, a learned French historian, was the younger son of Claude Du Puy, an eminent French lawyer,
, a learned French historian, was the
younger son of Claude Du Puy, an eminent French lawyer, who died in 1594, aijd who was celebrated by all the
learned of his time in eloges, published collectively under
the title of “Amplissimi viri Claudii Puteani Tumulus,
”
Paris, Memoires et Instructions pour servir a justifier
Pinnocence de messire Franc.ois-Auguste de Thou,
” which
was reprinted in Traité des Droits et des Libertes l'Eglise Gallicane,
avec les Preuves,
” Proofs,
”
in 2 vok. folio. 2. “Traités concernant l‘histoire de
France, savoir la condemnation des Templiers, l’histoire du
schisme d'Avignon, et quelques proces criminels,
” Paris,
Traité de la Majorite de nos rois et du
regences du royaume, avec les preuves,
” Paris, Histoire des plus illustres Favoris anciens et modernes,
” Leaden, Vitae Selectorum aliquot virorum.
”
that he was ranked among those whose intellects were disturbed by intense study; and this excellent historian seems to think that many such reports were calumnies invented
Some of his opinions and some of his oddities tend to
remind the reader of certain affectations of wisdom and
philosophy in our own days. “All men,
” he said, “regulate their conduct by received opinions. Every thing is
done by habit; every thing is examined with reference to
the laws and customs of a particular country; but whether
these laws be good or bad, it is impossible to determine.
”
In this may be found the germ of those principles advanced
by modern sceptics, in order to subvert all morality. At
first Pyrrho lived in indigence and obscurity, courting retirement, and seldom appearing in public. He frequently
travelled but never told to what country he intended to
go. Every species of suffering he endured with apparent
insensibility. He never turned aside to avoid a rock or
precipice, and would rather be hurt than get out of the
way of a chariot, and his friends were therefore obliged to
accompany him wherever he went. If this be true, says
Brucker, it was not without reason that he was ranked
among those whose intellects were disturbed by intense
study; and this excellent historian seems to think that
many such reports were calumnies invented by the dogmatists whom he opposed, and he is inclined to be of this
opinign on account of the respect with which he is mentioned by ancient writers. There appears, however, upon
the whole, no great reason to think that his life was much
more consistent than his opinions, and the respect paid to
either in his age seems entitled to little regard as evidence
of excellence.
Quien de la Neufville (James Le), a good historian, was born May 1, 1647, at Paris, and was the son of Peter Le
Quien de la Neufville (James Le), a good historian, was
born May 1, 1647, at Paris, and was the son of Peter Le
Quien, a captain of horse, descended from an ancient
Boulenois family. He made one campaign as a cadet in
the regiment of French guards, and then quitted the service,
meaning to attend the bar; but a considerable disappointment, which his father met with, deranged his plans, and
obliged him to seek a resource in literary pursuits. By
M. Pelisson’s advice, he applied chiefly to history, and
published in 1700, a “General History of Portugal,
” 2
vols. 4to, a valuable and well-written work, which obtained
him a place in the academy pf inscriptions, 1706. This
history is carried no farther than the death of Emmanuel I.
152 1.“M. de la Clede, secretary to the marechal de
Coigni, published a
” New History of Portugal,“1735,
2 vols. 4to, and 8 vols. 12mo, that comes down to the present time; in the preface to which he accuses M. Le Quien
of having omitted several important facts, and passed
slightly over many others. M. le Quien afterwards published a treatise on the origin of posts, entitled
” L' Usage
des Postes chez les Anciens et les Modernes," Paris,
1734, 12mo. This treatise procured him the direction of
part of the posts in Flanders, and in France. He settled
at Quesnoy, and remained there till 1713, when the abbe
de Mornay, being appointed ambassador to Portugal, requested that he might accompany him, which was granted,
and he received the most honourable marks of distinction
on his arrival; the king of Portugal settled a pension of
1500 livres upon him, to be paid wherever he resided,
created him a knight of the order of Christ, which is the
chief of the three Portuguese orders, and worn by himself.
His majesty also consulted him respecting the academy of
history which he wished to establish, and did establish
shortly after at Lisbon. Le Quien, flattered by the success of his Portuguese history, was anxious to finish it; but
his too close application brought on a disorder, of which
he died at Lisbon, May 20, 1728, aged 81, leaving two
sons, the elder of whom was knight of St. Louis, and
major of the dauphin foreign regiment, and the younger
postmaster general at Bourdeaux.
ntilian’s works yet is generally ascribed to Tacitus, and is commonly printed with the works of that historian and the late Mr. Melmoth, in his” Fitzosborne’s Letters,“seems
The anonymous dialogue (t De Oratoribus, sive de causis, corrupts eloquentiaj,“has sometimes been printed with Quintilian’s works yet is generally ascribed to Tacitus, and is commonly printed with the works of that historian and the late Mr. Melmoth, in his
” Fitzosborne’s Letters,“seems inclined to give it to the younger Pliny
” because,“says he,
” it exactly coincides with his age, is addressed to one of his particular friends and correspondents, and is
marked with some similar expressions and sentiments. But
as arguments of this kind are always more imposing than
solid,“he wisely leaves it as
” a piece, concerning the.
author of which nothing satisfactory can be collected,“only
” that it is evidently a composition of that period in which
he flourished." It was. ascribed to Quintilianj because he
actually wrote a book upon the same subject, and with the
same title, as he himself declares yet the critics are convinced by sufficient arguments, that the dialogue, or rather
fragment of a dialogue, now extant, is not that of which
Quintilian speaks.
, a Venetian cardinal, celebrated as an historian, a philologer, and an antiquary, was born in 1684, or, according
, a Venetian cardinal, celebrated as an historian, a philologer, and an antiquary, was
born in 1684, or, according to some authors, in 1680. He
entered very early into an abbey of Benedictines at
Florence, and there studied with so much ardour as to lay in a
vast store of literature of every kind, under Salvini, Bellini,
and other eminent instructors. The famous Magliabecchi
introduced to him all foreigners illustrious for their talents,
and it was thus that he became acquainted with sir Isaac
Newton and Montfaucon. Not contented with this confined intercourse with the learned, he began to travel in
1710, and went through Germany to Holland, where he
conversed with Basnage, Le Clerc, Kuster, Gronovius,
and Perizonius. He then crossed into England, where he
was honourably received by Bentley, Newton, the two
Burnets, Cave, Potter, and others. Passing afterwards
into France, he formed an intimate friendship with the
amiable and illustrious Fenelon and became known to all
the principal literati of that country. - The exact account
of the travels of Quirini would contain, in fact, the literary history of Europe at that period. Being raised to the,
dignity of cardinal, he waited on Benedict XIII. to thank
him for that distinction. “It is not for you,
” said that
pope, “to thank me for raising you to this elevation, it is
rather my part to thank you, for having by your merit reduced me to the necessity of making you a cardinal.
” Quirini spread in every part the fame of his learning, and of
his liberality. He was admitted into almost all the learned
societies of Europe, and in various parts built churches,
and contributed largely to other public works. To the library of the Vatican he presented his own collection of.
books, which was so extensive as to require the addition of
a large room to contain it. What is most extraordinary is,
that though a Dominican and a cardinal, he was of a most
tolerant disposition, and was every where beloved by the
Protestants. He died in the 'beginning of January 1755.
, a French ecclesiastical historian, was born November 25, 1708, at Chauny. He completed his studies
, a French ecclesiastical historian, was born November 25, 1708, at Chauny. He
completed his studies at the Mazarine college at Paris,
where he acquired great skill in Latin, Greek, Hebrew,
and ecclesiastical history, and was sent for by M. de la
Croix-Castries, archbishop of Albi, in 1729, to re-establish the college at Rabastens. Here he remained two
years, and under his care the college became flourishing
but, being afterwards banished by the intrigues of the Jesuits, for his attachment to the anti-constitutionists, retired
to M. Colbert at Montpellier, who employed him in
superintending the college of Lunel. This situation he privately quitted in a short time, to avoid some rigorous orders and, going to Paris, undertook the education of
some young men at the college of Harcourt but this place
too he was obliged to quit in 1734, by cardinal Fleury’s
order; from which time he lived sequestered from the
world, wholly occupied in his retreat in study and devotion. M. de Caylus, bishop of Auxerre, being determined
to attach M.Racine to himself, gave him a canonryat
Auxerre, and admitted him to sacred orders, all which,
however, occasioned no change in. his way of life. He
died at Paris, worn out by application, May 15, 1755,
aged 47, and was buried at St. Severin. His principal
works are, four tracts relative to the dispute which had
arisen concerning “Fear and Confidence,
” written with
so much moderation, that they pleased all parties; and an
“Abridgment of Ecclesiastical History,
” 13 vols. 12mo
and 4to. This work has been extremely admired, particularly by the opponents of the bull Unigenitus, and of
the Jesuits, who are treated in it with great severity, as
they had been the cause of all his troubles. He intended
to have continued his Abridgment down to the year 1750
at least, had he lived longer; and a history of the first 33
years of the eighteenth century has been published by one
of his friends, 2 vols. 12mo; and some Reflections, by M.
Racine, on Ecclesiastical History, have also appeared, 2
vols. 12mo, which are a summary of his Abridgment.
he printed his *' Observations on Sanderson’s History of king James," which were replied to by that historian with considerable asperity. In 1659, by the favour of General
His son, Carew, incidentally noticed above, was born
in the Tower of London, in 1604, and was edupated at
Wadham college, Oxford, After spending five years in
the university he went to court; but meeting with no encouragement there, his friend, the earl of Pembroke, advised him to travel, as he did till the death of James, which
happened about a year after. On his return he petitioned
Parliament to restore him in blood; but, while this was
under consideration, the king sent for him, and told him
that he had promised to secure the manor of Sherborn to
the lord Digby, it having been given by king James to
that nobleman on the disgrace of Carr earl of Somerset.
Mr. Ralegh, therefore, was under the necessity of complying with the royal pleasure, and to give up his inheritance.
On this submission an act was passed for his restoration,
a pension of 400l. a year was granted to him after the
death of his mother, who had that sum paid during life in
lieu of her jointure. About a year after this he married
the widow *of sir Anthony Ashley, by whom he had two
sons and three daughters, and soon after he was made one
of the gentlemen of the king’s privy chamber. In 1645
he wrote a vindication of his father against some misrepresentations which Mr. James Howel had made relative to
the mine-affair of Guiana. After the death of the king he
again applied to Parliament for a restoration of his estate;
but was not successful, although he published, in order to
enforce the necessity of his claim, “A brief relation of
sir Walter Ralegh’s Troubles.
” In
torians might afterwards avail themselves. Mr. Fox, in his late” Historical Work,“pronounces him” an historian of great acuteness, as well as diligence, but who falls sometimes
At length he became an attendant on the “levees of
great men,
” and luckily applied himself to political writing, for which he was well qualified. When the duchess
of Marlborough, about 1742, published memoirs of her
life, Ralph was employed to write an answer, which he
called “The other side of the question.
” This, says Davies, was written with so much art, and made so interesting, by the author’s management, that it sold very well.
His pamphlets and political papers at length appeared of
so much importance^ that towards the latter end of the
Walpole administration, it was thought proper to buy him
off with an income. Whether his paper called “The Remembrancer,
” recommended him to Doddington, lord
Melcombe, or was written in consequence of his acquaintance with that statesman, does not appear but from Doddington’s celebrated (< Diary,“we learn that he was much in the confidence of the party assembled round the prince of Wales, and was not only constantly employed to carry messages and propositions to the leaders of the party, but was frequently, consulted as to the subject of such messages. Nor indeed do his talents as a politician seem much inferior to those who employed him. He had like-r wise before this acquired considerable fame by his
” Use and Abuse of Parliaments,“174-4, 2 vols. 8vo, and still
more by his
” History of England, during the reign of William III.; with an introductory review of the reigns of
Charles II. and James II.“1744 6, 2 vols. folio, written
upon principles avowed by his party. This was always
considered as an useful work. Ralph had read a great
deal, and was very conversant in the history and politics
of this country. He applied himself, with great assiduity,
to the study of all writings upon party matters: and had
collected a prodigious number of pamphlets relating to the
contests of whig and tory, the essence of which he incorporated in his work so as to make it a fund of curious information and opinions, of which more regular historians
might afterwards avail themselves. Mr. Fox, in his late
” Historical Work,“pronounces him
” an historian of great
acuteness, as well as diligence, but who falls sometimes
into the common error of judging too much from the
event."
eous certainly in other particulars “Mr. Ralph, who died a few days since, was the son of that great historian. He enjoyed a pension of 150l. a year, which the late and present
On the death of George II. Ralph, according to Mr.
Davies’s account, attained the summit of his wishes by
the interest of the earl of Bute, a pension of 600l. per annum was bestowed upon him, but he did not live to receive above one half year’s income. A fit of the gout
proved fatal to him at his house at Chiswick, Jan. 24, 1762.
He died almost in the arms of lord Elibank and sir Gilbert
Elliot, from whom Mr. Davies had this information. His
character may be gathered from the preceding particulars.
He left a daughter, to whom a pension of 150l. was granted
in consequence of some papers found in her father’s possession, which belonged to the prince of Wales, and contained a history of his life, said to be written by himself
under the title of “The History of Prince Titi.
” The late
Dr. Rose of Chiswick, who was Ralph’s executor, gave up
those papers to the earl of Bute, and the pension was
granted to Miss Ralph, who died, however, about a month
after her father. It has been thought, with much probability, that “The History of Prince Titi
” was the composition of Ralph himself. Besides the above daughter,
he left a son, if we may rely on the following paragraph
in all the papers of May 22, 1770, erroneous certainly in
other particulars “Mr. Ralph, who died a few days since,
was the son of that great historian. He enjoyed a pension
of 150l. a year, which the late and present king settled on
his father for writing the History of Scotland.
”
, an eminent historian, was born at Castresin Languedoc, March 25, 1661. His family
, an eminent historian, was
born at Castresin Languedoc, March 25, 1661. His family was
originally from Savoy, and is supposed to have removed into
France upon embracing the Protestant religion. Philibert
de Rapin, his great-grandfather, who was of that persuasion, exposed himself so much to the indignation of the
Roman catholics, and particularly to that of the parliament
of Toulouse, that his head was struck off in 1563 by a
sentence of theirs, at the very time that he came, by the
king’s order, to have the treaty of peace registered there.
Daniel the historian passes over this fact in silence; and
his reason is supposed to have been, that he might exaggerate the disturbances raised by the Huguenots afterwards in the country about Toulouse. What then happened
appears to have been the popular revenge for Philibert’s
death, as the soldiers wrote on the ruins of the houses they
had burned, “Vengeance for Rapin’s death.
” James de
Rapin, lord of Thoyras, was our author’s father. He applied himself to the study of the law, and was an advocate
in the chamber of the edict of Nantes above fifty years.
These chambers were courts of judicature erected in several towns of France, in behalf of the Huguenots, or Protestants; the judges of which were half of the Reformed,
and half of the Roman catholic religion. Jane de Pelisson,
his wife, was daughter to a counsellor of the chamber of
Castres, and sister to George and Paul Pelisson; which
lady, after having been Confined for some time in a convent, was at last sent, by the king’s order, to Geneva,
where she died in 1705.
Chronicon Hierosolymitanum” “Historia Orientals;” “Historia Julia,” 3 vols. folio; “Methodus Legendi Historian).”
, a learned German, was a
native of Steinheim, in the sixteenth century. He was a
disciple of Melancthon, and taught the belles lettres in the
universities of Frankfort and Helmstadt till his death, in
1595. His chief publications, on history and genealogy,
in. which he was profoundly versed, are, “Syntagma de
Familiis Monarchiarum trium priorum,
” Families
Regum Judseorum;
” “Chronicon Hierosolymitanum
”
“Historia Orientals;
” “Historia Julia,
” 3 vols. folio;
“Methodus Legendi Historian).
”
orks were, 1. “Historia vitae & doctrincE Martini Lutheri carmine heroico descripta.” 2. “Descriptio Historian Ecclesiae, sive popult Dei, Politiae ejusdem, & rerum praecipuarum
, a learned German, was born
in 1546, at Sassowerf, belonging to the counts of Stolberg
in Upper Saxony, who, induced by an early display of talents, bore the expence of his education at the college of
Ilfield. He continued there six years; and made so great
a progress in literature, that he was thought fit to teach in
the most eminent schools and the most flourishing universities. He was especially skilled in the Greek tongue, and
composed some Greek verses, which were much admired,
but Scaliger did not think him equally happy in Latin
poetry. He was very successful in a Latin translation of
“Diodorus Siculus,
” which Henry Stephens prevailed on
him to undertake; and it was published in 1604, with Stephens^ text. He translated also into Latin the Greek poem
of Quintus Calaber, concerning the taking of Troy; and
added some corrections to it. At last, he was appointed
professor of history in the university of Wittemberg, and
died there in 1606. His other works were, 1. “Historia
vitae & doctrincE Martini Lutheri carmine heroico descripta.
” 2. “Descriptio Historian Ecclesiae, sive popult Dei,
Politiae ejusdem, & rerum praecipuarum quae in illopopulo
acciderum, Graeco carmine, cum versione Latina e regione
textus Graeci,
” Francof. Poesis Christiana, id est, Palestine seu Historic sacra? Grseco-Latinae
libri 9,
” Marpnrgi, 15S9; Francof. 1590, 1630, 4to. 4.
“Tabulae Etymologice Grseca?,
” Francof. Memnonis Historia de Republica Heracliensium, & rebus
Ponticis Eclogoe seu excerptae & abbreviates narrationes
in Sermonem Latinum translatae,
” Helmstadii, Epithalamia sacra,
” Jenae, Ex Memnone, de Tyrannis Heracleae Ponticas Ctesia & Agatharchide excerptae Historiac Greece & Latine partim ex Laur.
Rhodomani interpretatione,
” Geneva, Theologiae Christianæ tyrocinia, carmine heroico Græco-Latino in 5 libros digesta,
” Lips.
, an English historian, so named from his birth-place, flourished in the fourteenth
, an English historian,
so named from his birth-place, flourished in the fourteenth
century. No (races of his family or connections can be discovered, but they appear to have been such as to afford him a liberal education. In 13 50 “he entered into the Benedictine monastery of St. Peter, Westminster, and his name occurs in various documents of that establishment in 1387, 1397, and 1399. He devoted his leisure hours to the study of British and Anglo-Saxon history and antiquities, in which he made such proficiency, that he is said to have been honoured with the name of the Historiographer. Pits informs us, without specifying his authority, that
Richard visited different libraries and ecclesiastical establishments in England, in order to collect materials. It is
at least certain that he obtained a licence to visit Rome,
from his abbot, William of Colchester, in 1391, and there
can be little doubt that a man of his curiosity would improve his knowledge on such an occasion. He is supposed to Have performed this journey in the interval between 1391 and 1397, for he appears to have been confined in the abbey infirmary in 1401, and died in that or
the following year. His works are,
” Historia ab Hengista ad ann. 1348,“in two parts. The first contains the
period from the coming of the Saxons to the death of Harold, and is preserved in the public library of Cambridge.
Whitaker, the historian of Manchester, speaks of this as
evincing very little knowledge or judgment; the second
part is probably a ms. in the library of the Royal Society,
p. 137, with the title of
” Britonum Anglorum et Saxonurn
Historia.“In the library of Bene't college, Cambridge,
is
” Epitome Chronic. Ric. Cor. West. Lib. I.“Other
works of our author are supposed to be preserved in the
Lambeth library, and at Oxford. His theological writings
were,
” Tractatus super Symbolum Majus et Minus,“and
” Liber de Officiis Ecclesiasticis,“in the Peterborough
library. But the treatise to which he owes his celebrity,
is that on the ancient state of Great Britain,
” De situ
Britanniae,“first discovered by Charles Julius Bertram,
professor of the English language in the royal marine academy at Copenhagen, who transmitted to Dr. Stukeley
a transcript of the whole in letters, together with a copy of
the map. From this transcript Stukeley published an analysis of the work, with the itinerary, first in a thin quarto,
1757, and afterwards in the second volume of his
” Itinerarium Curiosum.“In the same year the original itself
was published by professor Bertram at Copenhagen, in a
small octavo volume, with the remains of Gildas and Nennius, under the title
” Britannicarum gentium Historiae
Antiquæ scriptores tres, Ricardns Corinensis, Gildas Badonicus, Nennius Banchorensis, &c.“This work has long
been scarce, and in very few libraries; but in 1809, a new
edition, with an English translation, &c. was published at
London. To this the editor, Mr. Hatchard, has prefixed
an account of Richard’s life, from which we have extracted
the above particulars, and an able defence of his merit and
fidelity as a historian, against the objections of certain
writers. Among these we observe that Gibbon cannot be
reckoned, for he says that Richard of Cirencester
” shews
a genuine knowledge of antiquity, very extraordinary for
a monk of the fourteenth century.“This useful and accurate republication is entitled
” The Description of Britain, translated from Richard of Cirencester; with the original treatise de situ Britanniæ; and a commentary on the
Itinerary; illustrated with maps," 8vo.
elegant and solid acquirements for which he was afterwards so eminently distinguished as a poet, an historian, and a divine. During a vacancy in 1728, he joined with four
, a learned divine, descended
collaterally from the preceding bishop Ridley, was born
at sea, in 1702, on-board the Gloucester East Indiaman,
to which circumstance he was indebted for his Christian
name. He received his education at Winchester-school,
and thence was elected to a fellowship at New college,
Oxford, where he proceeded B. C. L. April 29, 1729. In
those two seminaries he cultivated an early acquaintance
with the Muses, and laid the foundation of those elegant
and solid acquirements for which he was afterwards so eminently distinguished as a poet, an historian, and a divine.
During a vacancy in 1728, he joined with four friends, viz.
Mr. Thomas Fletcher (afterwards bishop of Kildare), Mr.
(afterwards Dr.) Eyre, Mr. Morrison, and Mr. Jennens, in
writing a tragedy, called “The Fruitless Redress,
” each
Undertaking an act, on a plan previously concerted. When
they delivered in their several proportions, at their meeting
in the winter, few readers, it is said, would have known
that the whole was not the production of a single hand.
This tragedy, which was offered to Mr. Wilks, but never
acted, is still in ms. with another called “Jugurtha.
” - Dr.
Ridley in his youth was much addicted to theatrical performances. Midhurst, in Sussex, was the place where
they were exhibited; and the company of gentlemen actors
to which he belonged, consisted chiefly of his coadjutors in
the tragedy already mentioned. He is said to have performed the characters of Marc Antony, Jaffier, Horatio,
and Moneses, with distinguished applause. Young Gibber,
being likewise a Wykehamist, called on Dr. Ridley soon
after he had been appointed chaplain to the East India
Company at Poplar, and would have persuaded him to quit
the church for the stage, observing that “it usually paid
the larger salaries of the two,
” an advice which he had too
much sense to follow. For great part of his life, he had no
other preferment than the small college living of Weston,
in Norfolk, and the donative of Poplar, in Middlesex, where
he resided. To these his college added, some years after,
the donative of Romfbrd, in Essex. “Between these two
places the curricle of his life had,
” as he expressed it,
“rolled for some time almost perpetually upon post-chaise
wheels, and left him not time for even the proper studies
of ceconomy, or the necessary ones of his profession.
” Yet
in this obscure situation he remained in possession of, and
content with, domestic happiness; and was honoured with the
intimate friendship of some who were not less distinguished
for learning than for worth: among these, it maybe sufficient
to mention Dr. Lowth, Mr. Christopher Pitt, Mr. Spence,
and Dr. Berriman. To the last of these he was curate and
executor, and preached his funeral sermon. In 1740 and
1741, he preached “Eight Sermons at Lady Moyer’s lecture,
” which were published in De Syriacarum novi fcederis versionum indole
atque usu, dissertatio,
” occasioned by a Syriac version,
which, with two others, were sent to him nearly thirty
years before, by one Mr. Samuel Palmer from Amida, in
Mesopotamia. His age and growing infirmities, the great
expence of printing, and the want of a patron, prevented
him from availing himself of these Mss.; yet at intervals he
employed himself on a transcript, which being put into the
hands of professor White, was published a few years ago,
with a literal Latin translation, in 2 vols. 4to, at the expence of the delegates of the Clarendon press. In 1763
he published the “Life of bishop Ridley,
” in quarto, by
subscription, and cleared by it as much as brought him
800l. in the public funds. In this, which is the most useful of all his works, he proved himself worthy of the name
he bore, a thorough master of the popish controversy, and
an able advocate for the reformation. In 1765 he published his “Review of Philips’ s Life of Cardinal Pole
” (see Philips); and in 17 6S, in reward for his labours in this controversy, and in another which “The Confessional
” produced, he was presented by archbishop Seeker to a golden
prebend in the cathedral church of Salisbury (an option),
but it is probably a mistake that Seeker honoured him with
the degree of D. D. that honour having been conferred upon him by the university of Oxford in 1767, by diploma, the
highest mark of distinction they can confer. At length, worn
out with infirmities, he departed this life in Nov. 1774, leaving
a widow and four daughters. An elegant epitaph, written by
Dr. Lowth, bishop of London, is inscribed upon his monument.
Two poems by Dr. Ridley, one styled “Jovi Eleutherio,
or an Offering to Liberty,
” the other called “Psyche,
” are
in the third volume of Dodsley’s Collection. The sequel of
the latter poem, entitled, “Melampus,
” with “Psyche,
” its
natural introduction, was printed in Collection.
” The Mss. Codex Heraclensis,
Codex Barsalibaei, &c. (of which a particular account may be seen in his Dissertation “De Syriacarum Novi Fcederis versionum indole atque usu, 1761,
”) were bequeathed by Dr.
Ridley to the library of New college, Oxford. Of these ancient Mss. a fac-simile specimen was published in his Dissertation above mentioned. A copy of “The Confessional,
”
with ms notes by Dr. Ridley," was in the library of the- late
Dr. Winchester.
