modest and unaffected. In all his researches he shewed much acuteness and judgment, but the course of his studies had alienated him from works of taste and imagination, for which he had little relish. His principal object was the ascertaining of truth in matters of literary history; and the recovery of dates and other minutiae, on which he was frequently obliged to bestow the time that seemed disproportionate, was to him a matter of great importance, nor was he to be diverted from such accuracy by his friend Malbranche, who did not think philosophy concerned in such matters. “Truth,” said Le Long, “is so valuable, that we ought not to neglect it even in trifles.” His works are, 1. “Methode Hebraique du P. Renou,” 1708, 8vo. 2. “Bibliotheca Sacra, sive syllabus omnium ferme Sacrse Scripture eclitionum ac versionum,” Paris, 1709, 8vo, 2 vols. Of this a very much enlarged edition was published at Paris in 1723, 2 vols. fol. by Desmolets. Another edition was begun by Masch in 1778, and between that and 1790, 5 vols. 4to were published, but the plan is yet unfinished. 3. “Discours historique sur les principales Editions des Bibles Polyglottes,” Paris, 1713, 8vo, a very curious work. 4. “Histoire des demelez du pape Boniface VIII. avec Philippe Le Bel, roi de France,” 1718, 12mo, a posthumous work of M. Baillet, to which Le Long added some documents illustrating that period of French history. 5. “Bibliotheque Historique de France,” 1719, fol. a work of vast labour and research, and perhaps the greatest of all his undertakings. It has since been enlarged by Ferret de Fontette and others, to 5 vols. fol. 1768—78, and is the most comprehensive collection of the kind in any language. The only other publication of M. Le Long was a letter to M. Martin, minister of Utrecht, with whom he had a short controversy respecting the disputed text in 1 John, v. 7.

Besides his astronomical work,- he published in 1731, under the name of Dicaiophilus Cantabrigiensis, “The Rights of Churches and Colleges defended; in answer to a pamphlet called * An Enquiry into the customary estates and tenant-rights of those who hold lands of church and other foundations, by the term of three lives, &c. by Everard Fleetwood, esq.;' with remarks upon some other pieces on the same subject,” 8vo. The author of this pamphlet, to which our author replied, was not Fleetwood, which was an assumed name, but Samuel Burroughs, esq. a master in chancery. Dr. Long published also a “Commencement-Sermon, 1728;” and an answer to Dr. Gally’s pamphlet “On Greek Accents.” We shall subjoin a few traits of him, as delineated in 1769, by Mr. Jones: " He is now in the eighty-eighth year of his age, and, for his years, vegete and active. He was lately (in October) put in nomination for the office of vice-chancellor. He executed that trust before; I think in the year 1737. A very ingenious person, and sometimes very facetious. At the public commencement in the year 1713, Dr. Greene (master of Bene't college, and afterwards bishop of Ely) being then vice-chancellor, Mr. Long was pitched upon for the tripos-performance; it was witty and humourous, and has passed through divers editions. Some that remembered the delivery of it told me, that, in addressing ttye vice chancellor (whom the university-wags usually styled Miss Greene), the tripos-orator, being a native of Norfolk, and assuming the Norfolk dialect, instead of saying, Domine vice-cancellarie, did very archly pronounce the words thus, Domina vice-cancellaria; which occasioned a general smile in that great auditory. His friend the late Mr. Bonfoy of Ripton told me this little incident: `That he and Dr. Long walking together in Cambridge, in a dusky evening, and coming to a short post fixed in the pavement, which Mr. B. in the midst of chat and inattention, took to be a boy standing in his way, he said in a hurry, `Get out of my way, boy.‘ `That boy, sir,’ said the doctor very calmly and slily, `is a post-boy, who turns out of his way for nobody.'