, a learned Italian ecclesiastical historian of the seventeenth century, was a native of Treviso, and was
, a learned Italian ecclesiastical historian of the seventeenth century, was a native of Treviso, and was brought up in the congregation of the oratory at Rome, of which Baronius had been a member. After the death of that cardinal, Rinaldi wrote a continuation of his 46 Ecclesiastical Annals," from 1198, where Baronius left off, to 1564, and with no inferiority to the preceding volumes. It consists often large volumes in folio, published at Rome at different periods, from 1646 to 1677. Rinaldi also was the author of a sufficiently copious abridgment, in Italian, of the whole annals, compiled both by Baronius and himself.
sland; and accordingly it entitles the author, not merely to the praise which would now be due to an historian of equal eminence, but to a high rank among those original and
In the mean time, his leisure hours had been so well
employed that, in 1758, he went to London to concert
measures for the publication of his first celebrated work,
“The History of Scotland during the reigns of queen Mary
and king James VI. till his accession to the crown of England; with a review of the Scottish history previous to that
period; and an Appendix, containing original papers,
” 2
vols. 4to. The plan of this work is said to have been formed soon after his settlement at Gladsinuir. It was accordingly published on the 1st of February, 1759, and so eager
and extensive was the sale, that before the end of that
month, he was desired by his bookseller to prepare for a,
second edition. “It was regarded,
” says his biographer,
“as an attempt towards a species of composition that had
been cultivated with very little success in this island; and
accordingly it entitles the author, not merely to the praise
which would now be due to an historian of equal eminence,
but to a high rank among those original and leading minds
that form and guide the taste of a nation.
” Contemporary
puhlications abounded in its praises, but it would be superfluous to coiiect options in favour of a work familiarized
to the public by so ^any editions. Among the most judicious of the literati of that period who were the first to perceive and predict the reputation our author was about to
establish, were, hon. Horace Walpole, bishop Warburton, lord Royston, the late sir Gilbert Elliot, Dr. Birch,
Dr. Douglas, late bishop of Salisbury, Dr. John Biair, late
prebendary of Westminster, and Mr. Hume. It may suffice to add, that fourteen editions of this work were published in the author’s life-time.
.” which, indeed, he had begun before the other plan was so strongly recommended. His character as a historian now stood so high that this new production was expected with
After more deliberation, however, Dr. Robertson determined to relinquish this scheme, and to undertake the
“History of Charles V.
” which, indeed, he had begun
before the other plan was so strongly recommended. His
character as a historian now stood so high that this new
production was expected with the utmost impatience, nor
was that expectation disappointed. The preliminary dissertation, under the unassuming title of an “Introduction
to the History of Charles V.
” is particularly valuable as an
introduction to the history of modern Europe, and suggests
in every page matter of speculation to the politician and
the philosopher. The whole appeared under the title of
“The History of the reign of the Emperor Charles V. with
a View of the Progress of Society in Europe, from the
subversion of the Roman Empire to the beginning of the
sixteenth century,
”
extent and variety, have not been equalled by any writer in our times. All the essential merits of a historian were his; fidelity, the skill of narrative, the combination
With this publication his historical labours closed labours which, for extent and variety, have not been equalled
by any writer in our times. All the essential merits of
a historian were his; fidelity, the skill of narrative, the
combination of philosophy with detail, so seldom attempted, and generally so unsuccessfully executed, and the
power of giving an uncommon interest to his personages
and events in the mind of the reader. His style has been
iSo justly characterized by his biographer, that we may,
without hesitation, recommend it as a decision from which
it will not be easy to appeal. “The general strain of his
composition,
” says professor Stewart, “is flowing, equal,
and majestic; harmonious beyond that of most English
writers, yet seldom deviating, in quest of harmony, into
inversion, redundancy, or affectation. If, in some passages, it may be thought that the effect might have been
heightened by somewhat more of variety in the structure
and cadence of his periods, it must be recollected, that
this criticism involves an encomium on the beauty of his
style; for it is only when the ear is habitually gratified,
that the rhythm of composition becomes an object of the
reader’s attention. The same judicious critic has re*
marked, that,
” perhaps, on the whole, it will be found
that of all his performances Charles V. is that which unites
the various requisites of good writing in the greatest degree. The style is more natural and flowing than that of the
History of Scotland: while, at the same time, idiomatical
phrases are introduced with so sparing and timid a hand,
that it is easy to perceive the author’s attention to correctness was not sensibly diminished. In the History of America, although it contains many passages equal, if not superior, to anything else in his writings, the composition
does not seem to me to be so uniformly polished as that of
his former works; nor does it always possess, in the same
degree, the recommendations of conciseness and simplicity."
ncient history. He wrote for the use of Winchester school, “Preces; Grammaticalis quaedam & Antiquae Historian Synopsis,” printed together at Oxford in 1616, 8vo “Scholar
, a learned divine and schoolmaster,
was born in St. Mary’s parish, in the county of Anglesea,
and educated at Winchester school, where he was admitted
probationary fellow of New college, Oxford, in 1603, and
in 1605 perpetual fellow. He completed his master’s degree in 1611, and about three years after, leaving college,
became chief master of Winchester school. He was afterwards archdeacon of Winchester, canon of Wei is, D. D.
and archdeacon of Gloucester. Having sided with the
party that were reducing the church to the presbyterian
form, and taken the covenant, he lost the advantages of his
canonry and archdeaconry, but obtained the rectory of Hinton, near Winchester, in room of a loyalist. He died March
30, 1655, and was buried in St. GilesVin-the-Fields, London. Wood gives him the character of an excellent linguist,
an able divine, and very conversant in ancient history. He
wrote for the use of Winchester school, “Preces; Grammaticalis quaedam & Antiquae Historian Synopsis,
” printed together at Oxford in Scholar Wintoniensis Phrases Latinse,
” Lond. Annalium mundi universalium, &c.
Tomus Unicus, lib. 14. absolutus,
” &c. Lond.
, or rather Richard Of Hexham, an ancient historian, was brought up in the convent of Hexham, in Northumberland,
, or rather Richard Of Hexham, an ancient historian, was brought up in the convent of Hexham, in Northumberland, where he embraced the monastic life, and was elected prior some time at least befqre 1138, for he saw the Scottish army march into Yorkshire, under their king David I. previous to the battle of the Standard, which was fought in September that year. He wrote the history of that campaign, wherein he points out, in the most declamatory style, the ravages committed by the Scottish army. But such was his ignorance, that he calls the Highlanders, and Galovidians, who composed part of king David’s army, P-icti, or Picts, as if they had painted their bodies in the same manner as in ancient times; whereas those people only wore party-coloured garments, which the Highlanders call Tartans.
tly well learned, a good Latin poet, and one that was especially beloved by the famous antiquary and historian William Camden, for whose sake he had laid the foundation of
Wood adds, that he was “a very good man, excellently
well learned, a good Latin poet, and one that was especially beloved by the famous antiquary and historian William Camden, for whose sake he had laid the foundation of
‘ A Discourse concerning the acts of the Britains, the form
of their Commonwealth, and the order and laws by which
they lived’.
” This was intended for Camden’s “Britannia,
” but he did not live to finish it. He wrote, 1. “Odae,
Epigrammata, Kpitaphia,
” &c. in laudem et mortem Johannis Juelli Episc. Sarisbur, at the end of Humphrey’s
Life of Jewell. 2. “A memorial or oration of Dr. Dan.
Rogers on the death of Frederic II. and the accession of
Christian IV.
” (probably addressed to the senate of Denmark, Copenhagen, July 19, 1588). 3. “Dr. Rogers
”
Search,“being a repertory of various transactions relating
to Commerce the two preceding are among the Cotton
Mss. 4.
” Dan, Rogersii Albimontii Angli, ad Stephani
Malescoti Catechesin ^oo-pawicnf, carmine Latino,“Basil,
1567, 8vo. 5.
” Elegia ad Gulielmum Cecilium baronem
Burleigh,“among the
” lllust. et clar. virorum Epist. select.“Leyden, 1617, 8vo. 6.
” Epistolae tres ad Buchananum,“among the
” Epist. Buchanani,“Lond. 1711,
8vo. 7.
” Epistola Adriano Vander Mylen,“among the
above Leydeu epistles. Among the Harleian Mss. is his
” Letter to Abraham Ortelius at Antwerp,“complimenting him on the glory he will reap from posterity by his
geographical works, and concluding with the mention of
his own commentary upon the laws and manners of the ancient Britons. Wood also mentions an epigram of his
printed with Ralph Aggas’s description of Oxford in 1578.
Wood notices another Daniel Rogers, and his works,
” David’s Cost“” A practical Catechism“” Lectures
upon the history of Naaman," &c. This, however, was
a puritan divine born in 1573, and educated at Cambridge.
He was son to Richard Rogers, and brother to Ezekiel
Rogers, both puritan divines, and men of note in their day,
but we do not find in their memoirs much to recommend a
distinct article on either. It remains to be noticed, that
Strype, in his Life of Whitgift, conjectures the above
Daniel Rogers, the ambassador, to be son to John Rogers
the proto-martyr; but this is inconsistent with the above
account, and seems founded on no authority, as the martyr
Rogers never left the kingdom on the accession of queen
Mary, but remained to be the first sacrifice to her infernal
bigotry.
, an early Italian historian, was born at Padua in 1200. He studied at Bologna, and had kept
, an early Italian historian, was born at Padua in 1200. He studied at Bologna, and had kept a chronicle of memorable events as they occurred, which was continued by his son, and in 1262 was read publicly before the university of Padua, submitted to an attentive examination, and solemnly approved, Rolandino died in 1276. His history, which extends to 1260, is accounted faithful, and has been highly praised by Vossius, who thinks that he surpassed all the writers of his age in perspicuity, order, and judgment. An edition of his work, with other chronicles, was given at Venice in 1636, by Felix Osius, and it has been reprinted by Muratori, in the seventh volume of his Italian historians.
, the historian of Marseilles, was born there in 1607, and bred to the law.
, the historian of Marseilles, was
born there in 1607, and bred to the law. Being appointed
counsellor to the seneschalcy of his native place, he practised in that court for some years, and with a scrupulous
integrity rather uncommon; for we are told that on one
occasion when, by his own neglect, a client had lost his
cause, he sent him a sum of money equivalent to that loss.
He was a man of learning, and a good antiquary, and employed much of his time in collecting materials for his
“History of Marseilles,
” which he published in Dissertations Historiques et Critiques sur POrigine des Comtes des Provence,
de Venaissin, de Forcalquier, et des Vicomtes de Marseille
” and in Une Dissertation.
Historique, Chronologique, et Critique sur les Evéques de
Marseille.
” Both these were intended as preludes to more
elaborate works on the subject, which he was prevented
from completing by his death, March 26, 1724, in the
sixty-sixth year of his age.
afterwards into two publications, “Historiae Navalis antiquae libri quatuor,” ibid. 1633, 8vo, and “ Historian Navalis mediae libri tres,” ibid. 1640, 8vo.
, son of John Ryves of Damery
Court, or, as Fuller says, of Little Langton, in Dorsetshire, was born in the latter end of the XVIth century, '
and was educated at Winchester-school, whence he was
admitted of New college, Oxford, in 1596, became fellow
in 1598, and applying himself to the study of the civil law,
commenced doctor in that faculty in 1610. He was a celebrated, civilian in doctors’ commons and the court of admiralty, and when he had established his fame in England,
was, in 1618, preferred to be one of the masters in chancery, and judge of the faculties and prerogative court in
Ireland, where he was held in equal esteem for his
knowledge in the laws. Upon king Charles I. coming to the
crown, he was made his advocate, and knighted: and,
when the rebellion broke out, he was very firm to the royal
cause, and although advanced in life, engaged in several
battles, and received several wounds in his majesty’s service. He was one of the assistants to the king at the treaty
of peace in the Isle of Wight. Sir Thomas Ryves was not
only a very eminent civilian, and a good common lawyer,
but likewise very accomplished in polite learning; and,
particularly, wrote in Latin with unusual delicacy and correctness. He died in 1651, and was buried in St. Clement
Danes, near Temple Bar, London. His works are, 1.
“The Vicar’s Plea; or, a competency of Means due to
Vicars out of the several parishes, notwithstanding their
impropriations.
” This book is written with a great deal of
learning and strength of argument. 2. “iiegiminis Anglicani in Hibernia Defensio, adversus Analecien, lib. 3,
”
London, 1624, 4to. This was the answer to a book called
“Analecta Sacra,
” supposed to be written by David Roth,
titular bishop of Ossory, a good antiquary, according to
Usher, but a bigoted Roman catholic, if the author of this
work. Sir Thomas Ryves’s object is, to vindicate the conduct of the Irish government as far as respects the Roman
catholics, and his book includes much curious information
respecting the state of opinions at that time. 3. “Jmperatoris Justiniani defensio adversus Alemannum,
” Lond.
Historia
Navalis,
” Lond. Historiae Navalis antiquae libri quatuor,
”
ibid. Historian Navalis mediae libri tres,
”
ibid.
, whose proper name was Marcus Antonius Coccius, or vernacularly Marcantonio Coccio, an Italian historian and critic, was born in 1436, in the campagna of Rome, on the
, whose proper name was Marcus Antonius Coccius, or vernacularly Marcantonio Coccio, an
Italian historian and critic, was born in 1436, in the campagna of Rome, on the confines of the ancient country of
the Sabines, from which circumstance he took the name of
Sabellicus. He was a scholar of Pomponius Letus’s, and
in 1475, was appointed professor of eloquence at Udino, to
which office he was likewise appointed at Venice, in 1484-.
Some time after, when the plague obliged him to retire to
Verona, he composed, within the space of fifteen months,
his Latin history of Venice, in thirty- three books, whiqh
were published in 1487, entitled “Rerum Venetiarum ab
urbe condita,
” folio, a most beautiful specimen of early
printing, of which there was a copy on vellum, in the Pinelli library. The republic of Venice was so pleased with
this work as to decree the author a pension of 200 sequins;
and Sabellicus, out of gratitude, added four books to his
history, which, however, remain in manuscript. He published also “A Description of Venice,
” in three books a
“Dialogue on the Venetian Magistrates
” and two poems
in honour of the republic. The most considerable of his
other works is his rhapsody of histories: “Rhapsodiae Historiarum Enneades,
” in ten Euneads, each containing nine
books, and comprizing a general history from the creation to the year 1503. The first edition published at Venice in 1498, folio, contained only seven Enneads; but the
second, in Io04, had the addition of three more, bringing
the history down to the above date. Although there is
little, either in matter or manner, to recommend tins work,
or many others of its kind, to a modern reader, it brought
the author both reward and reputation. His other works
are discourses, moral, philosophical, and historical, with
many Latin poems; the whole printed in four volumes,
folio, at Basil in 1560. There is a scarce edition of his
“Epistolæ familiares, necnon Orationes et Poemata,
” Venice, Thesaurus.
” He died at Venice
in
, an eminent Lutheran divine, historian to the duke of Saxony, and professor of history at Halle, was
, an eminent Lutheran divine,
historian to the duke of Saxony, and professor of history
at Halle, was born Sept. 23, 1643, at Lunenburg. He studied in, or visited the greatest part of the German universities, where he was much esteemed for his extensive knowledge of history and antiquities. He died March 9, 1694,
leaving nearly 70 volumes of dissertations, principally on
historical subjects on oracles on the gates of the ancients “The succession of the Princes of Orange,
” 4to
“History of the City of Herderwich
” a life of St. Norbert,
Tractatus varii da historia legenda,
” 4to “Historia antiqua Noribergse,
” 4to “Origin of the Dukes of
Brunswick
” “History of Lubec
” “Antiquities of the
kingdom of Thuringia
” “History of the Marquises and
Electors of Brandenburg,
” and many others, enumerated by
Niceron. His life was written by Schmid, and published
in 1713, 8vo.
cquaintance with the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew tongues and became an orator, a lawyer, a poet, and an historian he is also represented as a good friend, zealous for his country,
, in Latin Sammartbanus, is the
name of a family in France, which produced many men of letters. The first, Gaucher de Sainte-Marthe, had a son
Charles, born in 1512, who became physician to Francis II.
and was remarkable for his eloquence. Queen Margaret of
Navarre and the duchess of Vendome honoured him with
their particular esteem; and when they died in 1550, he
testified his grief by a funeral oration upon each, published
the same year. That upon the queen was in Latin, the
o.ther in French. There is also some Latin and French
poetry of his in being. He died in 1555. Scevole, or
Sclevola, the nephew of Charles, was born at Lou dun in
1536, and became very distinguished both in learning and
business. He loved letters from his infancy, attained an
intimate acquaintance with the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew
tongues and became an orator, a lawyer, a poet, and an
historian he is also represented as a good friend, zealous
for his country, and of inviolable fidelity to his prince. He
had, in the reigns of Henry III. and Henry IV. several considerable employments, which he filled with great reputation. In 1579, he was governor of Poitiers, and afterwards
treasurer of France for this district. In 1593 and 1594, he
exercised the office of intendant of the finances, in the
army of Breta^ne, commanded by the duke de Montpensier: and, in the latter of these years, he reduced Poitiers
to the subjection of Henry IV, Some time after, he conceived thoughts of retiring to his own country, and devoting the remainder of his life to contemplation: but was
again made governor of Poitiers, in so honourable a manner that he could not decline it. Upon the expiration of
this office, he went to Paris, and thence to Loudun, where
he passed the rest of his days “in otio cum dignitate.
”
This town had been often protected from ruin in the civil
wars merely by his credit, and therefore regarded hiui as
its protector. He died there in 1623, universally regretted;
and his funeral oration was pronounced by the famous
Urban Graudier. He was the author of “La louange de
la ville de Poitiers,
” 1573; “Opera Poetica,
” consisting
of odes, elegies, epigrams, and sacred poems, in French
and Luiin, 1575; “Gallorum doctrina illustrium elogia,
”
hut ins chief work, and that which keeps his lame
still alive in the republic of letters, is his work called
” Paedotrophia, seu de puerorum eciucatione,“printed in 1584,
and dedicated to Henry III. This poem^vent through ten
editions in the author’s life time, and hath gone through, as
many since. It was neatly printed at London in 1708, in
12mo, together with the
” Calliurfdia“of Quillet. It is
also printed with a complete edition of his and his son
Abel’s works, under the title
” Sammarthanorum patris et
lilii opera Latina et Gallica, turn soluta oratione, turn versa
scnpta,“Paris, 16:33, 4to. Scevole left several sons; of
whom Abel, the eldest, born at Loudun in 1570, applied
himself, like his father, to literature. He cultivated
French and Latin poetry; the latter were printed with
those of his father in the edition just mentioned, but are
inferior to them. Lewis XIII. settled on him a pension,
for the services he had -lone him, and made him a counsellor of state. In 1627, he was made librarian to the
king at Fontainebleau; and had after that other commissions of importance. He died at Poitiers in 1652, where
his
” Opuscula Varia“were printed in 1645, 8vo. This
Abe) had a son of his own name, born in 1630, and afterwards distinguished by his learning. He succeeded his father as librarian at Fontainebleau, and in that quality presented to Lewis XIV. in 1668,
” Un Discours pour le r6tablissement de cette Bibliorheque." He died in 1706.
, an eminent Roman historian, was born at Amiternum in 86 B. C. The rank of his ancestors
, an eminent Roman historian, was born at Amiternum in 86 B. C. The rank of his ancestors is uncertain, but from some circumstances. in his writings, it is not improbable that his family was plebeian. Having passed his more early years at his native town, he was removed to Rome, where he had the advantage of profiting by the lessons of Atticus Praetextatus, surnarned Philologus, a grammarian and rhetorician of great celebrity. Under this teacher he applied -to learning with diligence, and made uncommon progress. It appears, that he had turned his thoughts in his younger days to the writing of history, for which he had unquestionably great talents; but, as he himself intimates in his preface to the history of Catiline’s conspiracy, he was diverted from this pursuit by the workings of ambition. His early lift; too, appears to have been stained by vice, which the gross enormities of his more advanced years render highly probable. In this respect he has found an able advocate in his late learned translator and commentator; but although Dr. Steuart’s researches have removed some part of the reproaches of ancient authors, enough remains to shew that Sallust partook largely of the corruption of the age in which he lived, and added to it by his own example. The story of his having been detected in an adulterous intercourse with the wife of Milo, who, after a severe whipping, made him pay a handsome sum of money, may rest upon little authority, or may be altogether discarded as a fiction, but the general conduct of Sallust shows that the noble sentiments in his works had no influence on his conduct.
hatever objections may be made to Sallust’s character as a man, he has ever been justly admired as a historian. He is equally perspicuous and instructive: his style is clear
Whatever objections may be made to Sallust’s character as a man, he has ever been justly admired as a historian. He is equally perspicuous and instructive: his style is clear and nervous, his descriptions, reflections, speeches, and characters, all shew the hand of a master. But his partiality may he hlamed with equal justice, and even some of his most virtuous sentiments and bitter invectives against corruption in public men may be traced rather to party spirit, than to a genuine abhorrence of corruption, which, indeed, in one who had practised it so extensively, could not be expected, unless the result of a penitence we no where read of. His attachment to Caesar, and his disrespect for Cicero, are two glaring defects in his merit as a faithful historian.
s of Sallust. To which are prefixed, two Essays on the Life, literary character, and writings of the historian with notes historical, biographical, and critical.”
Of Sallust there are many excellent editions. His works
were first printed at Venice, in 1470, and reprinted thirty
times before the conclusion of that century, but these
editions are of great rarity. The best of the more modern
are the Aldus of 1521, 8vo, the Variorum of 1690, 8vo,
Wasse’s excellent edition, printed at Cambridge in 1710,
4to; Cortius’s edition, 1724, 4to; Havercamp’s, 1742,
2 vols. 4to; the prize edition of Edinburgh, 1755, 12mo;
the Bipont, 1779, 8vo that very accurate one by Mr.
Homer, Lond. 1789, 8vo and one by Harles, 1799, 8vo.
The late Dr. Rose of Chiswick, published a very correct
translation of Sallust in 1751, 8vo, with Cicero’s Four
Orations against Catiline; and more recently Sallust has
found a translator, and an acute and learned commentator
and advocate, in Heury Steuart, LL.D. F.R. S. and S. A.E.
who published in 1806, in 2 vols. 4to, “The Works of
Sallust. To which are prefixed, two Essays on the Life,
literary character, and writings of the historian with
notes historical, biographical, and critical.
”
learned have detected in these accounts, and especially the silence of the ancients concerning this historian, who, if he had deserved the character given him by Porphyry
* The first edition was patronized originally written with a view to pubiiby a subscription not known since the cation. She declared, therefore, “that
days of the Spectator. The work was no such idea was ever expressed by
published for the benefit of the author’s Mr. Sancho; and that not a single letfamily, by Miss Crewe, an amiable ter was printed from any duplicate
young lady, to whom many of the let- preserved by himself, but all were co!ter< are addressed, and who is since lected from the various friends 10 whom
married to John Phillips, esq. surgeon they were addressed.
” Her reasons
of the household to the Prince of Wales, for publishing them were “the desire
From the profits of the first edition, and of shewing that an untutored African
a sum paid by the booksellers for li- may possess abilities equal to an Euberty to print a second edition, Mrs. ropean and the still superior motive
Sancho, we are well assured, received of wishing to serve his worthy family,
more than 500l. The editor did not And she was happy,
” she declared,
venture to give them to the public till “in publicly acknowledging phe had
she had obviated an objection which not found the world inattentive to the
had been suggested, that they were voice of obscure merit.
”
and of great reputation for diligence and faithfulness. He
is said to have collected out of the most authentic records
he could procure, the “Antiquities of Phoenicia,
” with the
help of some memoirs which came from Hierombaal, [Hierobaal, or Gideon,] a priest of the God Jeuo or Jao. He
wrote several things also relating to the Jews. These
“Antiquities of the Phoenicians,
” Philo-Byblius, in the
same Phoenicia, in the days of Adrian, translated into
Greek; and Athenseus soon afterward reckoned him among
the Phoenician writers. A large and noble fragment of
this workj Eusebius has given us, verbatim, in his first
book of “Evangelical Preparation,
” cap. ix. x. and has
produced the strong attestation of Porphyry, the most
learned heathen of that age, to its authenticity. Upon
these authorities, many learned men have concluded that
the genuine writings of Sanchoniathon were translated by
Philo-Byblius, and that Sanchoniathon derived a great
part of his information from the books of Moses, nay, some
have supposed that Thoth, called by the Greeks, Hermes,
and by the Romans, Mercury, was only another name for
Moses; but the inconsistencies, chiefly chronological* which
the learned have detected in these accounts, and especially
the silence of the ancients concerning this historian, who,
if he had deserved the character given him by Porphyry >
could not have been entirely over-looked, create a just
ground of suspicion, either against Porphyry or PhiloByblius. It seems most probable, that Philo-Byblius fabricated the work from the ancient cosmogonies, pretending to have translated it from the Phoenician, in order to
provide the Gentiles with an account of the origin of the
world, which might be set in opposition to that of Moses.
Eusebius and Theodoret, indeed, who, like the rest of the
fathers, were too credulous in matters of this kind, and
after them some eminent modern writers, have imagined, that they have discovered a resemblance between
Sanchoniathon’s account of the formation of the world and
that of Moses. But an accurate examination of the doctrine of Sanchoniathon, as it appears in the fragment preserved by Eusebius, will convince the unprejudiced reader,
that the Phoenician philosophy, if indeed it be Phoenician,
is directly opposite to the Mosaic. Sanchoniathon teaches,
that, from the necessary energy of an eternal principle,
active but without intelligence, upon an eternal passive
chsiptic mass, or Mot, arose the visible world; a doctrine,
of which there are some appearances in the ancient cosmogonies, and which was not without its patrons among
the Greeks. It is therefore not unreasonable to conjecture, that the work was forged in opposition to the Jewish
cosmogony, and that this was the circumstance which rendered it so acceptable to Porphyry. Such is the opinion
of Brucker on this history; and Dodwell and Dupin, the
former in an express treatise, have also endeavoured to
invalidate its authenticity.
, an Italian ecclesiastical historian, was born June 31, 1692, and became, by the interest of his
, an Italian ecclesiastical historian,
was born June 31, 1692, and became, by the interest of
his bishop, cardinal Rezzonico, who was afterwards pope
Clement XIII. librarian and professor of ecclesiastical history at Padua, where he died, Feb. 23, 1751, in the fiftynrnth year of his age. He is known principally by his
“Vitae Pontificum Romanorum,
” Ferrara, Basis Historic Ecclesiasticae.
” He also
wrote “Historic Familiae Sacne;
”. “HistoriaS. S. Apostolorum;
” “Disputationes XX ex Historia Ecclesiastica
ad Vitas Pontificum Romanorum,
” and “Dissertations,
”
in defence of the “Historic Familiie Sacrae,
” which father
Serry had attacked.
ontinued in the hour of trial so true to their principles, that, according to Mr. Baker, the learned historian of that house, “probably more fellows were, in queen Mary’s
, a very eminent English prelate, the
third son of William Sandys, esq. and Margaret his wife,
descended from the ancient barons of Kendal, was born
near Hawkshead, in Furness Fells, Lancashire, in 1519.
The same neighbourhood, and almost the same year, gave
birth to two other luminaries of the reformation, Edmund
Grindal and Bernard Gilpin. Mr. Sandys’s late biographer
conjectures, that he was educated at the school of Furness
Abbey, whence he was removed to St. John’s-college,
Cambridge, in 1532 or 1533, where he had for his contemporaries Redmayn and Lever, both great lights of the
reformation, beside others of inferior name, who continued
in the hour of trial so true to their principles, that, according to Mr. Baker, the learned historian of that house,
“probably more fellows were, in queen Mary’s reign,
ejected from St. John’s than from any other society in either
university.
” Several years now elapsed of Sandys’s life,
during which in matters of religion men knew not how to
act or what to believe; but, though the nation was at this
time under severe restraints with respect to external conduct, inquiry was still at work jin secret: the corruptions
of the old religion became better understood, the Scriptures were universally studied, and every impediment being
removed with the capricious tyranny of Henry VIII., protestantism, with little variation from its present establishment in England, became the religion of the state.
, an Italian poet and historian, was born in 1521 at Rome, and was the son of James Sansovino,
, an Italian poet and historian,
was born in 1521 at Rome, and was the son of James Sansovino, an eminent sculptor and celebrated architect, whose
eulogy Vasari has left us. He studied the belies lettres at
Venice, and took his degrees in law at Padua; but that
science not suiting his taste, he devoted himself wholly to
poetry, history, and polite literature, and died in 1586, at
Venice, aged sixty-five, leaving more than fifty works, all
written in Italian. They consist of “Poems;
” notes on
Boccaccio’s “Decameron, on Ariosto, Dante, &c.
” translations of ancient historians and some histories written by
himself, as his “Venezia descritta,
” of which the best edition is that of Istoria Universale dell' origine,
guerre, ed imperio deTurchi,
” Satires
” are in a collection with
those of Ariosto, and others, Venice, 1560, 8vo his
“Capitoli
” with those of Aretino, and different writers,
Cento
novelle Scelte,
” Venice,
he Truth” raised a clamour against the author, the fury of which he had riot power to appease. As an historian, he believed that he was permitted to produce the chief arguments
But his most considerable work was, “Discourses historical, critical, and moral, on the most memorable Events of
the Old and New Testament.
” His first intention was to
have published a set of prints, with titles and explanations;
but, as that had been before executed by Fontaine amongst
the Roman catholics, and by Basnage amongst the protestants, it became necessary to adopt a newer plan. This
gave rise to the work above mentioned, which the author
left imperfect. Two volumes made their appearance in
folio, and the work was afterwards reprinted in four in 8vo.
Six other discourses form a part of a fifth volume in 8vo,
published by Mr. Roques, who undertook a continuation of
the work. It is replete with learning. The Christian and
the heathen authors, philosophers, poets, historians, and
critics, are cited with the utmost profusion, and it forms a
compilation of all their sentiments on every subject discussed throughout the work. The author shews himself to
be a warm advocate for toleration; and, though the catholics are more frequently censured than commended, yet
his principles are very moderate. “A Dissertation on the
Expediency of sometimes disguising the Truth
” raised a
clamour against the author, the fury of which he had riot
power to appease. As an historian, he believed that he
was permitted to produce the chief arguments of those that
maintain, that in certain cases truth may be disguised; and
the reasons which they gave who have asserted the contrary.
Without deciding the question, it is easy to perceive that
he is a favourer of the former. His principal antagonist
was Arrnand de la Chapelle; to whom Francis Michael Ganicon replied with great spirit, in a work, entitled “Lettres
serieuses & jocoses.
” The three first of the lettres, in the
second volume, are in favour of Saurin. He was answered
by La Chapelle with great violence. Saurin imagined, that
he should be able to terminate this dispute by reprinting the
dissertation separately, with a preface in defence of his
assertions: but he was deceived; for La Chapelle published a very long and scurrilous reply. It was Saurin’s
intention entirely to have neglected this production; but
he found a new champion in Francis Bruys. This dispute
was at length brought before the synod of Campen; who,
in May 1730, ordered the churches of Utrecht, Leyden,
and Amsterdam, to make their examinations, and report
the result of them to the synod of the Hague, which was to
sit in the September following. Commissaries were appointed for this purpose. The synod of Campen gave its
opinion, and that of the Hague confirmed it: but, having
made no mention of the instructions sent to the Walloon
church at Utrecht, that assembly complained, and ordered
Mr. Bonvoust, one of its ministers, to justify his proceedings and his doctrine. This he did in a large octavo volume, printed at Utrecht in 1731, after the death of Saurin, entitled “The Triumph of the Truth and Peace; or,
Reflections on the most important Events attending the last
Synod assembled to determine in the case of Messieurs
Saurin and Maty.
” Saurin had contributed to this peace,
by giving such a declaration of his sentiments as satisfied
the protestant churches; and he repeated that declaration,
when he foresaw that the new lights, which Mr. Bruys had
thrown upon this subject, were going to raise a storm that
might perhaps have been severer than the last. Saurin’s
sermons are now well known in this country by the selections translated into English, and published in 1775 1784,
by the rev, Robert Robinson, 5 vols. 8vo, to which Dr.
Henry Hunter added a sixth volume in 1796.
, or Sassi [Joseph Anthony), an ecclesiastical historian, was born at Milan in 1673. He for some time taught the belles
, or Sassi [Joseph Anthony), an ecclesiastical
historian, was born at Milan in 1673. He for some time
taught the belles lettres in his native city, and afterwards
was employed as a missionary. In 1703 he was admitted a
doctor of the Ambrosian college at Milan, and eight years
afterwards was appointed director of that college, and keeper
fits fine library. He died about 1756. He was author
of many theological, historical, and chronological works,
among which are, 1. “Epistola ad Card. Quirium de Literatura Mediolanensium,
” 4to. 2. “De Studiis Mediolanensium Antiquis et Novis,
” Milan, Archiepiscoporum Mediolanensium Series critico-chronologica,
”
ibid. St. Caroli Borromei Homilise, prefatione et notis,
” Rerum Italicarum Scriptores
” by Muratori.
, a very learned philologer and literary historian, was born at Eppendorff, a village between Chemnitz and Freyberg,
, a very learned philologer and
literary historian, was born at Eppendorff, a village between
Chemnitz and Freyberg, in Saxony, where his father was
a clergyman, Jan. 13, 1714. His proper name was Christopher Gottlob Sach, which, when he commenced author,
he Latinized into Sachsius, and afterwards into Saxius,
dropping the Gottlob altogether. His father first gave him
some, instructions in the teamed languages, which he afterwards improved at the school of Chemnitz, but more effectually at the electoral school of Misnia, where he also studied classical antiquities, history, and rhetoric, and in 1735
went to Leipsic with the strongest recommendations for industry and proficiency. Here he studied philosophy under
the celebrated Wolff, but as he had already perused the
writings both of the ancient and modern philosophers with
profound attention, he is said to have had the courage to
differ from the current opinions. Philosophy, however, as
then taught, was less to his taste than the study of antiquities, classical knowledge, and literary history, to which he
determined to devote his days; and the instructions of professor Christ, and his living in the house with Menkenius,
who had an excellent library, were circumstances which
very powerfully confirmed this resolution. He had not been
here above a year, when two young noblemen were confided
to his care, and this induced him to cultivate the modern
languages most in use. His first disputation had for its
subject, “Vindiciae secundum libertatem pro Maronis
jEneide, cui manum Jo. Harduinus nuper assertor injecerat,
” Leipsic, Nova acta
eruditorum,
” and other literary journals, from this year to
Onomasticon Literarium,
” or Literary
Dictionary, consisting of a series of biographical and critical notices or references respecting the most eminent writers
of every age or nation, and in every branch of literature,
in chronological order. The first volume of this appeared
in 1775, 8vo, and it continued to be published until seven
volumes were completed, with a general Index, in 1790.
To this, in 1793, he added an eighth or supplementary volume, from which we have extracted some particulars of his
life, as given by himself. This is a work almost indispensable to biographers, and as the work of one man, must
have been the production of many years* labour and attention. Some names, however, are omitted, which we might
have expected to find in it; and the English series, as in
every foreign undertaking of the kind, is very imperfect.
We have seen no account of his latter days. He lived to a
very advanced age, dying at Utrecht. May 3, 1806, in his
ninety-second year.
, a Danish historian, is supposed to have been a native of Denmark, but this has
, a Danish historian, is supposed to have been a native of Denmark, but this has been a disputed point. As to his name Sachse, it is evident from many monuments of Danish antiquity, that it is of no obscure or late origin in the history of Denmark. Saxo himself calls the Danes his countrymen, Denmark his country; and speaking of the kings, he terms them our kings. Some attribute his origin to Ambria, others with more reason to Sialandia, a Danish island. The name Scalandicus is also added to that of Saxo, in some editions of his works. He has been called Longus, which has induced some to attribute his descent to the noble family of the Langii. Others have rather chosen to ascribe this name to the height of his stature. Saxo, in his preface, speaks of his ancestors as having been distinguished in war, which indicates that they were of no ignoble race. His name of Grammaticus was titular, and expressive of his attainments in literature. There are different opinions concerning the year of his birth. It is, however, certain that he flourished in the twelfth century. Carpzovius endeavoured, by some acute and subtile reasonings, to ascertain the date. The education of Saxo is equally involved in uncertainty. Pontoppidan supposes that he studied at Paris,and there acquired the eleg.ance of style for which he afterwards was distinguished. It is certain, that in the 12th century the Cimbri and the Danes frequently went to France for education. It may, however, be doubted, whether in the rage for trifle which then prevailed at Paris, Saxo could have procured a master who was capable of instructing him. We must be rather inclined to suppose that he owed his attainments to his own industry and talents. It appears that he applied to theology, for we find him appointed capitular in the bishopric of Lundens, and afterwards a prefect in the cathedral of Roschiid. While he 'filled this office he was sent, in 1161, by Absalon, the bishop of Roschiid, to Paris, with a view of inviting some monks from St. Genevieve, who might correct^the depraved morals of those which belonged to Eskilsco. William Abbas accepted the invitation of Saxo, and three brothers followed him. These monks introduced into Denmark the monastic discipline which had been prescribed by St. Augustine. Various opinions have been offered about the date of Saxo’s death. Pontanus supposes it to have been in the year 1208. Some conjecture the time to have been 1190, others in 1201. But, when we reflect that in his preface he speaks of Waldemar II. who ascended the throne of Denmark in 1203, and that Andrew Suno, to whom the history is dedicated, succeeded Absalon in the bishopric in 1202, we cannot agree with those who have adopted the earlier dates. Though some others have fixed the date in 1204, and others in 1206, the general opinion is, that he died in 1208, aged upwards of seventy. He was buried in the cathedral of Roschild. Three centuries afterwards, an inscription was’ added to his tomb by Lago Urne, bishop of Scalandre. Though more elegant verses might have been invented, says Klotzius, none could have been more true.
A third edition appeared at Francfort on the Maine, in 1576. At last, Stephanus Johannes Stephanius, historian to the king, and professor of eloquence and history in the university
Absalon, bishop of Roschild, first instigated Saxo to undertake the history of Denmark, and assisted him with his
advice and with books. Saxo employed twenty years in
accomplishing his undertaking, and at last rendered it worthy the expectations of Absalon who, however, died be*
fore the history was completed, which Saxo inscribed to
Andrew Suno, who was the successor to the see. After
remaining in ms. for three hundred years, Christianus Petra3us undertook the publication, having received the manuscript accurately written from Bergeius the archbishop
of Lundens. It was delivered to be printed to Jodocus Radius Ascensius, and was published at Paris in 1514, and
re-published at Basil, in 1534, by Oporinus. A third edition appeared at Francfort on the Maine, in 1576. At last,
Stephanus Johannes Stephanius, historian to the king, and
professor of eloquence and history in the university of Sora,
with the aid of some Danish nobles, and the liberal contribution of the king, was enabled to publish an edition of
Saxo, in folio, printed at Sora, 1644. A second part of
the volume appeared in the following year, containing the
“Prolegomena,
” and copious notes. There is a later edition by Christ. Adolphus Klotz, printed at Leipsic in
1771, 4to, and there are several Danish translations. The
credibility of Saxo is somewhat doubtful, but his style is
good, and much praised by critics of authority.
had much of the genius and learning of his family, and was a good antiquary, medallist, and natural historian. He translated into English Koempfec’s history of Japan, 1727,
, an eminent physician
and naturalist, was the son of a very learned physician of
the same mimes at Zurich, where he was born, August 2,
1672. His father dying in the prime of life, he appears
to have been left to the care of his mother, and his maternal grandfather. He was educated at Zurich under the
ablest professors, of whom he has left us a list, but Says
that he might with great propriety add his own name to
the on cber, as he went through the greater part of his
studies with no other guide than his own judgment. In
1692 he commenced his travels, and remained some time
at \ltdorf, attending the lectures of Wagenseil, Hoffman^
father and son, Sturm, &c. In 1693 he went to Utrecht,
where he took his degree of doctor of physic in Jan. 1694,
and Pi 1695 returned to Nuremberg and Altdorf to study
mathematics under Sturm and Eimmart. To Sturm he addressed a learned letter on the generation of fossil shells,
which iie attempted to explain on mathematical principles;
but, discovering the fallacy of this, he adopted the theory
of our Dr. Woodward, whose work on the subject of the
natural history of the earth he translated into Latin, and
published at Zurich in 1704.
Returning to Zurich, before this period, he was appoint-,
ed first physician of the city, with the reversion of the professorship of mathematics. He now began to write various
dissertations on subjects of natural history, particularly that
of Swisserland, and wrote a system of natural history in
German, which he published in parts in the years 1705, 6,
and 7, the whole forming three small 4to volumes. He
published afterwards three more in 1716, 1717, and 1718,
which complete the natural history of Swisserland, with
the exception of the plants, of which he had formed an
herbal of eighteen vast volumes in folio. His “Nova litteraria Helvetica
” began in Itinera Alpina,
” one volume of which
was published at London in Physica sacra,
” in
4 vols. folio, which was immediately republished in French
at Amsterdam, in both instances enriched with a profusion
of fine plates illustrative of the natural history of the Bible.
This had been preceded by some lesser works on the same
subject, which were now incorporated. He did not long
survive this learned publication, dying at Zurich about the
end of June 1733. He was a member of many learned societies, of our Royal Society, and of those of Berlin, Vienna,
&c. and carried on a most extensive correspondence with the
principal literati of Europe. He left a well-chosen and numerous library, a rich museum of natural history, and a collection of medals. Besides the works we have incidentally
noticed, he published, 1. “Herbarium Diluvianum,
” Zurich, Piscium querelse et vindicise,
” Zurich, Oratio cle Matheseos su in Theologia,
” ibid. Museum Diluvianum,
” ibid. Homo
diluvii testis,
” ibid. De Helvetii aeribus,
aquis, locis, specimen,
” ibid. .Sciagraphia lithologica curiosa, seu lapidum figuratorum nomenclator, olim a Jo. Jac. Scheuchzero conscriptus, auctus et
illustratus,
” 4to. Of his “Physica Sacra,
” we have noticed the first edition published at Augsburgh, 1731—1735,
four vols. folio, or rather eight volumes in four, the text
of which is in German; this edition is valued on account of
its having the first impressions of the plates. The Amsterdam edition, 1732 38, 8 vols. has, however, the advantage
of being in French, a language more generally understood,
and has the same plates. Scheuchzer had a brother, professor of natural philosophy at Zurich, who died in 1737,
and is known to all botanists by his laborious and learned
“Agrostographia,
” so valuable for its minute descriptions
of grasses. He had a son with whom we seem more interested, John Gaspak Scheuchzer, who was born at Zurich
in 1702, and after studying at home came over to England,
and received the degree of' M. D. at Cambridge, during the
royal visit of George I. in 1728, and died at London April
13, 1729, only twenty-seven years old. He had much of
the genius and learning of his family, and was a good antiquary, medallist, and natural historian. He translated into
English Koempfec’s history of Japan, 1727, 2 vols. folio, and
had begun a translation 1 of Koempfer’s travels in Muscovy,
Persia, &c. but did not live to complete it. He wrote also
a treatise on inoculation. Some part of the correspondence
of this learned family is in the British Museum.
, a learned historian and antiquary, was born September 6, 1694-, at Sulzbourg, a
, a learned historian and
antiquary, was born September 6, 1694-, at Sulzbourg, a
town in the margraviate of Baden Dourlach; his father,
holding an honourable office in the margrave’s court, died
soon after in Alsace, leaving his son to the care of his mother. After tei: years studying at Dourlach and Basil, he
kept a public exercise on some contested points of ancient
history with applause, and finished his studies in eight
years more at Strasbourg. In 1717, he there spoke a
Latin panegyric on Ge^manicus, that favourite hero of
Germany, which was printed by order of the city. In
return for this favour he spoke a funeral oration on M.
Barth, under whom he had studied; and another on Kuhn,
the professor of eloquence and history there, whom he was
soon after elected to succeed in 1720, at the age of twenty ix. The resort of students to him from the Northern nations was very great, and the princes of Germany sent their
sons to study law under him. The professorship of history
at Francfort on the Oder was offered to him; the czarina
invited him to another at St. Petersburg, with the title of
historiographer royal; Sweden offered him the same professorship at Upsal, formerly held by Scheffer and Boeder,
his countrymen; and the university of Leyden named him
successor to the learned Vitriarius. He preferred Strasbourg to all. Amidst the succession of lectures public and
private, he found time to publish an innumerable quantity
of historical and critical dissertations, too many to be here
particularised. In 1725 he pronounced a congratulatory
oration before king Stanislaus, in the name of the university, on the marriage of his daughter to the king of France;
and, in 1726, another on the birth of the dauphin, besides
an anniversary one on the king of France’s birthday, and
others on his victories. In 1726 he quitted his professorship, and began his travels at the public expence. From
Paris he went to Italy, stayed at Rome six months, re*
ceived from the king of the Two Sicilies a copy of the
“Antiquities of Herculaneum,
” and from the duke of
Parma the “Museum Florentinum.
” He came to England at the beginning of the late king’s reign, and left it
the day that Pere Courayer, driven out of Paris by theological disputes, arrived in London. He was now honoured
with a canonry of St. Thomas, one of the most distinguished
Lutheran chapters, and visited Paris a third time in 1728.
Several dissertations by him are inserted in the “Memoirs
of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres;
” one,
ascribing the invention of moveable types to Guttenberg of
Strasbourg, 1440, against Meerman,
elligent and equally candid writer, we have the following account of this lady “She was an excellent historian, of great acquirements, extraordinary memory, and strong sense;
Mrs. Scott, his widow, survived him about fifteen years,
and died at Catton, near Norwich, in Nov. 1795. She was
sister to the late celebrated Mrs. Montagu, of Portmansquare. From the pen of a very intelligent and equally
candid writer, we have the following account of this lady
“She was an excellent historian, of great acquirements,
extraordinary memory, and strong sense; and constantly
employed in literary labours; yet careless of fame, and
tree from vanity and ostentation. Owing to a disagreement
of tempers, she soon separated from her husband; but in
every other relation of life she was, with some peculiarities,
a woman of exemplary conduct, of sound principles, enlivened by the warmest sense of religion, and of a charity
so unbounded, so totally regardless of - herself, as to be
almost excessive and indiscriminate. Her talents were not
so brilliant, nor her genius so predominant, as those of her
sister, Mrs. Montagu: but in some departments of literature she was by no means her inferior. When she left her
husband she united her income with that of her intimate
friend, lady Bab Montagu, the sister of lord Halifax, and
they continued to live together to the death of the latter.
From that period Mrs. Scott continually changed her habitation, for restlessness was one of her foibles. Her intercourse with the world was various and extensive; and
there were few literary people of her day with whom she
had not either an acquaintance or a correspondence. Yet
when she died, not one of her contemporaries who knew
her literary habits came forward to preserve the slightest
memorial of her; and she went to her grave as unnoticed
as the most obscure of those who have done nothing worthy
of remembrance. Under these circumstances, the writer
of this article trusts to a candid reception of this imperfect
memoir, while he laments that Mrs. Scott herself shut out
some of the best materials, by ordering all her papers and
voluminous correspondence, which came into the hands of
her executrix, to be burnt; an order much to be lamented,
because there is reason to believe, from the fragments
which remain in other hands, that her letters abounded with
literary anecdote, and acute observations on character and
life. Her style was easy, unaffected, and perspicuous;
her remarks sound, and her sagacity striking. Though her
fancy was not sufficiently powerful to give the highest attraction to a novel, she excelled in ethical remarks, and
the annals of the actual scenes of human nature. In dramatic effect, in high-wrought passion, and splendid imagery,
perhaps she was deficient.
”
lberg, 1618, 8vo. In these annals of the reformation he has shown himself a very candid and credible historian. 3. “Axiomata concionancii,” Han. 1619, 8vo. 4. “Observationes
The principal works of this learned divine, who, as Freher says, was reckoned another Chrysostom, are, 1. “Confutatio disputationis Baronii de baptismo Constantini,
”
Neost. Annales Evangelii per Europara
15 Seculi renovati, Decad. 1 et 2,
” Heidelberg, Axiomata concionancii,
” Han. Observationes in Pauli
Epistolas ad Timotheum, Titum, et Philernonem.
” 5. “Medulla Patrum,
”
also CuRopalates, from an office he held in the household of the emperor of that name, was a Greek historian, known for his abridgment of history from the death of Nicephorus
, called also CuRopalates, from an office he held in the household of the emperor of that name, was a Greek historian, known for his abridgment of history from the death of Nicephorus Logothetes, in 811, to the deposition of Nicephorus Botoniates, in 1081. This history, from 1067, is the same as that of Cedrenus, which has raised a doubt whether Cedre-. nus or Scylitza was the original author. Scylitza is thought to have been a native of Lesser Asia, and a prefect of the guards before he attained the dignity of curopalates. A Latin translation of his history entire, was published at Venice in 1570; and the part concerning which there is no dispute was printed in Greek and Latin conjointly with that author, at Paris, in 1647.
, a French historian, was born January 8, 1691, at Paris. He began to study the law
, a French historian, was
born January 8, 1691, at Paris. He began to study the
law in obedience to his father’s desire, who was an able advocate; but losing both his parents shortly after, he quitted
the bar, for which he had not the least taste, and devoted
himself wholly to the belles lettres, and French history.
His unwearied application to books, which no other passion
interrupted, soon made him known among the learned; and
he was admitted into the academy of inscriptions in 1723,
and chosen by chancellor d'Aguesseau five years after, to
continue the great collection of statutes, made by the
French kings, which M. de Laurier had begun. As Secousse possessed every talent necessary for such an important undertaking, the voiumes which he published were
received with universal approbation. He died at Paris,
March 15, 1754, aged sixty-three, leaving a library, the
largest and most curious, in French history, that any private person had hitherto possessed. His works are, the
continuation of the collection of statutes before mentioned,
to the ninth volume inclusively, which was printed under
the inspection of M. de Villevault, counsellor to the court
of aids, who succeeded M. Secousse, and published a table,
forming a tenth volume, and since, an eleventh and twelfth.
Secousse also wrote many dissertations in the memoirs of
the academy of inscriptions editions of several works, and
of several curious pieces “Memoirs for the History of
Charles the Bad,
” 2 vols. 4to,
, the historian of the Quakers, was the son of Jacob Williamson Sewell, a citizen
, the historian of the Quakers,
was the son of Jacob Williamson Sewell, a citizen of Amsterdam, and a surgeon, and appears to have been born
therein 1650. His grandfather, William Sewell, was an
Englishman, and had resided at Kidderminster; but being
one of the sect of the Brownists, left his native country for
the more free enjoyment of his principles in Holland,
married a Dutch woman of Utrecht, and settled there. The
parents of the subject of this article both died when he was
young, but had instructed him in the principles of the
Quakers, to which he steadily adhered during life. His
education in other respects appears to have been the fruit
of his own application; and the time he could spare from
the business to which he was apprenticed (that of a weaver)
he employed with good success in attaining a knowledge of
the Greek, Latin, English, French, and High Dutch,
languages. His natural abilities being good, his application unwearied, and his habits strictly temperate, he soon
became noticed by some of the most respectable booksellers in Holland; and the translation of works of credit,
chiefly from the Latin and English tongues, into Low Dutch,
seems to have been one of the principal sources from which
his moderate income was derived, in addition to the part
he took, at different times, in several approved periodical publications. His modest, unassuming manners gained
him the esteem of several literary men, whose productions,
there is reason to believe, were not unfrequently revised
and prepared for the press by him. His knowledge of his
native tongue was profound: his “Dictionary,
” “Grammar,
” and other treatises on it, having left very little room
for succeeding improvement: and he assisted materially in
the compilation of Halma’s French and Dutch Dictionary.
His “History of the people called Quakers,
” written first
in Low Dutch, and afterwards, by himself, in English
(dedicated to George I.) was a very laborious
undertaking, as he was scrupulously nice in the selection of his
materials, which he had been during many years engaged
in collecting. Of the English edition, for it cannot properly be called a translation, it may be truly said, that as
the production of a foreigner, who had spent only about
ten months in England, and that above forty years before,
the style is far superior to what could have been reasonably
expected. One principal object with the author was, a
desire to correct what he conceived to be gross misrepresentations in Gerard Croese’s “History of Quakerism.
”
The exact time of SewelPs death does not appear; but in,
a note of the editor’s to the third edition of his “Dictionary,
” in History of the Quakers
” appears to have
been first published in
d Sharp was consecrated in his room, July 5, 1691. His elevation to this dignity, says Thoresby, the historian of Leeds, was not only to the comfort and honour of his native
The merit of dean Sharp was now in the highest estimation, and upon the deprivation of those bishops who refused the oaths to William and Mary, he was considered as a proper person to succeed to one of the vacant sees. But neither the favour of his majesty, nor the persuasion of his friends, could prevail on him Ho accept the offer. He declined the promotion, not from any scruple of conscience, but from a delicacy of feeling; for he entertained a particular esteem for the prelates who were deprived. This refusal, however, which reflects equal honour on his disinterestedness and on his sensibility, displeased the king. But his friend, Dr. Tillotson, the day after his nomination to the see of Canterbury, waited on him, and proposed an expedient, by which he might accede, without violating his resolution, to the kind intention of his majesty. This was, that he should promise to accept the see of York, when it should become vacant, and that he should ground his present refusal on his wish to be preferred to his native county. To this he agreed, and Dr. Tillotson acquainted the king with what had passed; when his majesty signified his approbation of Dr. Sharp’s intention. In a few days afterwards, Lamplugh, the archbishop of York, died, and Sharp was consecrated in his room, July 5, 1691. His elevation to this dignity, says Thoresby, the historian of Leeds, was not only to the comfort and honour of his native county and family, but to the universal satisfaction and joy of the whole nation.
, the historian of Staffordshire, was son of the rev. Stebbing Shaw, rector
, the historian of Staffordshire, was
son of the rev. Stebbing Shaw, rector of Hartshorn,
on the borders of Derbyshire, near Ashby de la Zouch.
He was born in 1762, at or near Stone, in Staffordshire;
in the neighbourhood of which town, his mother inherited a small landed estate, which descended to this her
only child. He was educated at the school of Repton,
near Harishorn, first under the rev. Dr. Prior, and afterwards under his successor, the rev. William Bagshaw
Stevens, an ingenious poet and scholar, who died in 1800.
From this accomplished man, for whom he retained an unabated friendship till death, he early imbibed a warm love
of literature. At the close of the month of October, 1780,
he became a resident member of Qu.en’s-college, in Cambridge. At this period, his first literary predilections were
fixed on English poetry, of which he had caught an enthu iastic fondness from his last master. But even this
partiality yielded to his propensity for music; in which his
performance on the violin occupied a large portion of his
time, and he had already attained considerable excellence.
In due time he took his degree of B. A. was elected to a
fellowship, and went into orders. Not long afterwards, the
intimacy which, for almost half a century, had subsisted
between his father and his neighhour, sir Robert Burdett,
of Foremark, in which hospitable mansion the son had
passed many of his early days, induced him to undertake
the superintending care of the present sir Francis, then
lately released from Westminster school, at his father’s
villa at Ealing. With this pupil, he made a tour to the
Highlands of Scotland in the autumn of 1787, of which he
kept a diary. This diary, originally composed merely for
private amusement, he afterwards inconsiderately published;
and thus, it must be confessed, made his first appearance
as an author with some disadvantage; luckily, however,
the publication was anonymous. In the following year,
he made a tour to the West of England, of which he published a more laboured account, with his name. The book
was well received; and, though the style is not simple and
easy (an attainment which indeed the author never reached), yet it discovered a dawning attention to the history of
families and property, to which his industrious researches
were afterwards directed with considerable success. In
1789, about the time of the publication of his tour, he
obtained admission to the reading-room of the British Museum. His account of the vast stores of topographical and
genealogical materials deposited there, fired the imagination of one of his learned friends, who resided in London,
and with whom he passed much of his time. To this connection may be ascribed the origin of a periodical publication, entitled “The Topographer,
” which commenced in
the spring of
. was tortured in the Tower; concerning which there is reason to wonder that it was not known to the historian of the Reformation.
The consequence of this expedition was the retreat of
the Moors, and the blowing-up of Tangier. The poem
above alluded to was “The Vision,
” a licentious one, such
as was fashionable in those times, with little power of invention or propriety of sentiment. At his return he found
the king kind, who, as Dr. Johnson says, perhaps had never
been angry, and he continued a wit and a courtier as
before.
At the succession of king James, to whom he was intimately known, and by whom he thought himself beloved,
he was admitted into the privy council, and made lord
chamberlain. He accepted a place in the high commission
without knowledge, as he declared after the Revolution,
of its illegality. Having few religious scruples, he attended the king at mass, and kneeled with the rest; but
had no disposition to receive the Ilomish faith, or to force
it upon others; for when the priests, encouraged by his
appearances of compliance, attempted to convert him, he
told them, as Burnet has recorded, that he was willing to
receive instruction, and that he had taken much pains to
believe in God who had made the world and all men in it;
but that he should not be easily persuaded “that man was
quits, and made God again.
” A pointed sentence, says
Dr. Johnson, is bestoweo^ by successive transmission to the
last whom it will fit; this censure of transubstantiation,
whatever be its value, was uttered long ago by Anne Askew,
one of the first sufferers for the Protestant religion, who,
in the time of Henry VIII. was tortured in the Tower;
concerning which there is reason to wonder that it was not
known to the historian of the Reformation.
ressed. Sheffield’s memoirs also are lively and agreeable; he had the perspicuity and elegance of an historian, but not the fire and fancy oi a poet.
Yet Dryden extolled this essay highly, and it may be justly said that the precepts are judicious, sometimes new, and often happily expressed. Sheffield’s memoirs also are lively and agreeable; he had the perspicuity and elegance of an historian, but not the fire and fancy oi a poet.
, in 1636, young Sherburne was educated privately, under the care of Mr. Charles Aleyn, the poetical historian of the battles of Cressy and Poictiers, who had been one of
, an English poet, was descended from an antient family of the same name at Stanyhurst, in Lancashire. His grandfather, Henry, appears to have belonged, but in what capacity is not known, to Corpus Christi college, Oxford, and settled in that city, where Edward the father of our poet was born. This Edward went afterwards to London, and became secretary to the first East India company, established by queen Elizabeth’s charter, and in 1613, obtained a reversionary grant of the office of clerk of the ordnance. He was afterwards knighted by Charles I. He married Frances, the second daughter pf John Stanley of Roydon Hall, in Essex, esq. and resided in Goldsmith’s Rents, near Redcross-street, Cripplegate. Mis son, the poet, was born here Sept 18, 1618, and educated by the celebrated Thomas Farnaby, who then taught a school in Goldsmith’s rents. On his removal to Sevenoaks in Kent, in 1636, young Sherburne was educated privately, under the care of Mr. Charles Aleyn, the poetical historian of the battles of Cressy and Poictiers, who had been one of Farnaby’s ushers. On the death of Aleyn in 1640, his pupil being intended for the army, was sent to complete his education abroad, and had travelled in France and part of Italy, when his father’s illness obliged him to return. After his father’s death in 1641, he succeeded to the clerkship of his majesty’s ordnance, the reversion of which had been procured for him in 1638,- but the rebellion prevented his retaining it long. Being a Roman catholic, and firmly attached to the king, he was ejected by a warrant of the house of Lords in April or May 1642, and harassed by a long and expensive confinement in the custody of the usher of the black rod.
h attention, many rare and exotic plants. His reputation obtained for him the appointment of natural historian, geographer, and physician, to Charles II. and he received the
, an eminent physician, naturalist, and antiquary, was a descendant of the Sibbalds of
Balgonie, an ancient family in Fifeshire, Scotland. He
received his education in philosophy and the languages at
the university of Edinburgh, and afterwards studied medicine at Leyden, where, on taking his doctor’s degree in
1661, he published his inaugural dissertation “De variis
tabis speciebus.
” Soon after he returned home, and fixed
his residence at Edinburgh; but for the benefit of study,
often retired to a rural retreat in the neighbourhood, and
cultivated, with much attention, many rare and exotic
plants. His reputation obtained for him the appointment
of natural historian, geographer, and physician, to Charles
II. and he received the royal command to compose a general description of the whole kingdom, and a particular history of the different counties of Scotland. The “History
of Fife,
” however, is the only part of this plan which he
executed. This was at first sold separately, but became
very scarce; a new edition was published at Cupar-Fife in
1803, In 1681, when the royal college of physicians was
incorporated, he was one of the original fellows. In 1684
he published his principal work, “Scotia Illustrata, sive
Prodromus historian naturalis, &c.
” folio, reprinted in De legibus historian naturalis,
” Edit).
were cut, the one for writing, and the other for-printing a pamphlet against the match. Camden, the historian, was present at the execution of this savage sentence, one of
His spirit and sense were afterwards displayed in a manner which reflects high honour upon his character. When in 1579, queen Elizabeth seemed inclined to accede to the proposal of a marriage with the duke of Anjou, which might have endangered the prosperity, religion, and liberty of the nation, Mr. Sidney addressed a letter to her against such a connection, written with unusual elegance of expression as well as force of reasoning, and with uncommon freedom. The delicacy of the subject, and the difficulty of discussing it without offending the queen, he was perfectly aware of, yet his zeal for the welfare of his country, and particularly the protestant religion, would not permit him to be silent; and it is supposed that by this letter he had the honour of averting the mischiefs that would have attended the maiv riage. Nor did he lose her majesty’s favour, although others who interfered, were treated with the utmost rigour, particularly Stubbs, a gentleman of Lincoln’s Inn, and Page a printer, whose right hands were cut, the one for writing, and the other for-printing a pamphlet against the match. Camden, the historian, was present at the execution of this savage sentence, one of the greatest blemishes in the reign of Elizabeth.
, an eminent English historian, and the contemporary of William of Malmsbury, lived in the
, an eminent English historian,
and the contemporary of William of Malmsbury, lived in
the twelfth century. He both studied and taught the sciences, and particularly the mathematics at Oxford, and
became precentor to the church of Durham. He died probably soon after the year 1130, where his history ends. He
took great pains in collecting our ancient monuments,
especially in the north of England, after they had been
scattered by the Danes in their devastations of that country. From these he composed a history of the kings of
England from the year 616 to 1130, with some smaller
historical pieces. It was continued by John, prior of Hexham, to the year 1156. This work, and Simeon’s account
of the church of Durham, are printed among Twisden’s
“Decem Scriptores
” but of the latter a separate edition
was published in 1732, 8vo, by Thomas Bedford.
essing the author’s name (see David Dickson), for which he is censured by Wodrow, the ecclesiastical historian and biographer of professor Dickson, while he allows him the
He published, 1. “Tyrocinia mathematica,
” Glas. Ars Nova et Magna Gravitatis et Levitatis,
”
Rotterd. Hydrostatics,
” Eclin. Hydrostatical Experiments, with a Discourse on Coal,
”
Edin. Principles of Astronomy and Navigation,
” Edin. Ars Nova et Magna,
” and perhaps also his political principles, provoked the indignation of some persons;
on which occasion Mr. James Gregory, then professor of
mathematics at St. Andrew’s, animadverted on him rather
severely in a treatise entitled, “The great and new art of
weighing Vanity,
” &c. (See Gregory, vol. XVI. p. 278).
Besides the works above mentioned, a publication in defence
of witchcraft, entitled “Satan’s Invisible World,
” has been
ascribed to him: it bears the initials G. S. of his name; and
witchcraft was a standard article of belief in Scotland at
that time. He also translated and published under the same
initials Dickson’s “Truth’s Victory over Error,
” suppressing the author’s name (see David Dickson), for which he
is censured by Wodrow, the ecclesiastical historian and
biographer of professor Dickson, while he allows him the
merit of some good intention.
, an excellent German historian, was born in 1506, at Sleiden, a small town upon the confines
, an excellent German historian, was born in 1506, at Sleiden, a small town upon the confines of the duchy of Juliers, whence he derived his name. His origin, according to Varillas, was so obscure, that not knowing the name of his father, he adopted that of his birth-place; but this is the report of an enemy, as his father’s name was Philip, and his family not of the lower order. He went through his first studies in his own country, together with the learned John Sturmius, who was born in the same town with himself; and afterwards removed, first to Paris, and then to Orleans, where he studied the law for three years. He took the degree of licentiate in this faculty, but, having always an aversion to the bar, he continued his pursuits chiefly in polite literature. Uporf his return to Paris, he was recommended by his friend Sturmius, in 1535, to John Du Bellay, archbishop and cardinal; who conceived such an affection for him, that he settled on him a pension, and communicated to him affairs of the greatest importance; for Sleidan had a turn for business, as well as letters. He accompanied the ambassador of France to the diet of Haguenan, but returned to Paris, and remained there till it was not safe for him to stay any longer, as he was inclined to the sentiments of the reformers. In 1542 he retired to Strasburg, where he acquired the esteem and friendship of the most considerable persons, and especially of James Sturmius; by whose counsel he undertook, and by whose assistance he was enabled, to write the history of his own time. He was employed in some uegociations both to France and England; and, in one of these journeys, he met with a lady whom he married in 1546. About the same time the princes of the league of Smalcald honoured him with the title of their historiographer, and granted him a pension, and when he lost this by the dissolution of the league in 1547, the republic of Strasburgh gave him another. In 1551, he went, on the part of the republic, to the council of Trent; but, the troops of Maurice, elector of Saxony, obliging that council to break up, he returned to Strasburgh without having transacted any business. He was employed in other affairs of state, when the death of his wife, in 1555, plunged him into a deep melancholy, with such a total loss of memory, as that he did not know his own children. Some imputed this to poison; and others to natural causes. It ended, however, in his death, at Strasburg, Oct. 31, 1556, in the fiftieth year of his age.
to the grave. He was buried at Hartham. Many years afterwards, Ducket communicated to Oldmixon, the historian, an account, pretended to have been received from Smith, that
He died in 1710, in his forty-second year, at the seat
of George Ducket, esq. called Hartham, in Wiltshire;
and was buried in the parish church there. Some time
before his death, he engaged in considerable undertakings;
and raised expectations in the world, which he did not live
to gratify. Oldisworth observes, that he had seen of his
about ten sheets of Pindar, translated into English; which,
he says, exceeded any thing in that kind he could ever hope
for in our language. He had drawn out a plan for a tragedy
of Lady Jane Grey, and had written several scenes of it; a
subject afterwards nobly executed by Mr. Rowe. But his
greatest undertaking was a translation of Longinus, to which
he proposed a large addition of notes and observations of
his own, with an entire system of the art of poetry in three
books, under the titles of “thoughts, diction, and figure.
”
He intended also to make remarks upon all the ancients and
moderns, the Greek, Latin, French, Spanish, Italian, and
English poets; and to animadvert upon their several beauties and defects.
Oldisworth has represented Smith as a man abounding
with qualities both good and great; and that may perhaps
be true, in some degree, though amplified by the partiality
of friendship. He had, nevertheless, some defects in his
conduct one was an extreme carelessness in the particular of dress which singularity procured him the name of
“Captain Rag.
” The ladies, it is said, at once commended
and reproved him, by the name of the “handsome sloven.
”
It is acknowledged also, that he was much inclined to intemperance which was caused perhaps by disappointments, but led to that indolence and loss of character,
which has been frequently destructive to genius, even of a
higher order than he appears to have possessed. Dr. Johnson thus draws up his character: “As his years advanced,
he advanced in reputation; for he continued to cultivate
his mind; but he did not amend his irregularities, by which,
he gave so much offence, that, April 24, 1700, the dean
and chapter declared ' the place of Mr. Smith void, he
having been convicted of riotous misbehaviour in the house
of Mr. Cole, an apothecary; but it was referred to the
dean when and upon what occasion the sentence should be
put in execution. Thus tenderly was he treated; the governors of his college could hardly keep him, and yet wished
that he would not force them to drive him away. Some
time afterwards he assumed an appearance of decency; in
his own phrase, he whitened himself, having a desire to
obtain the censorship, an office of honour and some profit
in the college; but when the election came, the preference
was given to Mr. Foulkes, his junior; the same, I suppose,
that joined with Freind in an edition of part of Demosthenes; it not being thought proper to trust the superintendance of others to a man who took so little care of himself. From this time Smith employed his malice and his
wit against the dean, Dr. Aldrich, whom he considered as
the opponent of his claim. Of his lampoon upon him, I
once heard a single line too gross to be repeated. But
he was still a genius and a scholar, and OxtV-rd was unwilling to lose him: he was endured, with all his pranks
and his vices, two years longer; but on December 20,
1705, at the instance of all the canons, the sentence declared five years before was put in execution. The execution was, I believe, silent and tender; for one of his
friends, from whom I learned much of his life, appeared
not to know it. He was now driven to London, where he
associated himself with the whigs, whether because they
were in power, or because the tories had expelled him, or
because he was a whig by principle, may perhaps be
doubted. He was, however, caressed by tnen of great
abilities, whatever were their party, and was supported by
the liberality of those who delighted in his conversation.
There was once a design, hinted at by Oldisvvorih, to have
made him useful. One evening, as he was sitting with a
friend at a tavern, he was called down by the waiter, and,
having stayed some time below, came up thoughtful. After
a pause, said he to his friend, ‘ He that wanted me below
was Addison, whose business was to tell me that a history
of the revolution was intended, and to propose that I should
undertake it. I said, ’ What shall I do with the character
of lord Sunderland?‘ And Addison immediately returned,
’ When, Rag, were you drunk last?' and went away. Captain Rag was a name that he got at Oxford by his negligence
of dress. This story I heard from the late Mr. Clark, of
Lincoln’s Inn, to whom it was told by the friend of Smith.
Such scruples might debar him from some profitable employments; but as they could not deprive him of any real
esteem, they left him many friends; and no man was ever
better introduced to the theatre than he, who, in that
violent conflict of parties, had a prologue and epilogue
from the first wits on either side. But learning and nature
will now-and-then take different courses. His play pleased
the critics, and the critics only. It was, as Addison has
recorded, hardly heard the third night. Smith had, indeed, trusted entirely to his merit; had insured no band
of applauders, nor used any artifice to force success, and
found that naked excellence was not sufficient for its own
support. The play, however, was bought by Lintot, who
advanced the price from fifty guineas, the current rate, to
sixty; and Halifax, the general patron, accepted the dedication. Smith’s indolence kept him from writing the
dedication, till Lintot, after fruitless importunity, gave
notice that he would publish the play without it. Now,
therefore, it was written; and Halifax expected the author
with his book, and had prepared to reward him with a
place of three hundred pounds a year. Smith, by pride,
or caprice, or indolence, or bashful ness, neglected to attend him, though doubtless warned and pressed by his
friends, and at last missed his reward by not going to solicit it. In 1709, a year after the exhibition of Phaedra,
died John Philips, the friend and fellow-collegian of Smith,
who, on that occasion, wrote a poem, which justice must
place among the best elegies which our language can shew,
an elegant mixture of fondness and admiration, of dignity
and softness. There are some passages too ludicrous; but
every human performance has its faults. This elegy it was
the mode among his friends to purchase fora guinea-, and,
as his acquaintance was numerous, it was a very profitable
poem. Of his ‘ Pindar,’ mentioned by Oldisworth, I have
never otherwise heard. His ‘ Longinus’ he intended to
accompany with some illustrations, and had selected his
instances of * the false Sublime,’ from the works of Blackmore. He resolved to try again the fortune of the stage,
with the story of * Lady Jane Grey.' It is not unlikely
that his experience of the inefficacy and incredibility of
a mythological tale might determine him to choose an action from English history, at no great distance from our
own times, which was to end in a real event, produced by
the operation of known characters. Having formed his
plan, and collected materials, he declared that a few
months would complete his design; and, that he might
pursue his work with fewer avocations, he was, in June,
1710, invited by Mr. George Ducket, to his house at
Hartham in Wiltshire. Here he found such opportunities
of indulgence as did not much forward his studies, and
particularly some strong ale, too delicious to be resisted.
He ate and drank till he found himself plethoric: and
then, resolving to ease himself by evacuation, he wrote to
an apothecary in the neighbourhood a prescription of a
purge so forcible, that the apothecary thought it his duty
to delay it till he had given notice of its danger. Smith,
not pleased with the contradiction of a shopman, and
boastful of his own knowledge, treated the notice with rude
contempt, and swallowed his own medicine, which, in
July 1710, brought him to the grave. He was buried at
Hartham. Many years afterwards, Ducket communicated
to Oldmixon, the historian, an account, pretended to have
been received from Smith, that Clarendon’s History was,
in its publication, corrupted by Aldrich, Smalridge, and
Atterbury; and that Smith was employed to forge and insert the alterations. This story was published triumphantly
by Oldmixon, and may be supposed to have been eagerly
received: but its progress was soon checked for, finding
its way into the journal of Trevoux, it fell under the eye
of Atterbury, then an exile in France, who immediately
denied the charge, with this remarkable particular, that he
never in his whole life had once spoken to Smith; hrs
company being, as must be inferred, not accepted by those
who attended to their characters. The charge was afterwards very diligently refuted by Dr< Burton of Eton a
man eminent for literature, and, though not of the same
party with Aldrich and Atterbury, too studious of truth to
leave them burthened with a false charge. The testimonies which he has collected have convinced mankind that
either Smith or Ducket were guilty of wilful and malicious
falsehood. This controversy brought into view those parts
of Smith’s life which with more honour to his name might
have been concealed. Of Smith I can yet say a little more.
He was a man of such estimation among his companions,
that the casual censures or praises which he dropped in
conversation were considered, like those of Scaliger, as
worthy of preservation. He had great readiness and exactness of criticism, and by a cursory glance over a new
composition would exactly tell all its faults and beauties.
He was remarkable for the power of reading with great rapidity, and of retaining with great fidelity what he so
easily collected. He therefore always knew what the present question required; and, when his friends expressed
their wonder at his acquisitions, made in a state of apparent
negligence and drunkenness, he never discovered his hours
of reading or method of study, but involved himself in
affected silence, and fed his own vanity with their admiration and conjectures. One practice he had, which was
easily observed: if any thought or image was presented to
his mind that he could use or improve, he did not suffer
it to be lost; but, amidst the jollity of a tavern, or in the
warmth of conversation, very diligently committed to paper.
Thus it was that he had gathered two quires of hints for
his new tragedy; of which Howe, when they were put into
his hands, could make, as he says, very little use, but
which the collector considered as a valuable stock of materials. When he came to London, his way of life connected
him with the licentious and dissolute; and he affected the
airs and gaiety of a man of pleasure; but his dress was
always deficient: scholastic cloudiness still hung about
him, and his merriment was sure to produce the scorn of
his companions. With all his carelessness, and all his
vices, he was one of the murmurers at form tie; and wondered why he was suffered to be poor, when Addison was
caressed and preferred: nor would a very little have contented him; for he estimated his wants at six hundred
pounds a year. In his course of reading it was particular,
that he had diligently perused, and accurately remembered,
the old romances of knight-errantry. He had a high opinion of his own merit, and something contemptuous in his
treatment of those whom he considered as not qualified to
oppose or contradict him. He had many frailties; yet it
cannot but be supposed that he had great merit, who could
obtain to the same play a prologue from Addison, and an
epilogue from Prior; and who could have at once the patronage of Halifax, and the praise of Oldisworth.
”
, a historian, novelist, and poet of considerable reputation, was the grandson
, a historian, novelist, and poet of considerable reputation, was the grandson of sir James Smollett of Bonhill, a member of the Scotch parliament, and one of the commissioners for framing the treaty of union. He married Jane, daughter of sir Aulay Macauley, bart. of Ardincaple, by whom he had four sons and two daughters. The fourth son, Archibald, married without asking his father’s consent, Barbara Cunningham, daughter of Mr. Cunningham of Gilbertfield s in the 7ieighbourhood of Glasgow. His father, however, allowed him an income of about 300l. a-year. He unfortunately died, after the birth of two sons and a daughter, who, with their mother, were left dependent on the grandfather, and we do not find that he neglected them. Tobias, the subject of this memoir, and the youngest of those children, was born in the house of Dalquhnrn, near Renton in the parish of Cardross, in 1721, and christened Tobias George; but this latter name he does not appear to have used.
re vain to attempt to prove that virtue and taste are not directly injured by such productions. As a historian, Smollett’s reputation has certainly not been preserved. When
As an author, Dr. Smollett is universally allowed the praise of original genius displayed with an ease and variety which are rarely found. Yet this character belongs chiefly to his m.vels. In correct delineation of life and manners, and in drawing characters of the humourous class, he has few equals. But when this praise is bestowed, every critic who vu; nos what is more important than genius itself, the interest of moralsuid decency, must surely stop. It can be of no use to analyze each individual scene, incident, or character in works, which, after all, must be pronounced unfit to be read. But if the morals of the reader were in no danger, his taste can hardly escape being insulted or perverted. Smollett’s humour is of so low a cast, and his practical jokes so frequently end in what is vulgar, mean, and filthy, that it would be impossible to acquire a relish for them, without injury done to the chaster feelings, and to the just respect due to genuine wit. No novel-writer seems to take more delight in assembling images and incidents that are gross and disgusting; nor has he scrupled to introduce, with more than slight notice, those vices which are not fit even to be named. If this be a just representation of his most favourite novels, it is in vain to oppose it by pointing out passages which do credit to his genius, and jnore vain to attempt to prove that virtue and taste are not directly injured by such productions. As a historian, Smollett’s reputation has certainly not been preserved. When he published his History, something of the kind was wanted, and it was executed in a manner not unworthy of his talents. But the writings of Hume, Robertson, and Gibbon have introduced a taste for a higher species of historical composition; and, if we are not mistaken, there has been no complete edition of Smollett’s history but that which he published. Had he been allowed the proper time for revision and reflection, it cannot be doubted that he might have produced a work deserving of more lasting fame. His history, even as we have it, when we advert to the short time he took fur its completion, is a very extraordinary efTort, and instead of blaming him for occasionally following his authorities too servilely, the wonder ought to be that he found leisure to depart from them so frequently, and to assign reasons, which are not those of a superficial thinker. It is impossible, however, to quit this subject without adverting to the mode of publication which dispersed the work among a class of persons, the purchasers of sixpenny numbers, whom Smollett too easily took for the learned and discerning part of the public. This fallacious encouragement afforded fuel to his irritable temper, by inciting him, not only to the arts of puffing, by which the literary character is degraded, but to those vulgar and splenetic recriminations, of which a specimen has been given, and which must have lowered him yet more, in the opinion of the eminent characters of his day.
, an ecclesiastical historian, who flourished about the middle of the fifth century, was born
, an ecclesiastical historian, who flourished about the middle of the fifth century, was born at Constantinople, in the reign of Theodosius. He studied grammar under Helladius and Ammonius, who, having fled from Alexandria to Constantinople, had opened a school there; and, after he had finished his studies, for some time professed the law, and pleaded at the bar, whence he obtained the name of Scholasticus. In the decline of life he undertook to write the history of the church, beginning from 309, where Eusebius ends, and continued it down to 440, in seven books. This history is written, as Valesins his editor observes, with much judgment and exactness. His veracity may be presumed from his industry in consulting the original records, acts of council, bishops’ letters, and the writings of his contemporaries, of which he often gives extracts. He is also careful in setting down the succession of bishops, and the years in which every thing was transacted; and describes them by consuls and olympiads. His judgment appears in his reflections and observations, which are rational and impartial. He has been accused of being a Novatian; and it cannot be denied that he speaks well of that sect: yet, as Valesius has proved, he was not one of them, but adhered to the church, while he represents them as separated from it. What he says of these Novatians is only a proof of his candour and generous peaceable temper. His style is plain and easy; and has nothing in it of declamation, which he treats with contempt. His history has been translated into Latin, and published in Greek and Latin by Valesius, together with Eusebius and the other ecclesiastical historians; and republished, with additional notes by Reading, at London, 1720, 3 vols, folio. There is also an English edition printed at Cambridge, 1683, fol.
, an ecclesiastical historian of the fifth century, was of a good family; and born at Bethelia,
, an ecclesiastical historian of
the fifth century, was of a good family; and born at Bethelia, a town of Palestine. After being liberally educated,
he studied the law at Berytus in Phoenicia; and then going to Constantinople, became a pleader at the bar. Afterwards he applied himself to the writing of ecclesiastical
history; and first drew up a compendium of it in two books,
from the ascension of Christ to the year 323; but this is
lost. Then he continued his history in a more circumstantial and closer manner to the year 440; and this part is
extant. He has many particulars relating to him in common with the ecclesiastical historian Socrates: he lived at
the same time, was of the same profession, and undertook
a work of the same nature, and comprised it within the
same period: for his history ends, as it nearly begins, at
the same point with that of Socrates. His style is more
florid and elegant, says Jortin, in his “Ecclesiastical Remarks,
” vol. III. than that of Socrates; but he is by no
means so judicious an author. Being of a family which had
excessively admired the monks, and himself educated
among them, he contracted a superstitious turn of mind,
and great credulity for monkish miracles: he speaks of the
benefit which himself had received from the intercession of
Michael the archangel. He gives an high commendation
of a monastic life, and enlarges very much upon the actions
and manners of those recluses: and this forms the greater
part of what he has added to the “History of Socrates,
”
who, it is universally agreed, wrote first, and whom he every
where visibly copies.
His history has been translated and published by Valesius, with Eusebius and the other ecclesiastical historians;
and repnblished, with additional notes by Reading, at London, 1720, in 3 vols. folio.
, a well-known English historian, was born at Farington in Cheshire, about 1555, and brought
, a well-known English historian, was
born at Farington in Cheshire, about 1555, and brought
up to the business of a taylor, and became a freeman of
the company of Merchant-taylors in the city of London.
He had probably shewn some taste for literature, as sir
Fulk Grevile, a patron of learning, took him from his shop-board, and supported him in his study of English history
and antiquities. By such encouragement he published, in
1606, his “Theatre of Great-Britain;” which was afterwards reprinted, particularly in 1650, under this title:
“The Theatre of the Empire of Great Britaine, presenting
an exact geography of the kingdomes of England, Scotland, Ireland, and the isles adjoyning. With the shires,
hundreds, cities, and shire-townes within the kingdome of
England, divided and described by John Speed,
” folio.
Nicolson observes, that these maps “are extremely good;
and make a noble apparatus, as they were designed, to his
history: but his descriptions of the several counties are
mostly short abstracts of what Camden had said before
him.
” In 1614 he published, in folio, “The History of
Great Britain under the conquests of the Romans, Saxons,
Danes, and Normans; their originals, manners, warres,
coines, and scales, with the successions, lives, actes, and
issnes of the English monarchs, from Julius Cæsar to our
most gracious sovereigne king James;
” dedicated to
James I. He borrowed many of his materials from Camden; and was supplied with many by sir Robert Cotton,
sir Henry Spelman, and other antiquaries, with whom he
was well acquainted. There are prefixed to it commendatory poems in Latin, French, and English, by sir Henry
Spelman and others; and many writers have spoken of it
in terms of high commendation. Speed was not only an
historian, but also a divine; for, in 1616, he published a
work in 8vo, called “The Cloud of Witnesses, or the
Genealogies of Scripture, confirming the truth of holy
history and humanity of Christ.
” This was prefixed to the
new translation of the Bible in 1611, and printed for many
years in the subsequent editions, particularly of the folio
and quarto sizes, and king James I. gave him a patent for
securing the property of it to him and his heirs.
s in 4to. The countess de Viri, wife of a late Sardinian ambassador, was lineally descended from our historian. Such was the friendship between lord Cobham and colonel Speed,
His son John Speed was born at London in 1595, and
educated at Merchant-taylors’ school, whence he was
elected a scholar of St. John’s-college in Oxford, in 1612,
of which he afterwards became a fellow, and took the degree of master of arts, and bachelor and doctor of physic.
He wrote “Sjwaetoj utriusque sexus Toxtwsvrof,
” a manuscript
in Latin, dedicated to archbishop Laud, and preserved in
the library of St. John-college. This piece relates to two
skeletons, one of a man, another of a woman, made by Dr.
Speed, and given by him to that library. He wrote likewise “Stonehenge, a Pastoral,
” acted before Dr. Rich.
Baylie, and the president and fellows of St. John’s-college
in 1635. It is extant in manuscript. He died in May
1640, and was buried in the chapel of that college. He
married a daughter of Bartholomew Warner, M. D. and had
by her two sons. One of them, Samuel, was a student of
Christ-church in Oxford, and was installed canon of that
church May the 6th, 1674, and died at Godalmin in Surrey, of which he was vicar, January the 22d, 1681. The
other, John, was born at Oxford, and elected scholar of
St. John’s-coliege there about 1643, but ejected thence
by the parliament-visitors in 1648, he being then bachelor
of arts and fellow. At the restoration he was restored to
his fellowship, and in 1666 took the degree of physic, and
afterwards quitting his fellowship, he practised that faculty
at Southampton, where he was living in 1694. He wrote
“Batt upon Batt; a Poem upon the parts, patience, and
pains of Bartholomew Kempster, clerk, poet, and cutler
of Holy-rood parish in Southampton;
” and also “The
Vision, wherein is described Batt’s person and ingenuity,
with an account of the ancient and present state and glory
of Southampton.
” Both these pieces were printed at London in two sheets in fol. and afterwards in 4to. The countess de Viri, wife of a late Sardinian ambassador, was
lineally descended from our historian. Such was the friendship between lord Cobham and colonel Speed, her father,
that upon his decease, he esteemed her as his own child,
brought her up in his family, and treated her with paternal
care and tenderness. Her extraordinary merit recommended her to the viscountess Cobham, who left her the
bulk of her fortune. This lady, who was eminent for her
wit and accomplishments, is celebrated by Gray in his
“Long Story,” which indeed was written in consequence
of a visit from her.
, an historian, poet, and divine of the sixteenth century, was born in Dublii^
, an historian, poet, and divine of the sixteenth century, was born in Dublii^ probably about 1545 or 1546. His father James Stanyhurst was
a lawyer, recorder of Dublin, and speaker of the House of
Commons in several parliaments. He published; in Latin,
“Piae Orationes
” “Ad Corsagiensem Decanum Epistoke,
”
and three speeches, in English, which he delivered as speaker, at the beginning of the parliaments of the 3d and 4th
Philip and Mary, and the 2d and llth of Elizabeth. He
died Dec. 27, 1573, leaving two sons, Walter and Richard.
Of Walter our only information is, that he translated “Innocentins de contemptu Mundi.
”
g universally esteemed as an excellent scholar in the learned languages, a good divine, philosopher, historian, and poet. He kept up a constant correspondence with Usher,
Richard had some classical education at Dublin, under
Peter White, a celebrated school-master, whence he was
sent to Oxford in 1563, and admitted of University-college.
After taking one degree in arts, he left Oxford, and undertook the study of the law with diligence, first at FurnivaPsnn, and then at Lincoln’s-inn, where he resided for some
time. He then returned to Ireland, married, and turned
Roman Catholic. Removing afterwards to the continent,
he is said by A. Wood to have become famous for his learning in France, and the Low Countries. Losing his wife,
while he was abroad, he entered into orders, and was made
chaplain, at Brussels, to Albert archduke of Austria, who
was then governor of the Spanish Netherlands. At this
place he died in 1618, being universally esteemed as an
excellent scholar in the learned languages, a good divine,
philosopher, historian, and poet. He kept up a constant
correspondence with Usher, afterwards the celebrated archbishop, who was his sister’s son. They were allied, says
Dodd, “in their studies as well as blood; being both very
curious in searching after the writings of the primitive
ages. But their reading had not the same effect. The
uncle became a catholic, and took no small pains to bring
over the nephew.
” Stanyhurst published several works,
tke first of which was written when he had been only two
years at Oxford, and published about five years after. Ic
was a learned commentary on Porphyry, and raised the
greatest expectations of his powers, being mentioned with
particular praise, as the work of so young a man, by Edmund Campion, the Jesuit, then a siudent of St. John’seollege. It is entitled “Harmonia, seu catena dialectics
in Porphyrium,
” Lond. De rebus in Hibernia gestis, lib, iv.
” Antwerp, Descriptio Hiberniac,
” inserted in Holinshed’s Chronicle. 4. “De vita S. Patricii, Hiberniae Apostoli, lib. ii.
”
Antw. Hebdotnada Mariana,
” Antw.
Hebdomacla Euclmristiea,
” Douay, Brevis prsemonitio pro futura concertatione cum
Jacobo Usserio,
” Douay, The Principles
of the Catholic Religion.
” 9. “The four first books of
Virgil’s Æneis, in English Hexameters,
” the
lambical quantitie relisheth somwhat unsavorly in our
language, being, in truth, not al togeather the toothsomest
in the Latine.
” The second is in elegiac verse, or English
hexameter or pentameter. The third is a short specimen
of the asclepiac verse; thus “Lord, my dirye foes, why
do they multiply.
” The fourth is in sapphics, with a prayer
to the Trinity in the same measure. Then follow, “certayne poetical conceites,
” in Latin and English: and after
these some epitaphs. The English throughout is in Roman
measures. The preface, in which he assigns his reasons
for translating after Phaer, is a curious specimen of quaintness and pedantry. Mr. Warton, in his History of Poetry,
seems not to have attended to these reasons, such as they
are; but thus speaks of the attempt of Stanyhurst: “After
the associated labours of Phaier end Twyne, it is hard to
say what could induce Robert [Richard] Stanyhurst, a native of Dublin, to translate the four first books of the Æneid
into English hexameters, which he printed at London, in
15S3, and dedicated to his brother Peter Plunket, the
learned baron of Dusanay [Dunsanye], in Ireland. Stanyhurst was at that time living at Leyden, having left England for some time, on account of the [his] change of religion. In the choice of his measure he is more
unfortunate than his predecessors, and in other respects succeeded
worse. Thomas Naishe, in his Apology of Pierce Pennilesse, printed in 1593, observes, that * jltany hurst, the
otherwise learned, trod a foul, lumbring, boistrcus, wallowing measure, in his translation of Virgil. He had never
been praised by Gabriel Harvey for his labour, it therein
he had not been so famously absurd.' Harvey, Spenser’s
friend, was one of the chief patrons, if not the inventor of
the English hexameter here used by Stanyhurst.
” His translation, opens thus:
, secretary and historian of an embassy to China, was son of a gentleman of small fortune
, secretary and
historian of an embassy to China, was son of a gentleman
of small fortune in the county of Galway, in Ireland; and
sent early to study physic at Montpelier, where he proceeded M. D. On his return to London, he translated Dr.
Stb'rck’s treatise on hemlock, and drew up for the “Journal
Etranger
” in France a comparison between the literature
of England and France. About the year 1762, Dr. Staunton embarked for the West Indies, as we find from a farewell letter written to him by Dr. Johnson, given by Mr.
Boswell in his life of that great man. This epistle is replete
with excellent advice, and does equal credit to the writer,
and the person to whom it is addressed. Dr. Staunton resided, for several years, in the West Indies, where he acquired some addition to his fortune by the practice of physic purchased an estate in Grenada which he cultivated;
and had the good fortune to obtain the friendship of the
late lord Macartney, governor of that island, to whom he
acted as secretary, and continued in that capacity until the
capture of it by the French, when they both embarked for
Europe. Having studied the law, while in Grenada, Dr.
Staunton filled the office of attorney-general of the island.
Soon after lord Macartney’s arrival in England, he was appointed governor of Madras, and took Mr. Staunton with
him (for he seems now to have lost the appellation of doctor) as his secretary. In this capacity, Mr. Staunton had
several opportunities of displaying his abilities and intrepidity, particularly as one of the commissioners sent to treat
of peace with Tippoo Sultaun, and in the seizure of general
Stuart, who seemed to have been preparing to act by lord
Macartney as had been before done by the unfortunate
lord Pigot. The secretary was sent with a small party of
seapoys to arrest the general, which he effected with great
spirit and prudence, and without bloodshed. On his return to England, the India Company, as a reward for his
services, settled on him a pension of 500l. per annum; the
king soon after created him a baronet of Ireland, and the
University of Oxford conferred on him the degree of
LL.D. It having been resolved to send an embassy to
China, lord Macartney was selected for that purpose, and
he took his old friend and countryman along with him, who
was not only appointed secretary of legation, but had also the
title of envoy-extraordinary and minister-plenipotentiary
bestowed on him, in order to be able to supply the place of
the ambassador in case of auy unfortunate accident. The
events of this embassy, which, on the whole, proved rather
unpropitious, are well known, and were given to the public
in two quarto volumes, written by sir George. This account is rather to be considered as a proof of learning and
observation than of genius and reflection. The subject
itself was highly interesting, but it is certainly not rendered very much so in the relation. However, it is on
the whole a valuable work, and creditable to his character
for knowledge and diligence. And when we consider the
short time he took to compile these volumes^ added to the
severe illness he actually laboured under, and with which
he was attacked soon after his return, we cannot withhold
our praise and approbation. As a proof of tha esteem in
which the India Company held sir George Staunton, they
appointed his son, who accompanied him in the former
voyage, a writer to China; and had the father’s health permitted, he would, probably, again have attended lord Macartney in some honourable and confidential station to his
government at the Cape of Good Hope. The memoirs of
sir George, if drawn up at full length, would exhibit many
instances of a strong and ardent mind, labouring occasionally under difficulties, and surmounting dangers by patience, talents, and intrepidity. His conduct in the seizure
of general Stuart, demonstrated his resolution and presence
of mind; and when treating with Tippoo, he had the address to induce M. Suffrein to suspend hostilities, even
before he had received advice from his court of the treaty
of peace being signed between Great Britain and France.
, a valuable historian and antiquary, was born in London, and as is usually supposed,
, a valuable historian and antiquary, was born in London, and as is usually supposed, in St. Michael’s Cornhill, where his father and grandfather lived, and were reputed men of good credit. The time of his birth was about 1525, but we know little of the circumstances of his youth, unless that he was bred up to his father’s business, that of a taylor. It has been often remarked as a singular, but after all a trifling circumstance, that two of the most celebrated antiquaries of the sixteenth century, Stow and Speed, were both bred to that occupation.
, a celebrated Greek geographer, philosopher, and historian, was born at Amasia, and was descended from a family settled
, a celebrated Greek geographer, philosopher, and historian, was born at Amasia, and was descended from a family settled at Gnossus in Crete. He was the disciple of Xenarchus, a Peripatetic philosopher, was well read in the history and tenets of the Grecian sects, but at length attached himself to the Stoics, and followed their dogmas. He contracted a strict friendship with Cornelius Gallus, governor of Egypt; and travelled into several countries, to observe the situation of places, and the customs of nations.
Although his “Prolusiones” is by far his best work, he is yet perhaps better known as a historian. His “Historia de Bello Belgico” was published at Rome in two
Although his “Prolusiones
” is by far his best work, he is
yet perhaps better known as a historian. His “Historia
de Bello Belgico
” was published at Rome in two parts
or decades, in a
certain degree, it deserves; but the style is florid and
fuse, and too obviously an affected imitation of that of
Livy. His partiality to the Spanish cause is another objection, of which his readers must be warned. This history appeared at the same time wit!) that o(' Beniivoglio, who says that Strada’s work is fitter for a college than a court, and that he did not understand war and politics. It was also attacked by Scioppius in a very rude manner, in a book entitled
” Infamia Faimani." Strada, or Stradanus (John), a Flemish painter,
born at Bruges in 1536, was famous in several branches of
his art. He painted history, battles, chaces, and animals,
all with great success. His family was illustrious, but his
inclinations led him to the study of painting; and to complete his knowledge of the art he went to Italy. The exquisite remains of antiquity, with the works of Raphael,
and other great painters, were the models which enabled
him to attain considerable eminence in his profession.
Florence was the place where he chose to fix his residence,
though invited to several others; and there the best of his
works remain. He died there in 1604, at the age of sixtyeight. His taste is esteemed good, though not entirely
divested of the Flemish style, after all his diligent study
in Italy. The tone of his colouring, however, is pleasing,
and his works maintain an honourable place with those of
Salviati, Volterra, and others.
ng to the high esteem in which he was held by the heads of the church, for his eminent services as a historian. Soon after he came to reside at Low-Leyton, he got access to
, the most valuable contributor to ecclesiastical history and biography that ever appeared in
this country, is said to have been of German extraction.
His father John Strype, or Van Stryp, was a native of
Brabant, and fled to England for the sake of religion. He
was a merchant and silk-throwster. His son is said to have
been born at Stepney, Nov. 1, 1643, but he calls himself
a native of London, and his baptism does not occur in the
register of Stepney, though the names of some of his
brothers and sisters are there entered, and his father lies
buried in the church-yard. The reason why he calls himself a Londoner probably was, that he was born in Strype’s
yard, formerly in Stepney, but afterwards in the parish of
Christ-church, Spitalfields. After being educated in St.
Paul’s school for six years, he was matriculated of Jesuscollege, Cambridge, July 5, 1662, whence he removed to
Catherine-hall, where he took his degree of A. B. in 1665,
and that of M. A. in 1669, His first preferment was the
donative, or perpetual curacy of Theydon-Boys in the
county of Essex, conferred upon him July 14, 1669; but
he quitted it a few months after, on being appointed minister of Low-Leyton in the same county, which he retained
all his life. The circumstances attending this preferment
were rather singular, Although he enjoyed it above sixtyeight years, and administered the sacrament on Christmasday, for sixty-six years successively, yet he was never
instituted nor inducted. The reason assigned for this irregularity is, that the living being small, the patrons allowed
the parish to choose a minister. Accordingly Mr. Strype
having, on the vacancy which occurred in 1669, preached
before them, he was duly elected to be their curate and
lecturer, and they entered into a subscription-bond for his
maintenance, promising to pay the sums annexed to their
names, “provided he continues the usual custom of his
predecessor in preaching twice every Sunday.
” The subscriptions in all amounted to 69l. Many years after this,
viz in 1674, he was licensed by Dr. Henchman, then
bishop of London, to preach and expound the word of
God in the parish church of Low-Leyton, and to perform
the full office of priest and curate there, during the vacancy of the vicarage, which license, and no other instrument, he used to exhibit at the visitations, as late as 1720.
In 1677, as he seemed secure of his possession, he rebuilt the vicarage, with 140l. of his own money, aided by
contributions from his parishioners, and expended considerable sums also in the repairs of the chancel. After his
death, his executors derived some advantage from the
manner in which he held this living; for, being sued by his
successor for dilapidations, only 40l. could be recovered,
as the plea was, that he had never been instituted nor inducted, and that the parsonage- house was built and ought
to be repaired by the parish. It is probable that the quiet
possession he so long enjoyed was owing to the high esteem
in which he was held by the heads of the church, for his
eminent services as a historian.
Soon after he came to reside at Low-Leyton, he got
access to the valuable manuscripts of sir Michael Hickes,
knt. once of Ruckholt’s in this parish, and secretary to
William lord Burleigh, and began from them some of
those collections which he afterwards published. It appears, however, that he extended his inquiries much farther, and procured access to every repository where records
of any kind were kept; made numerous and indeed voluminous transcripts, and employed many years in comparing, collating, and verifying facts, before he published
any thing. At the same time he carried on an extensive
correspondence with archbishop Wake, and the bishops Atterbury, Burnet, Nicolson, and other eminent clergymen or
laymen, who had a taste for the same researches as himself.
Towards his latter days, he had the sinecure of Terring, in
Sussex, given him by archbishop Tenison, and was lecturer of Hackney till 1724, when he resigned that lecture.
When he became old and infirm, he resided at Hackney
with Mr. Harris an apothecary, who had married his granddaughter, and there he died Dec. 11, 1737, at the very
advanced age of ninety-four , one instance at least, that
the most indefatigable literary labour is not inconsistent
with health.
, a Scottish historian, was born at Edinburgh, in 1742. His father, Mr. George Stuart,
, a Scottish historian, was born at
Edinburgh, in 1742. His father, Mr. George Stuart, who
died in 17>3, was professor of humanity in that university,
and a man of considerable eminence for classical taste and
literature. Gilbert Stuart, having made the usual prepa'
rations in the grammar-school and the university, applied
himself to the study of jurisprudence. For thr-.t profession,
however, he is said to have been disqualified by indolence:
and he early began to indulge his passion for general literature, and boundless dissipation. Yt t his youth was not
wasted altogether in idleness, for before he had completed
his twenty-second year, he published “An Historical Dissertation concerning the Antiquity of the British Constitution,
” which had so much merit as to obtain for him the
degree of doctor of laws, from the university of Edinburgh.
After an interval of some years, in which he could not have
neglected his studies, he produced, 2. “A View of Society
in Europe, in its progress from rudeness to refinement; or
inquiries concerning the history of laws, government, and
manners.
” This is a valuable work, and proves that he
had meditated with much attention on the most important
monuments of the middle ages. About the time when the
first edition of this book appeared, Dr. Stuart applied for
the professorship of public law in the university of Edinburgh; but being disappointed, removed soon after to
London. He there became from 1768 to 1773, one of the
writers of the Monthly Review. He then returned to
Edinburgh, where he began a magazine and review, called
from the name of that city, the first number of which appeared in October 1773. In this he was assisted by William Smellie (See Smellie); but owing to the virulent
spirit displayed by the writers, it was obliged to be discontinued in 1776. In 1778 his View of Society' was republished. In 1782 he again visited London, and engaged in
the Political Herald, and the English Review; but being
attacked by two formidable disorders, the jaundice and the
dropsy, he returned by sea to his native country, where
he died, in his father’s house, August 13, 1786.
, an ancient historian and biographer, was born at Rome about the beginning of the
, an
ancient historian and biographer, was born at Rome about
the beginning of the reign of Vespasian, perhaps in the
year 70, as may be collected from his own words in the
life of Nero. His father Suetonius Lenis was tribune of a
legion, in the service of the emperor Otho, against Vitellius. He passed his first years probably at Romej and
when grown up, applied himself to the bar. He appears
to have very early acquired the friendship of the younger
Pliny, who procured for him the office of tribune and
aiteru lkl.N, upon his resignation, transferred it to his kinsman, at Sdetonius’s request. He ohtained also In* him
th “Jus trimn liberon.m;
” a favour seldom granted, and
which Pliny could not have obtained, if, besides hU great
interest at court, he had not very earnestly solicited the
emperor Trajan, in a letter written from Bnhynia, of
which he was at that time governor. In this letter he describes Suetonius as a man of gr<at integrity, honour, a. d
learning, whose manners and studies were the same with
his own; and he adds, “the better I have known him, the
more I have loved him. He has been rather unhappy in
his marriage; and the privileges of those who have three
children are upon several accounts necessary. He begs
through me, therefore, that your bounty will supply what
his ill fortune has denied him. I know, sir, the high value
of the favour I ask but I am asking a sovereign whose
indulgence to all my wishes I have long experienced. How
desirous I am to obtain it, you will easily conclude, from
my applying to you at this distance; which I should not
have done, if it had been a mutter of indifference to me.
”
Suetonius advanced himself to be afterwards secretary to
the emperor Adrian; but he lost that place, for not paying
a due respect to the empress. Spartian, speaking of him
and others involved in the same blame, uses the words
“quod apud Sabinam uxorem, injussu ejus, familiarius se
tune egerant, quam reverentia domus aulicae postulabat.
”
On the nature of this disrespect, or “too great familiarity,
”
critics are not agreed. Their offence probably rose only
from the capricious temper of the emperor, who, we are
told, treated her with great contempt himself for some
reason, and permitted others also to do so under certain
limitations; which limitations Suetonius and others might
ignorantly transgress.
, Nero, and Domitian, which Erasmus is willing to excuse on the score of his care and fidelity as an historian; but certainly such descriptions can* not be defended, because
We know nothing more of Suetonius, nor of the time of
his death. He wrote many books, none of which are come
down to us, except his Lives of the first twelve emperors,
and part of his treatise concerning the illustrious grammarians and rhetoricians; for he applied himself much to
the study of grammar and rhetoric, and many are of opinion that he was a teacher. Suidas ascribes to him several works of the grammatical kind; and observes, that he
wrote a book respecting the Grecian games, two upon the
shows of the Romans, two upon the laws and customs of
Home, one upon the life of Cicero, or upon his books
“De Republica,
” and “A catalogue of the illustrious men
of Rome.
” Many other pieces of his are cited by various
authors; and the lives of Terence, Horace, Juvenal, Persius, and Lucan, have usually gone under his name, and
been printed at the end of his works, though it is not absolutely certain that they are his. His *' History of the
Emperors“is a work of great value, as illustrative of the
manners of the times, and the particular character of these
sovereigns, but is not written strictly either in the historical or biographical form. It consists of a continued series
of curious facts, related succinctly, without digressions or
reflections. There is in it a character of sincerity, which
shews very plainly, that the author feared and hoped for
nothing, and that his pen was not directed by hatred or
flattery.* Suetonius, says Politian,
” has given us evident
proofs of his diligence, veracity, and freedom. There is
no room for any suspicion of partiality in his books; nothing is advanced out of favour, or suppressed out of fear:
the facts themselves have engrossed his whole attention,
and he has consulted truth in the first place.“Politian is
also of opinion, that he forbore writing the lives of Nerva,
Trajan, and Adrian, the emperors of his time, because he
would not be tempted to disregard the love of truth. Some
have blamed him for his descriptions of the horrid debaucheries of Tiberius, Caligula, Nero, and Domitian, which
Erasmus is willing to excuse on the score of his care and
fidelity as an historian; but certainly such descriptions can*
not be defended, because they cannot be necessary even to
fidelity itself. A good English translation was published in
1796 by Dr. Alexander Thomson, in which he softened or
suppressed Suetonius’s indelicacies, without any injury to
the general effect of the narrative. Suetonius speaks disrespectfully of the Christians, calling them
” genus hominum superstitionis novae & maleficae, a sort of people of a
new and mischievous superstition:" but Lardner has selected from him some important corroborations of the facts
of gospel history.
, a Spanish historian, was born at Saragossa, Dec. 4, 1512, of an ancient family.
, a Spanish historian,
was born at Saragossa, Dec. 4, 1512, of an ancient family.
He made great progress in Greek and Latin, under a very
able master, at Alcala de Henares; but his particular predilection was for the study of history. He afterwards
became secretary to the inquisition, but employed his time
chiefly in writing numerous works which procured him a
very high reputation, not only with his countrymen, butiii
the opinion of the learned of other nations. He died Oct.
31, 1580, in the sixty-eighth year of his age. His principal historical work is his “A Males de la corona del Reyno
de Aragon,
” 7 vols. fol. first printed at Saragossa in 1562,
but the third edition of 1610 is accounted the most complete. He published also in Latin “Indices rerum ab
Aragonice regibus gestarum, libri tres,
” Sarag. Gaufredi Monachi de acquisitione regni
Siciliac, Calabria?, &c. per Robertum Guiscardum et fratres
Nortmannos principes,
” and Celesinus “De Robert! Sicilin; regis rebus gestis, libri quatuor,
” both before unpublished. He was the editor also of Antoninus 9 s Itinerary,
and his notes were adopted by Dr. Thomas Gale in his
edition. He left many other learned works in ms. particularly commentaries on Julius Caesar, and on Claudian.
, a Flemish historian and antiquary, was born at Antwerp in 1567. We have no particulars
, a Flemish historian and antiquary, was born at Antwerp in 1567. We
have no particulars of his literary progress, but a general
character that he was a man of science and learning, of an
amiable disposition, and occasionally a wit, a poet, and a
man of business. He devoted much of his time to study,
and published a great many works which brought him considerable reputation. Saxius says he does not know whother he married or lived single, nor, he acids, “is it of
much importance. This, I know, that he does not speak
very respectfully of the ladies and their company. He
says of Janus Dousa, the father, that when he returned
home, he married that necessary evil, a icife
” Whatever
reason Swert had for using this expression, Saxius might
have known from Valerius Andreas, or from Foppen, that
he married Susanna Van Erp, and had a family of six
children. He died at Antwerp in 1629, aged sixty- two.
sion of Vespasian. The reign of Titus is totally lost, and Domitian has escaped the vengeance of the historian’s pen.
The friendship that subsisted between Tacitus and the younger Pliny, and which is well known, was founded on the consonance of their studies and their virtues. When Pliny says that a good and virtuous prince can never be sincerely loved, unless we shew our detestation of the tyrants that preceded him, we may be sure that Tacitus was of the same opinion. They were both convinced that a striking picture of former tyranny ought to be placed in contrast to the felicity of the times that succeeded. Pliny acted up to his own idea in the panegyric of Trajan, where we find a vein of satire on Domitian running through the whole piece. It appears in his letters, that he had some thoughts of writing history on the same principle, but had not resolution to undertake that arduous task. Tacitus had more vigour of mind: he thought more intensely, and with deeper penetration, than his friend. We find that he had formed, at an early period, the plan of his history, and resolved to execute it, in order to shew the horrors of slavery, and the debasement of the Roman people through the whole of Domitian’s reign. From the year of Rome 853, when along with Pliny, he pleaded in the famous cause of Priscus, the proconsul of Africa, and in behalf of those who had been oppressed by him, Tacitus appears to have dedicated himself altogether to his history. At what time it was published is uncertain, but it was in some period of the reign of Trajan, who died in the year of Rome 870, A. D. 117. In this work he began from the accession of Galba, and ended with the death of Domitian, i. e. from the year of Rome 82-2 to 849, a period of twenty-seven years. Vossius says that the whole work consisted of no less than thirty books; but, to the great loss of the literary world, we have only four books, and the beginning of the fifth. In what remains, we have little after the accession of Vespasian. The reign of Titus is totally lost, and Domitian has escaped the vengeance of the historian’s pen.
y find that M. Claudius Tacitus, who was created emperor in A. D. 275, deduced his pedigree from our historian; and Vopiscus telts us that he ordered the image of Tacitus,
Tacitus intended, if his life and health continued, to review the reign of Augustus, in order to detect the arts by which the old constitution was overturned to make way for the government of a single ruler. This, in the hands of such a writer, would have been a curious portion of history; but it is probable he did not live to carry his design into execution. The time of his death is not mentioned by any ancient author. It seems, however, highly probable that he died in the reign of Trajan, and we may reasonably conclude that he survived his friend PJiny. The commentators assume it as a certain fact, that he must have left issue, because they find that M. Claudius Tacitus, who was created emperor in A. D. 275, deduced his pedigree from our historian; and Vopiscus telts us that he ordered the image of Tacitus, and a complete collection of his works, to be placed in the public archives, with a special direction that twelve copies should be made every year, at the public expence. But when the mutilated state, in which our author has come down to posterity is considered, there is reason to believe that the orders of this prince, who reigned only six months, were never executed.
Without entering on the merits of Tacitus as a historian, which have been the subject of very extensive discussion, we
Without entering on the merits of Tacitus as a historian,
which have been the subject of very extensive discussion,
we may refer to Mr. Murphy’s comprehensive view of his
life and genius. It is universally acknowledged that his
works are among the most precious remains of antiquity,
and it is not much less universally acknowledged that he
exhibits the defects as well as excellencies of the historian,
The first edition of his works was published at Venice by
John de Spira in 1468, containing the last six books of the
“Annals,
” four books of the “History,
” with part of the
fifth, the treatise on the “Manners of the Germans,
” and
the “Dialogue concerning Oratory,*' which we see has
always been printed with Tacitus’ s works, although many
critics have doubted whether it was his. Another edition
was published in a year or two after by Franciscus Puteolanus, more correct and elegant than the former, with the
addition of the life of Agricola. The first six books of the
” Annals" had not then been found, but diligent search
being made in all parts of Europe, they were at length discovered in the monastery of Corby in Westphalia. Leo X.
purchased this treasure, and, under his patronage, Beroaldus, in 1515, gave the world a complete edition of the.
whole, the manuscript having been deposited in the Florentine library. The principal subsequent editions were
those of Froben, 1519, 1533, and 1544, fol.; several by
Lipsius, 1574 1619; by Freinsheim, 1638 and 1664, 8vo;
Elzivir, 1634, 1640, 2 vols. 12mo; the Variorum, 1672 and
1685, 2 vols. 8vo; by Rickius, 1687, 2 vols. 12mo; by
Gronovius, 1721, 2 vols. 4to by Mrs. Grierson of Dublin,
1730, 3 vols. 8vo; by Ernest, 1752, 1772,2 vols. 8vo; by
Lallemand, 1760, 3 vols. 12mo; by Brotier, 1771, 4 vols.
4to; by Crellius, 1779—02, 4 vols. 8vo; by Homer, 1790,
4 vols. 8vo; at Edinburgh, 1796, 4 vols. 4to and 8vo
and by Oberlin, 1801, 2 vols. 8vo. Broiler’s, undoubtedly
the best edition, is the model of all that followed. There
have been translations of Tacitus in most European languages. His whole works have been published in English,
with large political discourses annexed, by Mr. Gordon.
The style of Gordon is, however, so vicious and affected,
that it is impossible to read him with patience; and Tacitus has lately found a much more elegant and judicious
translator in Mr. Murphy, whose work in 4 vols. 4to, was
published in 1793, and has met with very general approbation. There have been in all, four English translations
of Tacitus; that of Greenway and sir Henry Saville in the
reign of Elizabeth that performed by Dry den and others;
the translation by Gordon; and that of Murphy.
, a modern historian, in 1720 began to collect materials for a complete history of
, a modern historian, in 1720 began to collect materials for a complete history of Russia and continued his researches without intermission for the space of thirty years. This indefatigable compiler finished his account to the reign of Feodor Ivanovitch; and was bringing it down to this century, when death put a period to his labours. Part of this great work was consumed in a fire; and the remainder was published after the author’s death by Mr. Muller. It consists of three large volumes in quarto. The first contains several curious dissertations relative to the antiquity of the Sclavonian nation; while the second and third comprise the history of the Russian empire, from its earliest origin to 1237.
lliam Temple is accurate and comprehensive. “Of all the considerable writers of this age,” says that historian, “Sir William Temple is almost the only one that kept himself
Hume’s character of sir William Temple is accurate and
comprehensive. “Of all the considerable writers of this
age,
” says that historian, “Sir William Temple is almost
the only one that kept himself altogether unpolluted by
that inundation of vice and licentiousness which overwhelmed the nation. The style of this author, though extremely negligent, and even infected with foreign idioms,
is agreeable and interesting. That mixture of vanity which
appears in his works, is rather a recommendation to them.
By means of it, we enter into acquaintance with the character of the author, full of honour and humanity and
fancy that we are engaged, not in the perusal of a book,
but in conversation with a companion.
”
hurch from which he departed, with unbecoming contempt. Error, however* says a modern ecclesiastical historian, is very inconstant; for Tertullian afterwards left the Montanists,
, the iirst Latin writer of the primitive church whose writings are come clown to us, was an African, and born at Carthage in the second century. His father was a centurion in* the troops which served under the proconsul of Africa. Tcrtullian was at first an heathen, and a man, as he himself owns in various parts of his works, of loose manners; but afterwards embraced the Christian religion, though it is not known when, or upon what occasion. He flourished chiefly under the reigns of the emperor Severus and Caracalla, from about the year 194 to 216 and it is probable that he lived several years, since Jerome mentions a report of his having attained to a decrepit old age. There is no passage in his writings whence it can be concluded that he was a priest; but Jerome affirms it so positively, that it cannot be doubted. He had great abilities and learning, which he employed vigorously in the cause of Christianity, and against heathens and heretics; but towards the latter part of his life quitted the church to follow the Montanists, which is the reason why his name has not been transmitted to us with the title of saint. The cause of his separation is not certainly known. Baronius has attributed it to jealousy, because Victor was preferred before him to the see of Rome; Pamelius hints at his disappointment, because he could not get the bishopric of Carthage; and Jerome says, that the envy which the Roman clergy bore him, and the outrageous manner with which they treated him, exasperated him against the church, and provoked him to quit it. What perhaps had as much weight as any of these reasons was the extraordinary austerity, which the sect of Montanus affected, which suited his monastic turn of mind. Whatever the cause, he not only joined them, but wrote in their defence, and treated the church from which he departed, with unbecoming contempt. Error, however* says a modern ecclesiastical historian, is very inconstant; for Tertullian afterwards left the Montanists, or nearly so, and formed a sect of his own, called Tertullianists, who continued in Africa till Augustine’s time, by whose labours their existence, as;i distinct body, was brought to a close. The character of Tertullian is very strongly delineated by himself in his own writings if there bad been any thing peculiarly Christian, which he had learned from the Montanists, his works must have shown it; but the only change discoverable is, that he increased in his austerities. He appears to have been married, and lived all his life, without separating from his wife upon his commencing priest, if, indeed, he did not marry her after. The time of his death is no where mentioned.
one of the greatest men whom that country ever produced. “The mind of Themistocles,” says the great historian Thucydides, “seems to have displayed the utmost force of human
The power of Themistocles in Athens was confirmed for
a time by this groat exploit, and he earnestly pressed the
rebuilding of the city, and the construction of new and
more complete fortifications. The latter step gave alarm
to the jealousy of Sparta; but Themistocles, employing all
his prudence to deceive the Lacedaemonians, and even
going to Sparta in person as an ambassador, contrived to
gain so much time, that the walls were nearly completed
before the negociation was settled. With equal vigilance,
patriotism, and sagacity, he superintended the improvement of the Athenian port named Piraeus. After these,
and other services to his country, Themistocles met with
the return almost invariable in democratic governments,
ingratitude. He was accused of aggrandizing his own
power and wealth in a naval expedition, was finally implicated in the accusations proved against Pausanias in Sparta,
and banished. He sought first the patronage of Admetus,
king of the Molossi, and afterwards that of the king of
Persia, by whom he was magnificently supported to his
death, which happened about 465 years before our sera.
His bones, in pursuance of his dying request, were carried
into Attica, and privately buried there. The blemishes in
the character and conduct, attributed to this great man,
cannot, perhaps, with strict historical fidelity, be completely denied; yet much allowance must be made for that
party spirit, by which political worth so frequently suffered in Greece. In abilities, and in his actions, he was
certainly one of the greatest men whom that country ever
produced. “The mind of Themistocles,
” says the great
historian Thucydides, “seems to have displayed the utmost force of human nature; for the evident superiority
of his capacity to that of all other men was truly wonderful.
His penetration was such, that from the scantiest information, and with the most instantaneous thought, he formed
the most accurate judgment of the past, and gained the
clearest insight into the future. He had a discernment
that could develope the advantageous and the pernicious
in measures proposed, however involved in perplexity and
obscurity; and he had, no less remarkably, the faculty of
explaining things clearly to others, than that of judging
clearly himself, Such, in short, were the powers of his
genius, and the readiness of hU judgment, that he
was, beyond all men, capable of directing all things, on
every occasion.
” He died, according to Plutarch, in his
sixty-fifth year; leaving a large progeny, to whom the
bounty of the Persian monarch was continued. Many of
them were, however, restored to their country. It is very
commonly said, and Plutarch favours the notion, that he
died by poison voluntarily taken: but Thucydides does hot
seem to credit the opinion, but rather to consider his death
as natural.
qualities; and it may be said, that he has equally deserved the name of a good interpreter, divine, historian, writer in controversy, apologist for religion, and author of
Great encomiums have been bestowed upon this writer,
particularly by Dupin, who asserts that “Of all the fathers
who have composed works of different kinds, Theodoret is
one of those who has succeeded the very best in every
kind. Some have been excellent writers in matters of
controversy, but bad interpreters of Scripture; others have
been good historians, but bad divines; some have had
good success in morality, who have had no skill in doctrinal
points; those who have applied themselves to confute Paganism by their own principles and authors, have usually
Lad little knowledge in the mysteries of our religion; and
lastly, it is very rare for those. who have addicted themselves to works of piety to be good critics. Theodoret had
all these qualities; and it may be said, that he has equally
deserved the name of a good interpreter, divine, historian,
writer in controversy, apologist for religion, and author of
works of piety. But he hath principally excelled in his
compositions on Holy Scripture, and has outdone almost
all other commentators, according to the judgment of the
learned Phqtius. His style, says that able critic, is veryproper for a commentary; for he explains, in just and significant terms, whatsoever is obscure and difficult in the
text, and render* the mind more fit to read and understand
it by the elegance of his style. He never wearies his
reader with long digressions, but on the contrary labours
to instruct him clearly, neatly, and methodically, in every
thing that seems hard. He never departs from the purity
and elegance of the Attic dialect, unless when he is obliged
to speak of abstruse matters, to which the ears are not accustomed: for it is certain that he passes over nothing that
needs explication; and it is almost impossible to find any
interpreter who unfolds all manner of difficulties better,
and teaves fewer things obscure. We may find many
others who write elegantly and explain clearly, but we
shall find few who have forgotten nothing which needed
illustration, without being too diffuse, and without running
out into digressions, at least such as are not absolutely necessary to clear the matter in hand. Yet this is what
Theodoret has observed throughout his commentaries, in.
which he hath opened the text admirably well by his accurate inquiries.
” Other writers, however, have not expressed so high an opinion of Theodoret. Beausobre, in
his History of the Manichees, says that “Theodoret is, in
my opinion, one of the most valuable of the fathers. He
is learned; he reasons well, especially in his dialogues
against the Greek heresies of his times: he is a good literal interpreter of the Scriptures. I cannot help admiring
his prudence and moderation, when I consider that he
ended his Ecclesiastical History at the time when the Nestorian quarrels, in which he was so deeply interested, began. But, I fear, his zeal against heretics imposed upon
him almost as much, as his admiration for the heroes of the
ascetic life, with whom he was charmed. Monasteries
have undoubtedly sent forth great men into the world, but
these disciples of the monks contracted there in their youth
a superstitious disposition, which is hardly ever thrown off;
and the weak side of this able man seems to have been an
excessive credulity.
” In truth, Theodoret surpasses all
other writers in admiration of monastic institutions, and is
credulous beyond measure in subjects of that nature. Yet
he was undoubtedly one of the most learned and best men
in the Eastern church. His pacific conduct displeased the
bigots, during the Nestorian and Eutychian controversies,
and because he inclined to healing methods, he was condemned at one of the synods, and was not without difficulty
reinstated. “His works,
” says Milner, “are large, on a
variety of subjects; but they speak not for him equally
with his life; and it will be sufficient to say, that his theology, with a stronger mixture of superstitioiij was of the
same kind as that of Chrysostom. But his spirit was humble,
heavenly, charitable; and he seems to have walked in the
iaith, hope, and love of the gospel, a shining ornament in
a dark age and country.
”
, an historian who may be ranked among those to whom Russia is chiefly indebted
, an historian who may
be ranked among those to whom Russia is chiefly indebted
for the introduction of polite literature, was the son of a
burgher of Kiof; born in that city, June 9, 1681, and
baptised by the name of Elisha. Under his uncle, Theophanes, rector of the seminary in the Bratskoi convent at
Kiof, he commenced his studies, and was well grounded
in the rudiments of the Greek, Latin, and Hebrew tongues.
Though his uncle died in 1692, he completed his education in that seminary; and in 1698, in the eighteenth year
of his age, he travelled into Italy. He resided three years
at Rome, where, beside a competent knowledge of Italian,
he acquired a taste for the fine arts, and improved himself
in philosophy and divinity. Upon his return to Kiof he
read lectures on the Latin and Sclavonian art of poetry in
the same seminary in which he had been educated: and,
with the monastic habit, assumed the name of Theophanes.
Before he had attained the twenty-fifth year of his age he
was appointed praefect, the second office in the seminary,
and professor of philosophy. In 1706 he distinguished
himself hy speaking a Lain oration before Peter the Great;
and still more by a sermon, which in 1701) he preached
before the same monarch after the battle of Pultawa. Having once attracted the notice, he soon acquired the protection of Peter, who was so captivated with his great talents, superior learning, and polite address, as to select
him for a companion in the ensuing campaign against the
Turks; a sure prelude to his future advancement. In 1711
Theophanes was nominated abbot of Bratskoi, rector of
the seminary, and professor of divinity. His censures
against the ignorance and indolence of the Russian clergy,
and his endeavours to promote a taste for polite literature
among his brethren, rendered him a fit instrument in the
hands of Peter for the reformation of the church, and the
final abolition of the patriarchal dignity. He was placed
at the head of the synod, of which ecclesiastical establish*
merit he himself drew the plan; was created bishop of
Plescof; and, in 1720, archbishop of the same diocese;
soon after the accession of Catharine he was consecrated
archbishop of Novogorod, and metropolitan of all Russia;
and died in 1736. Beside various sermons and theological
disquisitions, he wrote a treatise on rhetoric, and on the
rules for Latin and Sclavonian poetry; he composed verses
in the Latin language; and was author of a “Life of Peter
the Great,
” which unfortunately terminates with the battle
of Pultawa. in this performance the prelate has, notwithstanding his natural partiality to his benefactor, avoided
those scurrilous abuses of the contrary party, which frequently disgrace the best histories; and has been particularly candid in his account of Sophia. Peter, from a
well-grounded experierce, had formed such a good opinion of the talents of Theophanes, as to employ him in
composing the decrees which concerned theological questions, and even many that related to civil atf'airs. Theophanes may be said not only to have cultivated the sciences,
and to have promoted them during his life, but likewise to
have left a legacy to his cou itrymen, for their further progress after hi-, decease, by maintaining in his episcopal
palace fifty hoys, who>e education he superintended under his an>piccs they were instructed in foreign languages,
and in various branches of polite knowledge, which had
teen hitherto censured by many as profane acquisitions
thus transmitting the rays of learning to illuminate future
ages and a distant posterity.
, an illustrious historian of France, was son of a first president of the parliament of
, an illustrious historian of France, was son of a first president of the parliament of Paris, and born there the 9th of October, 1553. He was so exceedingly weak and infirm in his infancy, that there was no hope of rearing him for the first five years of his life; and to this it is owing, that abundantly more care was taken to preserve his body, than to cultivate his mind, although he then appeared to be a boy of uncommon talents; for he was not addicted to the amusements of childhood, but aimed at something higher, and would divert himself with drawing and painting, for which he had always a very good taste. When he was ten years old, he was put to books, and placed in the college of Bourgogne; but in less than a year he was attacked with a violent fever, and taken home. The physicians gave him over for many months; but he recovered, and applied again to books, though with great moderation; for hie constitution was not able to* undergo the least fatigue. He was afterwards placed under the care of private tutors \ and regard seems to have been had, in the choice of them, to the weakness of his nature, as well as to the improvement of his understanding; for they were physicians, and successively four of them. Then he studied under the famous Dionysius Lambinus, and Joannes Pellerinus, who was professor of the Greek language in the College-royal.
ath, just as he wrote it. It was long, however, before this could be effected. Thuanus was an honest historian, and with respect to things and persons boldly delivered the
Part of this History was first printed at Paris in 1604,
with a dedication to Henry IV. which is thought to be as
masterly a composition in its kind, as the dedication of
Casaubon’s Polybius to the same monarch, and that of the
“Instittitiones Christianae
” of Calvin to Francis I. The
publication of the history, in separate parts, was alterwards
continued by the author, who, however, does not seem to
have published it all in his life-time; or any part of it,
except the volume just mentioned, in a manner conformable to his original copy, which, therefore, he deposited in
the hands of a friend, that it might be printed after his
death, just as he wrote it. It was long, however, before
this could be effected. Thuanus was an honest historian,
and with respect to things and persons boldly delivered the
truth. There would of course be many exceptionable passages in his work, many that would highly offend individuals both in church and state; and this was the reason
why, though printed frequently and in different countries,
it never came out free from castrations, and agreeable to
the author’s original copy, till 1733. It was then handsomely printed at London, and published under the direction, and chiefly at the expence, of the excellent Dr. Mead,
in seven volumes folio; to which are prefixed four Latin
letters, inscribed to that celebrated patron of letters, and
giving an account of the various changes and chances this
History has undergone; of the different editions; what
each of them contain, and how they vary; and by what
materials and assistances the editors have at length been
enabled to give a very complete and perfect copy of it.
, a natural historian, was born May 31, 1676, at Keiberg, in the parish of Kirkoswald
, a natural historian, was born May 31, 1676, at Keiberg, in the parish of Kirkoswald in Cumberland. In 1698 he commenced master of arts in the university of Glasgow, and soon after settled at Low Huddlesceugh, near the place of his birth, in the character of a dissenting minister. In this situation he made a considerable progress in the study of physic, and contracted a love for plants; insomuch, that in 1712, he took a doctor’s degree in medicine at Edinburgh and the next spring, having- a narrow income, and a large family, he removed to Dublin and settled there in both characters, as a divine and a physician. His family, consisting of a wife and three sons, and as many daughters, did not follow till more than a year had elapsed; when, finding himself likely to succeed, he sent for them over. His practice <in medicine soon increased, so far as to enable him to drop his other character entirely, and devote himself wholly to physic; but he died after a short sickness of a violent fever, at hia house in Mark Valley, Frances-street, April 28, 1728, and was buried in the new burial ground belonging to St. Patrick’s, near Cavan Street, to which place his obsequies were attended by a set of children educated by a society t)f gentlemen. He was much regretted by the poor, to whom he had been both as a man, and as a physician, a kind benefactor.
, an ancient Greek historian, was a citizen of Athens, and born in the second year of the
, an ancient Greek historian, was a citizen of Athens, and born in the second year of the 77th olympiad, or before Christ 469. He was of royal extraction; for all writers relate, that his father Olorus, or Orolus, was descended from Olorus, king of Thrace. He was educated in philosophy by Anaxagoras, and in eloquence by Antiphon. Suidas and Photius relate a circumstance, which shews, that he had from his youth a noble emulation, for when Herodotus recited his History in public, a practice in use then and many ages after, it drew tears from him; which Herodotus himself noticing, congratulated his father on having a son who shewed so wonderful an affection to the muses. Herodotus was then twenty-nine years of age; Thucydides about sixteen.
He excelled in the two great points which form a just historian, truth and eloquence. The faith of his History has never been
He excelled in the two great points which form a just
historian, truth and eloquence. The faith of his History
has never been called into question. He wanted no opportunities of knowing the truth, and he does not appear
to have misrepresented it; and though some have fancied
him a little malevolent towards his country, because the
usage hy had received would have made most people so,
yet he has not written any thing that discovers such a passion. His manner of writing is coherent, perspicuous, and
persuasive, yet close, strong, and pithy. The ancients have
spoken <of him in the highest terms and if Herodotus, as
his senior, obtained the title “father of history,
” yet the
greater part have allowed that Thucydides is the better
historian. Plutarch says, in his treatise De Gloria Atheniensinm, that Thucydides “aims always at this, to make
his auditor a spectator, and to excite in his reader the same
passions witii those who were beholders.
” Then enumerating some examples, “these things,
” he says, “are so
described, and so evidently set before our eyes, that the
mind of the reader is no less affected, than if he had been
present in the actions.
” And it was probably for his skill
in painting, certainly not for his eloquence (for, as Cicero says, “what great rhetorician ever borrowed any thing of Thucydides?
”) that the famous orator Demosthenes wrote
over his History, according to Lucian, eight times with his
own hand. The same Lucian, in his book “How a history
ought to be written,
” continually exemplifies the virtues
required in an historiographer by Thucydides; and it seems
as if the image of Thucydides’s History, preconceived in
Lucian’s mind, suggested to him all the precepts he there
delivers. As to his style, Cicero speaks of it thus: “Thucydides in the art of speaking, in my opinion, has far exceeded them all. ^For he is so full of matter, that the number of his sentences almost equals the number of his words;
and in his words he is so apt, and so close, that it is hard
to say, whether his words more illustrate his sentences, or
his sentences his words,
” The Romans thought highly of
Thucydides’s work; and Sallust evidently took him for his
model.
It is remarkable, that Dionysius Halicarnassensis entertained unreasonable prejudices against this historian, in favour of his countryman Herodotus, whom he was desirous
It is remarkable, that Dionysius Halicarnassensis entertained unreasonable prejudices against this historian, in favour of his countryman Herodotus, whom he was desirous
to have considered as superior to him, and had raised accordingly many objections to his work. “The principal
and most necessary office of any man that intendeth to
write an history,
” he says, “is to chuse a noble argument,
and grateful to such as shall read it; and this Herodotus
has done, in my opinion, better than Thucydides. For
Herodotus hath written the joint history both of the Greeks
and Barbarians; but Thucydides writeth only one war.
”
To this, as well as to Dionysius’ s other objections, Hobbes
replies: “Let any man consider, whether it be not more
reasonable to say, that the principal and most necessary
office of him that will write an history is to take such an
argument as is both within his power well to handle, and
profitable to posterity that shall read it; which Thucydides,
in the opinion of all men, has done better than Herodotus.
For Herodotus undertook to write of those things, of which
it was impossible for him to know the truth, and which deJight more the ear with fabulous narrations, than satisfy the
mind with truth; but Thucydides writes one war, which,
how it was carried on from the beginning to the end, he
was able certainly to inform himself.
” The single circumstance here urged in favour of Thucydides, gives lord Clarendon’s History of our Civil Wars, perhaps, the preference
to any history that is extant in any language. Some modern critics have, however, formed an opinion of Thucydides more according with that of Dionysius than of Hobbes.
The emperor Charles V. is said to have been so fond of this
historian, that he always carried him with him into the
camp, and used to talk of him with wonderful pleasure to
those about him.
, a learned Danish historian and antiquary, was born in Iceland, and partly educated there,
, a learned Danish historian
and antiquary, was born in Iceland, and partly educated
there, but completed his studies in Denmark. Here he
became so well known for his acquaintance with history,
that when Frederick III. king of Denmark, himself a very
learned prince, wanted some able scholar to translate certain Icelandic Mss. which were in his library, Torfa-us
was recommended to him, and executed his task so much
to the king’s satisfaction, that he retained him for several
years in his court, and employed him on other affairs that
had no connexion with his studies, and always admired
him as a man of talent and probity. As a reward he gave
him a valuable appointment in the customs, but Torfseus
found it not very agreeable to one of his disposition, and
was about soliciting an exchange when the king died. His
successor and son, Christian V. appointed him his historiographer for Norway, with a salary of 600 German crowns.
This enabled Torfaeus to reside either at Copenhagen, or
at an estate he had in Stongeland, pursuing his researches
into history and antiquities. He died in 1719, or 1720,
nearly eighty years old. As an historian, he occupies a
very high rank among his countrymen. His principal
works, or those best known, although all are scarce, are,
1. “Historia rerum Norvegicarum,
” Hafniae (Copenhagen)
Orcades, seu rerum Orcadensium historiae libri tres,
” ibid. Series
Dynastarum et Regum Daniae, a Skioldo Odini filio, ad
Gormum Grandaevum,
” ibid. Historia VinJandiae antiquae,
” Groenlandia antiqua,
seu veteris Groenlandiae descriptio,
”
, a Latin historian, was born in the country of the Vocontian Gauls, in Gallia
, a Latin historian, was born in
the country of the Vocontian Gauls, in Gallia Narbonensis,
and lived in the reign of Augustus, about the beginning of
the Christian sera. His father enjoyed a situation under
the emperor. We know, however, nothing of the personal character of Trogus, nor should have heard of his
name had not Jnstin made an abridgment of his “Universal History,
” comprized in for ty- four books the editions
of which are noticed in our account of that classic.
se. Tucker was, if we mistake not, the first who wrote in defence of the royal touch, and Carte, the historian, the last, or perhaps the celebrated Whiston, who has a long
Dr. Tucker was esteemed an excellent Greek and Latin
scholar. “The purity of his Latin pen,
” says Fuller,
“procured his preferment. He was an able divine, a person of great gravity and piety, and well read in curious and
critical authors.
” His publications are, 1. “Charisma, sive
Donum Sanationis, seu Explicatio totius qusestionis de mirabilium sanitatum gratia, &c.
” Lond. with him,
” say Wood and
Prince, “are said to agree most fanaticks,
” and we may
add, most persons of common sense. Tucker was, if we
mistake not, the first who wrote in defence of the royal
touch, and Carte, the historian, the last, or perhaps the
celebrated Whiston, who has a long digression on the subject in his life. 2. “Of the Fabrick of the Church and
Church-men’s Living,
” Lond. Of parity
and imparity of gifts; of competency and incompetency of
men’s livings; and of the reward of men’s gifts or maintenance, so called; of parity and imparity of men’s livings,
which ariseth out of the equality or inequality of men’s
gifts, and of preferments so called; of singularity and plurality of beneh'ces, and of the cause thereof, viz. dispensations; of the friends and enemies of pluralities; and of
supportance and keeping of the fabrick of the church upright, in which he vindicates the hierarchy and constitution
of the church of England against the enemies thereof, who
are for reducing all to a parity and equality.
” 3. “Singulare Certamen cum Martino Becano Jesuita,
” Lond.
, an ancient historian, of the eleventh century, was an Anglo-Saxon, of a good family
, an ancient historian, of the eleventh century,
was an Anglo-Saxon, of a good family in Lincolnshire.
When a young man, he was delivered by the people of
Lindsay, as one of their hostages, to William the Conqueror, and confined in the castle of Lincoln. From thence
he made his escape to Norway, and resided several years
in the court of king Olave, by whom he was much caressed
and enriched. Returning to his native country, he was
shipwrecked on the coast of Northumberland, by which he
lost all his money and effects, escaping death with great
difficulty. He then travelled to Durham; and applying to
Walter, bishop of that see, declared his resolution to forsake the world, and become a monk; in which he was encouraged by that pious prelate, who committed him to the
care of Aldwine, the first prior of Durham, then at Jarrow.
From that monastery he went to Melross; from thence to
Wearmouth, where he assumed the monastic habit; and
lastly returned to Durham, where he recommended himself so much to the whole society, by his learning, piety,
prudence, and other virtues, that, on the death of Aidwine, in 1087, he was unanimously chosen prior, and not
long after was appointed by the bishop archdeacon of his
diocese. The monastery profited greatly by his prudent
government; the privileges were enlarged, and revenues
considerably increased by his influence; and he promoted
many improvements in the sacred edifices. In this office
he spent the succeeding twenty years of his life, sometimes residing in the priory, and at other times visiting
the diocese, and preaching in different places. At the
end of these twenty years, he was, in 1107, elected bishop
of St. Andrew’s and primate of Scotland, and consecrated
by archbishop Thomas, at York, Aug. 1, 1109. Dissentions arising between our archbishop and the king of Scotland, the prelate’s anxiety and distress of mind brought on
a decline of health, under which he obtained permission to
return to England; and came back to Durham in 1115,
where he resided little more than two months before his
death. Stevens, in the “Monasticon,
” says that he returned to Durham after the death of king Malcolm and his
queen; and Spotiswood, in his “Church History,
” that he
died in Scotland, and was thence conveyed to and buried
at Durham, in the Chapter-house, between bishops Walcher and William.
e was doubtless at the head of all our ecclesiastical composers of that period. This eminent musical historian adds, that Dr. Tye, “if compared with his contemporaries, was
The “Acts of the Apostles,
” set to music by Dr. Tye,
were sung in the chapel of Edward VI. and probably in
other places where choral service was performed; but the
success of them not answering the expectation of their author, he applied himself to another kind of study, the
composing of music to words selected from the Psalms of
David, in four, five, and more parts; to which species of
harmony, for want of a better, the name of Anthem, a
corruption of Antiphon, was given. In Dr. Boyce’s collection of cathedral music, lately published, vol. II. is aa
anthem of this great musician, “I will exalt thee,
” a
most perfect model for composition in the church-style,
whether we regard the melody or the harmony, the expression or the contrivance, or, in a word, the general
effect of the whole. In the Ashmolean ms. fol. 189, is
the following note in the hand-writing of Antony Wood
“Dr. Tye was a peevish and humoursome man, especially
in his latter days and sometimes playing on the organ in
the chapel of Qu. Eliz. which contained much music, but
little delight to the ear, she would send to the verger to tell
him that he played out of tune; whereupon he sent word,
that her ears were out of tune.
” The same author adds,
that Dr. Tye restored church-music after it had been almost ruined by the dissolution of abbeys. What sir John
Hawkins, from whom this article appears to have been
taken by our predecessors, has said of Tye, is confirmed
by Dr. Burney, who says that he was doubtless at the
head of all our ecclesiastical composers of that period.
This eminent musical historian adds, that Dr. Tye, “if
compared with his contemporaries, was perhaps as good a
poet as Sternhold, and as great a musician as Europe then
could boast; and it is hardly fair to expect marc perfection
from him, or to blame an individual for the general defects
of the age in which he lived.
”
, an English historian, descended from an ancient family, was the eldest son of sir
, an English historian, descended from an ancient family, was the eldest son of sir Timothy Tyrrell, of Shotover near Oxford, kiit. by Elizabeth his wife, sole daughter of the celebrated archbishop Usher. He was born in Great Queen -street, Westminster, in May 1642, and educated chiefly at the free school of Camberwell in Surrey. In 1657 he was admitted a gentleman commoner of Queen’s college, Oxford, where he continued three years under the tuition of Mr. Thomas Tully and Mr. Timothy Halton. After going to the Temple to study law, he returned to Oxford in September 1663, and was created M. A. In 1665 he was called to the bar, but did not practise, employing his time chiefly in historical researches, particularly respecting the history and constitution of England. Having an independent fortune, he resided chiefly on his estate at Onkeley, near Brill in Buckinghamshire, and was made one of the deputy lieutenants and justices of the peace for that county; in which offices he continued till king James If. turned him and the rest out of the commission, for not assisting in taking away the penal laws and test. On the revolution, he zealously espoused king William’s interest, and wrote with great effect in vindication of his right to the crown.
, an ecclesiastical historian, was born March 21, 1595, at Florence, of a good family. After
, an ecclesiastical historian, was
born March 21, 1595, at Florence, of a good family. After
pursuing his studies with great credit, he entered among
the Cistertians, and held several honourable posts in his
order. He was appointed abbot of Trois Fontaines at
Rome, procurator in his province, and counsellor to the
congregation of the Index. The popes Alexander VII.
and Clement IX. esteemed Ughelli, and gave him a pension
of 500 crowns; but he refused several bishoprics that were
offered. He died at Rome, in his abbey, May 19, 1670,
aged seventy-five. His principal work is, “Italia sacra,
sive de Episcopis Italiae, et Insularum adjacentium,
” &c.
Rome,
spense, till he could examine how the truth stood in that particular. He took it for granted, as his historian says, that the ancient doctrines must needs be the right, as
Having continued five years under these excellent masters, of whom he ever afterwards spoke with honour, and
having made a progress far beyond his age, he was admitted into the college of Dublin, which was finished that
very year, 1593. He was one of the first three students
who were admitted; and his name stands to this day in the
first line of the roll. Dr. Bernard seems to hint that he was
the first graduate, fellow, and proctor, which we doubt, at
least as to the fellowship, his uncle being first fellow, and
his tutor at this time senior fellow, according to Harris.
Here he learned logic, and the philosophy of Aristotle,
under Mr. Hamilton, his tutor, and though, as we are told,
his love of poetry and cards retarded his studies for some
time, yet he soon recovered himself from these habits, applied to books again with great vigour, and at the same
time acquired that pious turn which was ever afterwards a
distinguishing; feature in his character. He is said to hare
been wonderfully affected with that passage in Cicero,
“Nescire quid antea quam natus sis accident, id est semper esse puerum
” that is, “to know nothing of what happened before you were born is to be always a boy.
” About
this time, from meeting with Sleidan’s little book “De
quatuor imperiis,
” he contracted an extreme fondness for
the study of history, which he afterwards pursued with
equal depth and preciseness. At fourteen years of age he
began to make extracts from all the historical books he
could meet with, in order to fix the facts more firmly in his
memory; and, between fifteen or sixteen, he had made
such a proficiency in chronology, that he had drawn up in
Latin an exact chronicle of the Bible, as far as the book of
Kings, not much differing from his “Annals,
” which have
since been published. The difference chiefly consists in the
addition of observations and the parallel chronofcugy of the
heathens. Before he was full sixteen, he had entered upon
theological studies, and perused the most able writers, on
both sides, on the Romish controversy. Among the Romanists, he read Stapleton’s “Fortress of Faith;
” and,
finding that author confident in asserting antiquity for the
tenets of Popery, and in taxing our church with novelty in.
what it dissented from theirs, he kept his mind in suspense,
till he could examine how the truth stood in that particular.
He took it for granted, as his historian says, that the ancient
doctrines must needs be the right, as the nearer the fountain
the purer the stream; and that errors sprang up as the ages
succeeded, according to that known saying of Tertullian,
“Verum quodcunque primum, adulterum quodcunque
posterius.
” Bishop Jewel had adopted the same principle
before him; and too much deference to the authority of
the fathers prevailed in their days and long after. Yet
they were far from being ignorant, as has been absurdly
imputed to them, that the question concerning doctrines is
not how ancient, but how true those doctrines are. The
dispute was purely historical. Stapleton quoted the fathers
as holding the doctrines of popery. Usher thought this
impossible, and rather believed that Stapleton had misquoted them, at least had wrested and tortured them to his
own sense. This made him then take up a firm resolution,
that in due time (if God gave him life) he would himself
read all the fathers, and trust none but his own eyes in
searching out their sense: which great work he afterwards
began at twenty years of age, and finished at thirty-eight;
strictly confining himself to read a certain portion every
day, from which he suffered no occasion to divert him.
, a French historian, was born in 1685, at Gaillac in Agenois. He was for some time
, a French historian, was born in
1685, at Gaillac in Agenois. He was for some time king’s
attorney in the country of the Albigenses, but in 1711 entered the Benedictine order in the priory of la Daurade at
Toulouse. His studious turn, and taste for history, induced
his superiors to send for him to Paris in 1713, where they
employed him in writing the history of Languedoc with
Claude de Vic. The first volume appeared 1730, and de
Vic dying in 1734, the whole of this great work devolved on
Vaissette, who executed it with success, and published the
four other volumes. At the end of each are learned and
curious notes, and throughout the whole he is candid and
impartial, especially in speaking of the protestants. He had
before written a small piece “On the Origin of the French
Monarchy,
” which was well received; and afterwards published an abridgment of his “History of Languedoc,
”
Universal
Geography,
” 4 vols. 4to, and 12 vols. 12mo, which was
formerly thought one of the best the French had, though
not wholly free from errors. He died in the abbey of St.
Germain-des-Pres’at Paris, April 10, 1756.
alike liable.” “Yet,” adds Mr. D'Israeli, “evert this small volume has its value; for, although the historian confines his narrative to his own times, he includes a sufficient
He composed several learned and curious works, some
of which were published in his life-time, some not till after
his death. Among the former are, “De Fulminum significationibus,
” Romae, Pro Sacerdotum
barbis defensio,
” Romae, Castigationes
Virgilianae iectionis,
” printed in Robert Stepbens’s Virgil
at Paris, Hieroglyphica, sive de sacris Egyptiorum
aliarumque gentium literis Commentariorum libri LVIII.
”
Basil, 1566. In this he attempts to illustrate, from Egyptian, Greek, and Roman symbols, almost every branch of
science and art, but is supposed to display more imagination than judgment. Among the works published after his
death are, “Diaiogo della volgar lingua, non prima uscito
in luce,
” 4to; “Antiquitatum Belluuensium libri quatuor,
”
8vo; and “Contarenus, sive de literatorum infelicitate
libri duo,
” 8vo; all printed at Venice in Contarenus,
” because the
first book of it is a dialogue between Caspar Contareno, a
Venetian ambassador, and some learned persons at Rome.
It has been often printed at Amsterdam, 1647, in 12mo,
“cum Cornelii Tollii Appendice,
” at Helmstadt, 1695, in
12mo; and at Leipsic, 1707, in 8vo, with two other pieces
upon similar subjects, namely, “Alcionius de Exilio,
” and
“Barberius de miseria Poetarum Grascorum,
” and a preface by Joannes Burchardus Menkenius, the editor. Mr.
D'Israeli, who has written so well on this interesting subject, considers Valerianus’s as “a meagre performance, iti
which the author shews sometimes a predilection for the
marvellous, which happens so rarely in human affairs; and
he is so unphilosophical, that he places among the misfortunes of literary men, those fatal casualties to which all
men are alike liable.
” “Yet,
” adds Mr. D'Israeli, “evert
this small volume has its value; for, although the historian
confines his narrative to his own times, he includes a sufficient number of names to convince us that to devote t>nf
life to authorship is not the true means of improving our
happiness or our fortune.
”
res among themselves, as put an end to his government the next election.“Mather, another New England historian, speaks with still greater contempt of Vane, and says, that”
, eldest son of the preceding, and
one of the most turbulent enthusiasts which the rebellion
produced, was born in 1612, and educated at
Westminsterschool, whence he went to Magdalen-hall, Oxford, and
even at this early age seems to have embraced some of
those republican opinions which were destined to plunge
his country in all the miseries of anarchy. He is said to
have then travelled to France and Geneva, and on his return betrayed such an aversion to the discipline and liturgy
of the Church of England, as greatly displeased his father.
Finding how obnoxious his principles made him, he determined to go to New England, then the resort of all who
were disaffected to the Church of England. His father was
against this wild scheme, but, according to Neal (in his History of New England), the king advised him to consent
to it, and to limit his stay to three years. Young Vane’s
purpose was to have begun a settlement on the banks of
the river Connecticut; but the people upon his arrival, in
1635, complimenting him with the government of Massachusetts for the next year, he resolved to stay among them.
He was, however, Neal says, ' no sooner advanced to the
government, than he appeared to be a person of no conduct, and no ways equal to the post he was preferred to:
being a strong enthusiast, he openly espoused the Antinomian doctrines, and gave such encouragement to the
preachers and spreaders of them, as raised their vanity,
and gave them such an interest among the people, as the
very next year had like to have proved fatal both to the
church and commonwealth; but the sober party observing
his conduct, concerted such measures among themselves,
as put an end to his government the next election.“Mather, another New England historian, speaks with still
greater contempt of Vane, and says, that
” Mr. Vane’s
election will remain a blemish to their judgments who did
elect him, while New England remains a nation.“Baxter
tells us, that he became so obnoxious that
” he was fain to
steal away by night, and take shipping for England, before
his year of government was at an end,“Baxter adds, that
” when he came over into England, he proved an instrument of greater calamity to a people more sinful and more
prepared for God’s judgments."
, an Italian historian, poet, and critic, was born at- Florence in 1502. His father,
, an Italian historian, poet, and critic, was born at- Florence in 1502. His father, a lawyer, placed him with a master, who reported that he was not fit for literature, and advised him to breed the boy up to merchandise. He was accordingly sent to a counting-house, and there his masters discovered that he never was without a book, and minded nothing but reading. His father then, after examining him, found that he had been deceived by the school-master, and determined to give his son a learned education, and for that purpose sent him to Padua and Pisa. Unfortunately, however, he prescribed the study of the law, which Varchi relished as little as commerce; and although, out of filial respect, he went through the usual courses, he immediately, on his father’s death, relinquished both the study and practice of the law, and determined to devote all his attention to polite literature. In this he acquired great reputation; but when Florence became distracted by civil commotions, he joined the party in opposition to the Medici family, and was banished. During his exile he resided at Venice, Padua, and Bologna, where his talents procured him many friends; and his works having diffused his reputation more widely, Cosmo de Medicis had the generosity to forgive the hostility he had shewn to his family, and, respecting him as a man of letters, recalled him home, and appointed him his historiographer. In this capacity he recommended him to write the history of the late revolutions in Florence. All this kindness, accompanied with a handsome pension, produced a great change in the mind of the republican Varchi, who became now the equally zealous advocate of monarchy. As soon as he had finished a part of it, he submitted it to the inspection of his patron, and some copies were taken of it. These being seen by soma persons who suspected that he would make free with their characters, or the characters of their friends, they conspired to assassinate the apostate author, as they thought him; and having one night attacked him, left him weltering in his blood, but his wounds were not mortal; and although it is said he knew who the assassins were, he declined appearing against them. He was, however, so much affected by the affair, that he embraced the ecclesiastical profession, and obtained some preferment. He died at Florence in 1565. His history, which extends from 1527 to 1538, was not published until 1721, at Cologne, and reprinted at Leydeu 1723; but both these places are wrong, as both editions were published in Italy. There is a recent edition, Milan, 1803, 5 vols. 8vo. The style, like that of all his works, is pure and elegant, though a little too much elaborated. The facts, of course, are strongly tinctured with an attachment to the house of Medici.
ion,” Paris, 1686, and often reprinted. Varillas had some advantages of style to recommend him as an historian; he had likewise a pleasing manner of relating and setting off
He wrote a great number of works, chiefly of the historical kind; and published, at different times and in distinct
portions, a history of France, comprising a period of 176
years under nine different reigns, beginning with Lewis
XL and ending with Henry III. He published also “Les
Anecdotes de Florence, ou THistoire secrette de la Maison
de Medicis, at the Hague,
” Histoire des Revolutions arrives en Europe en matiere de Religion,
” Paris, of ten things which he knew, he
had learned nine from conversation.
” He was also profuse in his professions of sincerity, and was thought to have
penetrated into the inmost recesses of the cabinet, and
drawn forth a great deal of secret history from the numerous and important manuscripts which he pretends in his
prefaces to have been from time to time communicated to
him. All this procured him a vast reputation at first: his
books were read with eagerness: and such was the call for
them, that the booksellers generally sent forth two editions,
in different forms, at the same time. The public, however,
were at length undeceived, and came to be convinced that
the historical anecdotes, which Varillas put off for authentic facts, were wholly of his own invention, notwithstanding
his affected citations of titles, instructions, letters, memoirs, and relations, all of them imaginary. As his design was to please rather than instruct his readers, he
omitted nothing which he thought might conduce to this.
Thus he characterised persons he knew little of, as if he
had lived in the greatest familiarity with them; and gave
particular reasons for all the steps they took, as if he had
been privy to their councils. He advanced facts with the
utmost confidence, which were scarcely probable: the air
of politics, which runs through all his writings, is romantic;
and every event, according to him, proceeded from premeditation and design. Such is the opinion which his own
countrymen soon learned to give of his “History of France,
”
and “Florentine Anecdotes;
” but his “History of the
Revolutions in matters of Religion which have happened
in Europe,
” utterly ruined his reputation abroad, and exposed him to the criticisms of able men in each country:
of Burnet and Dr. King, in England, Brunsmann in Denmark, Puffendorf and Seckendorf in Germany, vtho
copiously detected and exposed his falsehoods and misrepresentations concerning the state of religion in their respective countries, and totally destroyed the reputation of his
works.
, a French historian, was born near Fismes, in Champagne, in 1711. He entered the
, a French historian, was born
near Fismes, in Champagne, in 1711. He entered the
Jesuits’ order, but quitted it at the end of eleven years,
was tutor to M. Goguet, counsellor to the parliament, and
having finished that gentleman’s education, devoted himself wholly to the study of French history. He died suddenly at Paris, September 4, 1759, aged about forty-eight,
leaving a “History of France,
” written in a simple and
correct style, and with great candour. Six only, however,
of the eight volumes were published by him; the seventh,
which he had entirely finished, and the eighth, which was
nearly completed at the time of his death, have been published since by M. Villaret, who continued the history to
vol. XII. But the complete edition, with Garnier’s continuation, amounts to 15 vols. 4to, 1770 1789. M. Velli
also left a French translation of Dr. Swift’s “History of
John Bull.
”
, a very pleasing French historian, whose principal works have been translated into English, was
, a very pleasing French historian, whose principal works have been
translated into English, was born at the castle of Bennetot,
in Normandy, Nov. 25, 1655, of a good family. Such was
his application to study, that in his seventeenth year he
maintained his last philosophical theses. Much against his
father’s will he entered among the Capuchins, and took
the name of brother Zachary, but the austerities of this
order proving hurtful to his health, he was induced to
exchange it for one of milder rules. Accordingly, in 1677,
he entered among the Premonstratenses, where he became
successively secretary to the general of the order, curate,
and at length prior of the monastery. But with this he
does not appear to have been satisfied, and after some
other changes of situation, became a secular ecclesiastic.
In 1701 he came to Paris in that character, and was in
1705 made an associate of the academy of belles lettres.
His talents soon procured him great patronage. He was
appointed secretary of commands to the duchess of Orleans
Bade-Baden, and secretary of languages to the duke of
Orleans. In 1715 the grand-master of Malta appointed
him historiographer to that order, with all its privileges,
and the honour of wearing the cross. He was afterwards
appointed to the commandery of Santery, and would, but
for some particular reasons, not specified, have been intrusted with the education of Louis XV. His last years
were passed in much bodily infirmity, from which he was
released June 15, 1735. His literary career has in it somewhat remarkable. He was bordering on his forty- fifth year
when he wrote his first history, and had passed his seventieth when he bad finished the last, that of Malta. He
lived nine years afterwards, but under extreme languor of
body and mind. During this, when, from the force of
habit, he talked of new projects, of the revolutions of Carthage, and the history of Poland, and his friends would
represent to him that he was now incapable both of reading
or writing, his answer was, that he had read enough to
compose by memory, and written enough to dictate with
fluency. The French regard him as their Quintus Curtius. His st)le is pleading, lively, and elegant, and hjs
reflections always just, and often profound. But he yielded
too much to imagination, wrote much from memory, which
was not always sufficiently retentive, and is often wrong in
facts, from declining the labour of research, and despising
the fastidiousness of accuracy. His works, which it is unnecessary to characterise separately, as they have been so
long before both the French and English public, are, 1.
“Histoire des Revolutions de Portugal,
” Paris, i6?9, 12mo.
2. “Histoire des Revolutions de Suede,
” Histoire des Revolutions Romanies,
” 3 vols.
12mo. 4. “histoire de Malte,
” 1727, 4 vols 4to, and 7
vols. 12mo. 5. “Traité de la mouvance de Bretagne.
”
6. “Hisjtoire critique de l'etablissment des Bretons dans
les Gaules,
” 2 vols 12mo, a posthumous work, 1713. H
wrote also some dissertations in the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres, and corresponded much with the
literati of his time on subjects of history, particularly with
earl Stanhope, on the senate of ancient Rome. His and
lord Stanhope’s Inquiry on this subject were published by
Hooke, the Roman historian, in 1757, or 1758.
are, he would have had more admirers, if his style had been more spirited; yet the antiquary and the historian who prefer truth to elegance of design, and correctness to bold
Valuable as Vertue’s engravings are, he would have had
more admirers, if his style had been more spirited; yet the
antiquary and the historian who prefer truth to elegance of
design, and correctness to bold execution, have properly
appreciated his works, and have placed him, in point of
professional industry at least, next to his predecessor Hollar. But the public owe another obligation to Vertue.
After his death the late lord Orford purchased the manuscript notes and observations which he had put down, as
materials for a history of artists, and from them published
that very useful and entertaining work, which he entitled
“Anecdotes of Fainting in England; with some account
of the principal Artists, and incidental notes on other Arts,
collected by Mr. George Vertue,
” Vertue,
” says Mr.
Walpole, “had for several years been collecting materials
for a work ‘ upon Painting and Painters:’ he conversed
and corresponded with most of the virtuosi in England he
was personally acquainted with the oldest performers in the
science: he minuted down every thin^ he heard from
them. He visited every collection of them, attended sales,
copied every paper he could find relative to the art,
searched offices, registers of parishes, and registers of
wills for births and deaths, turned over all our own authors,
and translated those of other countries which related to his
subject. He wrote down every thing he heard, saw, or
read. His collections amounted to near forty volumes,
large and small. In one of his pocket-books I found a
note of his first intention of compiling such a work: it was
in 1713, and he continued it assiduously to his death in
1757. These Mss. I bought of his widow after his decease.
” Venue’s private character, it must not be omitted,
was of the most amiable kind; friendly, communicative,
upright in all his dealings, a most dutiful son, and an affectionate husband. He laboured almost to the last, solicitous to leave a decent competence to a wife, with whom
he lived many years in tender harmony, and who died in
1776, in the seventy-sixth year of her age. He had a
brother James, who followed the same profession at Bath,
and died about 1765.
, a Roman historian, lived in the fourth century, probably in the reigns of Constantius
, a Roman historian, lived
in the fourth century, probably in the reigns of Constantius
and Theodosius, as may be collected from some dates in his
history. He was the son of very obscure parents, and had
not the benefit of education. He was probably a native of
Africa, as he makes very honourable mention of that country in his writings, calling it the glory of the world. In
spite, however, of the meanness of his extraction, he had
talents which raised him to the highest honours. In the
year 361, Julian appointed him prefect of Pannonia; and,
as, a recompense of his services, he was honoured with a
statue of brass. A considerable time afterwards, he was
prefect of Rome, and in the year 369 consul with Valentinian. He obtained this last dignity probably under the
reign of Theodosius; for there is an inscription extant,
which Se-xtus Aurelius Victor, prefect of the city, caused
to be engraved on a monument in honour of Theodosiua.
If all this belongs to the same Sextus Aurelius Victor, as
is not unlikely, he filled, under various emperors, posts of
great distinction, and appears to have lived till towards the
end of the fourth century.
There are some works extant under his name: 1. “Arigo
gentis Romanae.
” This history should extend, ats its title
imports, from the uncertain times of Janus to the tenth consulate of Constantius; but what remains comes no lower
down than the first year from the foundation of Rome.
, grandson of the preceding historian, was born in 1606, at Blois. He was bred a protestant, and became
, grandson of the preceding historian, was born in 1606, at Blois. He was bred a protestant,
and became bailiff“of Baugency; but having afterwards abjured the Protestant religion, he entered the congregation
of the Oratory, in which he distinguished himself by his
learning. He understood Greek, Hebrew, and Chaldee,
cultivated the belles lettres with success, and had a talent
for Latin poetry, as appears from his paraphrases of some
Psalms. He died November 14, 1661, at Paris, aged fiftysix. He left several works: among the principal are,
” La
Genealogie des Seigneurs d'Alsace,“1649, fol.; a very
useful supplement to St. Augustine’s works, of which he
found some Mss. at Clairvaux that had never been published.
” A Harmony of the Gospels,“in French;
” Stemma Austriacum,“1650, fol.; and
” La Genéalogie des
Comtes de Champagne.“He meant to have published a
treatise, written by St. Fulgentius against Faustus, but was
prevented by death, nor is it known what became of this
treatise. Vignier found an ancient ms. at Metz, containing a relation of events in that city, and in which there was
a long account of the famous Joan d‘Arc, better known by
the name of the Maid of Orleans. According to this it appear,ed that she had been married to the Sire des Amboises,
or D’Hermoises, descended from an illustrious house, and
of the ancient knighthood. He also found in the treasury
of Messrs, des Amboises, the contract of the above marriage, which imports
” that in 1436, Robert des Amboises
married Joan d'Arc, called the Maid of Orleans." But
this fact is very generally doubted.
, a Florentine historian of the fourteenth century, was the son of a native of that place,
, a Florentine historian of the fourteenth century, was the son of a native of that place, and
is supposed to have been born about the end of the thirteenth century, as he was somewhat older than an infant in
1300, when he informs us he went to Rome to see the Jubilee, and young as he was, first formed, on that occasion,
the design of writing his “Chronicle.
” Before, however,
he began this work, he visited various parts of Italy,
France, and the Netherlands, and having collected much
information, began to compile his history as soon as he
returned home. His first intention was to write only the
history of Florence, a city which he imagined would rise
in splendour and prosperity as Rome declined, but he was
induced to extend his plan to the events of other countries
wherever they could be introduced. In the mean time
the public employments to which his merit raised him, delayed the completidn of his history for many years. Tnrice,
1316, 1317, and 1321, he was one of the priors of Florence; he had also some office in the mint, and at various
times was employed in the service of the republic. He
died of the plague in 1348. He had written his history up
to this period, and his brother Matthew Villani made a
continuation till the year 1363, when he also died of the
plague. The work then fell into the hands of Philip Villani, son to Matthew, who made a still longer addition to
the labours of his father and uncle. The first edition was
printed at Florence by the Junti in 1537, fol. and was often
reprinted. The last, corrected from three ms copies,
was printed at Milan in 1729, 2 vols. fol. The original
part by John Villani, is, like most chronicles, mere compilation of fabulous history, until he comes to his own times,
when he is allowed to be accurate and useful, and the same
praise is due to his successors.
, an ancient English historian, was born in 1075, and was the son of Odelinus, chief counsellor
, an ancient English historian,
was born in 1075, and was the son of Odelinus, chief
counsellor of Roger de Montgomery, earl of Shrewsbury.
He was first educated at Shrewsbury, and at the age of ten
was sent over to Normandy to the monastery of St. Ercole’s
and in his eleventh year became a member of the order of
that society. In his thirty-third year he was admitted into
the priesthood. His history is entitled “Histories ecclesiasticae libri XIII in tres partes divisi, quarum postremae
duae res per Normannos in Francia, Anglia, Sicilia, Apulia,
Calabria, Palestina, pie streneque gestas, ab adventu
Rollonis usque ad annum Christi 1124 complectuntur.?
Nicolson, in his Historical Library, gives but an inclifferent opinion of the merits of this historian; but baron
Maseres, who has lately republished a part of Vitalis, along
with other historical collections of ancient times, 4to, from
Duchesne’s
” Scriptores Normanni," estimates him more
highly, and recommends the publication of the whole.
There is no other book, he thinks, that gives so full and
authentic an account of the transactions of the reign of
William the Conqueror. Orderic was living in 1143, but
how much longer is uncertain.
le of Hastings; and of the noble actions by which each of them signalized his valour. In a word, the historian will learn with pleasure many circumstances and details which
Of Wace’s personal history we have no farther account,
but with regard to the advantages attending the perusal of
the productions of Wace, his biographer says very truly,
that “The antiquary will at first remark with astonishment,
that their language (that of the Normans) has been preserved even to our own days in the countries of Lower
Normandy. He will perceive their progress in the various
arts; their attainments in that of war; their arms and their
military customs their method of attacking castles and
strong holds the state of their marine and their commerce;
the height to which they have carried architecture and
other sciences, together with the monuments they have left
us. The genealogist will find many curious and interesting
facts relating to ancient families; he will feel himself rewarded in the perusal of the names of the knights who were
present at the battle of Hastings; and of the noble actions
by which each of them signalized his valour. In a word,
the historian will learn with pleasure many circumstances
and details which are not to be found in any other writer.
”
, a Dutch historian, and historiographer to the city of Amsterdam, was born there
, a Dutch historian, and historiographer to the city of Amsterdam, was born there in 1709,
and died in 1773. His principal work is a “History of
Holland,
” from the earliest times to The present state of the
United Provinces,
” Amst. Description of the city of Amsterdam,
” ibid. The character of John de Witt placed in its true light.
”
He published also some tracts on topics of divinity.
. In 1717 some mutual civilities had passed between the archbishop and the celebrated ecclesiastical historian Dupin, as men of letters, by means of the rev. Mr. Beauvoir,
That for which archbishop Wake appears to have been
most blamed, was the share he had in a scheme of union
between the English and Gallican churches; but in this,
as in other parts of his conduct, the blame seems to have
arisen principally from misrepresentation, at the same time
that we are willing to allow that the scheme itself was a
weak one, and never likely to produce any good. The
outline of the affair, which is related more at large in the
Appendix to the last edition of Mosheim’s History, No IV.
is this. In 1717 some mutual civilities had passed between
the archbishop and the celebrated ecclesiastical historian
Dupin, as men of letters, by means of the rev. Mr. Beauvoir, then chaplain to lord Stair, the English ambassador
at Paris. In the course of these civilities, Dupin wrote to
the archbishop a Latin letter in Jan. 1718, in which, having congratulated the church of England on the enjoyment of so eminent a prelate for its metropolitan, he took
occasion to express his desire for an union between the two
churches of England and France, and wished to enter into
a correspodence with his grace with that view. The archbishop, in return, after thanking him for his compliment,
observed, that it was full time both for himself (Dupin)
and the rest of his brethren of the Sorbonne, to declare
openly their true sentiments of the superstition and ambition of the court of Rome; that it was the interest of all
Christians to unmask that court, and thereby reduce it to
those primitive limits and honours which it enjoyed in the first
ages of the church. In some farther correspondence, the
archbishop explained the belief, tenets, and doctrine of
the chuch of England, the manner of its beginning to reform and shake off all foreign power and superstition both
in church and state, and its acknowledgment that our
Lord Jesus Christ is the only founder, source, and head of
the church. In all his letters both to Dupin and others,
he insisted constantly on this article, and always maintained the justice and orthodoxy of every individual article
of the church of England, without making the least concession towards any approbation of the ambitious pretensions of the church of Rome. Some of the doctors of the
Sorbonne readily concurred in this scheme, and Dupin
drew up an essay towards an union, which was to be submitted for approbation to the cardinal de Noailles, and
then to be transmitted to his grace. This essay, which
was called a “Commonitorium,
” was read by, and had the
approbation of the Sorbonne, and in it was ceded the administration of the sacrament in both kinds, the performing
of divine service in the vulgar tongue, and the marriage of
the protestant clergy; and the invocation of saints was
given up as unnecessary. The project engrossed the whole
conversation of the city of Paris, and the Engiish ambassador was congratulated upon it by some great personages
at court. The regent duke of Orleans himself, and the
abbe Du Bois, minister of foreign affairs, and De Fleury,
the attorney general, at iirst seemed to acquiesce, or at
least not to interfere; but, after all, no considerate person
could expect much from the scheme, which was entirely
prevented by the Jesuits, who sounded the alarm, and represented the cardinal de Noailles and his friends the Jansenists as about to make a coalition with the heretics.
ho have supported the practice of infant-baptism; and his antagonists Gale, Whiston, and the baptist historian Crosby, all unite in praising his candour and piety. He was
Dr. Wall stands confessedly at the head of those writers who have supported the practice of infant-baptism; and his antagonists Gale, Whiston, and the baptist historian Crosby, all unite in praising his candour and piety. He was vicar of Shorebam for the long space of fifty-two years. He once had an offer of a living of 300l. a year, Chelsfield, three miles from Shoreharn, which his conscience would not allow him to accept; but he afterwards consented to take one of about one fifth the value, at twelve miles distance, that of Milton, near Gravesend. By an only daughter, Mrs. Catherine Waring, of Rochester, he had sixteen grand-children. This lady communicated some anecdotes of her father, printed in Atterbury’s Correspondence, by which it appears that he was a man of a facetious turn, and there are some of his letters to Atterbury in that correspondence. He was such a zealot for this prelate, that he would have lighted up all Whittlebury -forest, in case of his recall, at his own expence.
ng of this kind as having happened to him, when taken up for the plot hereafter to be mentioned. The historian’s words are, “After Waller had, with incredible dissimulation,
Being too young to resist beauty, and probably too vain
to think himself resistible, he fixed his heart, perhaps half
fondly and half ambitiously, upon the lady Dorothea Sidney, eldest daughter of the earl of Leicester, whom he
courted by all the poetry in which Sacharissa is celebrated;
and describes her as a sublime predominating beauty, of
lofty charms, and imperious influence; but she, it is said,
rejected his addresses with disdain. She married, in 1639,
the earl of Sunderland, who died at Newbury in the royal
cause; and, in her old age, meeting somewhere with Waller, aske<l him, when he would again write such verses
upon her “When you are as young, madam,
” said he, “and
as handsome, as you were then.
” In this part of his life it
was that he was known to Clarendon, among the rest of the
men who were eminent in that age for genius and literature.
From the verses written at Penshurst, it has been collected
that he diverted his rejection by Sacharissa by a voyage;
and his biographers, from his poem on the Whales, think it
not improbable that he visited the Bermudas; but it seems
much more likely that he should amuse himself with forming an imaginary scene, than that so important an incident,
as a visit to America, should have been left floating in conjectural probability. Aubrey gives us a report that some
time between the age of twenty-three and thirty, “he
grew mad,
” but did not remain long in this unhappy state;
and he seems to think that the above disappointment might
have been the cause. It'is remarkable that Clarendon insinuates something of this kind as having happened to him,
when taken up for the plot hereafter to be mentioned.
The historian’s words are, “After Waller had, with incredible dissimulation, acted such a remorse of conscience, his
trial was put off out of Christian compassion, till he might
recover his understanding.
” Neither of these perhaps is
decisive as to the fact, but the coincidence is striking.
hich Clarendon ascribes the preservation of his dearbought life, is inserted in his works. The great historian, however, seems to have been mistaken in relating that he prevailed
“Waller,
” says Clarendon, whom we have already
quoted on this point, “though confessedly the most guilty,
with incredible dissimulation, affected such a remorse of
conscience, that his trial was put off, out of Christian compassion, till he might recover his understanding.
” What
use he made of this interval, with what liberality and
success he distributed flattery and money, and how, when
he was brought (July 4) before the House, he confessed
and lamented, and submitted and implored, may be read
in the History of the Rebellion (B. vii.). The speech, to
which Clarendon ascribes the preservation of his dearbought life, is inserted in his works. The great historian,
however, seems to have been mistaken in relating that he
prevailed in the principal part of his supplication, not to
be tried by a council of war; for, according to Whitlock,
he was by expulsion from the House abandoned to the tribunal which he so much dreaded, and, being tried and condemned, was reprieved by Essex; but after a year’s imprisonment, in which time resentment grew less acrimonious, paying a fine of ten thousand pounds, he was permitted to recollect himself in another country. Of his behaviour in this part of his life, Johnson justly says, it is not
necessary to direct the reader’s opinion.
certainly none to whom he was not known can presume to emulate. “Edmund Waller,” says that excellent historian, “was born to a very fair estate, by the parsimony or frugality
The character of Waller, both moral and intellectual,
has been drawn by Clarendon, to whom he was familiarly
known, with nicety, which certainly none to whom he was
not known can presume to emulate. “Edmund Waller,
”
says that excellent historian, “was born to a very fair
estate, by the parsimony or frugality of a wise father and
mother; and he thought it so commendable an advantage,
that he resolved to improve it with the utmost care, upon
which in his nature he was too much intent; and, in order
to that, he was so much reserved and retired, that he was
scarcely ever heard of till by his address and dexterity he
had gotten a very rich wife in the city, against all the recommendation, and countenance, and authority, of the
court, which was thoroughly engaged on the behalf of Mr.
Crofts; and which used to be successful in that age against
any opposition. He had the good fortune to have an alliance and friendship with Dr. Morley, who had assisted and
instructed him in the reading many good books, to which
his natural parts and promptitude inclined him, especially
the poets; and, at the age when other men used to give
over writing verses (for he was near thirty years of a&Q when he first engaged himself in that exercise, at least that he was known to do so), he surprized the town with
two or three pieces of that kind; as if a tenth Muse had
been newly born to cherish drooping poetry. The doctor
at that time brought him into that company which was
most celebrated for good conversation; where he was received and esteemed with great applause and respect.
He was a very pleasant discourser, in earnest and in jest;
and therefore very grateful to all kind of company, where
he was not the less esteemed for being very rich. He had
been even nursed iti parliaments, where he sat when he
was very young; and so, when they were resumed again
(after a long intermission), he appeared in those assemblies
with great advantage; having a graceful way of speaking,
and by thinking much upon several arguments (which his temper and complection, that had much of melancholic, inclined him to) he seemed often to speak upon the sudden, when the occasion had only administered the opportunity of saying what he had thoroughly considered, which
gave a great lustre to all he said, which yet was rather of
delight than weight. There needs no more be said to extol the excellence and power of his wit, and pleasantness
of his conversation, than that it was of magnitude enough
to cover a world of very great faults that is, so to cover
them that they were not taken notice of to his reproach
viz. a narrowness in his nature to the lowest degree; an
abjectness and want of courage to support him in any virtuous undertaking an insinuating and servile flattery, to
the height the vainest and most imperious nature could be
contented with; that it preserved and won his life from
those who were most resolved to take it, and on an occasion in which he ought to have been ambitious to have lost
it; and then preserved him again from the reproach and
contempt that was due to him for so preserving it, and for
vindicating it at such a price, that it had power to reconcile him to those whom he had most offended and provoked; and continued to his old age with that rare felicity,
that his company was acceptable when his spirit was
odious; and he was at least pitied, where he was most detested.
”
erformance endeavours to establish the favourable idea given of this monarch by sir George Buck, the historian; but this defence did not receive universal assent: it was
The same year, Mr. Walpole published his “Historic
Doubts of the Life and Reign of King Richard III.
” 4to.
This performance endeavours to establish the favourable
idea given of this monarch by sir George Buck, the historian; but this defence did not receive universal assent: it
was controverted in various quarters, and generally considered as more ingenious than solid. It was answered by
Frederick Guy Dickens, esq. in a 4 to volume; and the
evidence from the wardrobe- roll was controverted by Dr.
Milles and Mr. Masters, in papers read before the Society
of Antiquaries; and now it was discovered that Mr. Walpole, who affected the utmost humility as an author, and
most politely deferred to the opinion of others, could not
bear the least contradiction, and one or both of these latter pieces gave him so much disgust, that he ordered his
name to be struck out of the list of members, and renounced
the honour annexed to it from his connection with the
body of antiquaries. Yet in this plausible work, the character of Richard is in some measure cleared from many of
the enormities charged upon him by historians and poets;
and, particularly, the absurdity of representing him as a mass
of personal deformity, is justly exposed.
favourites with the public, although they are of very opposite merits. He was alternately a poet, an historian, a politician, an antiquary, and a writer of dramas and romances.
His intervals of leisure, health, and spirits, he employed in the works above mentioned, most of which have been favourites with the public, although they are of very opposite merits. He was alternately a poet, an historian, a politician, an antiquary, and a writer of dramas and romances. Of all his works his own opinion appeared to be humble but this was mere affectation, for he was pertinacious in maintaining what he had once asserted and being possessed of' kee*n powers of controversy, he betrayed all the irascibility of the author, while he affected to be considered only is a gentleman writing for his amusement. In his latter days he determined to vindicate his claims to literary rank, and employed himself in preparing for the press that splendid and complete edition of his works, which was published the year after his death, and was bought up with avidity, as an important addition to every library. He had begun to print this edition as far back as 1768, and nearly two volumes were completed at his private press.
qualities it expected in a faultless testimony, it could invent none but what might be found in the historian here produced. He was a pagan, and so not prejudiced in favour
* Were infidelity itself, when it would evade the force of testimony, to prescribe what qualities it expected in a faultless testimony, it could invent none but what might be found in the historian here produced. He was a pagan, and so not prejudiced in favour of Christianity: he was a dependent, follower, and profound admirer of Julian, and so not inclined to report any thing to his dishonour. He was a lover of truth, and so would not relate what he knew, or but suspected, to be false. He had great sense, improved by the study of philosophy, and so would not suffer himself to be deceived: he was not only contemporary to the fact, but at the time it happened resident near the place. He related it, not as anuncertain hearsay, with diffidence, but as a notorious fact at that time no more questioned in Asia than the project of the Persian expedition: he inserted it not for any partial purpose, in support or confutation of any system, in defence or discredit of any character; he delivered it in no cursory or transient manner; nor in a loose or private memoir; but gravely and deliberately, as the natural and necessary part of a composition the most useful and important, a general history of the empire, on the complete performance of which the author was so intent, that he exchanged a court life for one of study and contemplation, and chose Rome, the great repository of the proper materials, for the place of his retirement.'
, the historian of English poetry, was descended from an ancient and honourable
, the historian of English poetry, was descended from an ancient and honourable family of Beverley in Yorkshire. His father was fellow of Magdalen-college, Oxford, poetry professor in that university, and afterwards vicar of Basingstoke, Hampshire, and Cobham, Surrey. He married Elizabeth daughter of the rev. Joseph Richardson, rector of Dunsford, Surrey, and had by her three children; Joseph, the subject of the next article, Thomas, and Jane a daughter, who survived both her brothers. He died in 1746, and is buried under the rails of the altar of his church at Basingstoke, with an inscription on a tablet near it, written by his sons, who afterwards published a volume of his poems, by subscription, chiefly with a view to pay the few debts he left behind, and supply his children with some assistance in the progress of their education. Whether the success of this volume was equal to their hopes, is uncertain, but the poems acquired no reputation,
his, while he pointed out some real inaccuracies, for which he might have received the thanks of the historian, his chief object seems to have been to violate, by low scurrility
It is almost needless to say that the progress of Warton’s
History afforded the highest gratification to every learned
and elegant mind. Hitson, however, whose learning appears to have been dear to him only as it administered to
his illiberality, attacked our author in a pamphlet entitled
“Observations on the three first volumes of the History of
English Poetry, in a familiar letter to the author,
”
her the author of the Essay on Pope could have pursued the History of English poetry, or whether the historian of poetry could have written the papers we find in the Adventurer.
The personal character of Dr. Warton continues to be the theme of praise with all who knew him. Without affectation of superior philosophy, he possessed an independent spirit; and amidst what would have been to others very bitter disappointments, he was never known to express the language of discontent or envy. As a husband and parent, he displayed the tenderest feelings mixed with that prudence which implies sense as well as affection. His manners partook of what has been termed the old court: his address was polite, and even elegant, but occasionally it had somewhat of measure and stateliness. Having left the university after a short residence, he mixed early with the world, sought and enjoyed the society of the fair sex, and tempered his studious habits with the tender and polite attentions necessary in promiscuous intercourse. In this respect there was a visible difference between him and his brother, whose manners were more careless and unpolished. In the more solid qualities of the heart, in true benevolence, kindness, hospitality, they approached more closely. Yet though their inclinations and pursuits were congenial, and each assisted the other in his undertakings, it may be questioned whether at any time they could have exchanged occupations. With equal stores of literature, with equal refinement of taste, it may be questioned whether the author of the Essay on Pope could have pursued the History of English poetry, or whether the historian of poetry could have written the papers we find in the Adventurer.
, a political writer and historian of the seventeenth century, was by birth a gentleman, descended
, a political writer and historian of the seventeenth century, was by birth a gentleman,
descended from the Warwicks of Warthwykes of Warwicke
in Cumberland, and bearing the same arms: “Vert, 3 lions
rampant Argent.
” His grandfather, Thomas Warwick, is
(in the visitation of Kent, by sir Edward Bysche, in 1667),
styled of Hereford, but whom he married is not mentioned.
His father, Thomas Warwick, was very eminent for his
skill in the theory of music, having composed a song of
forty parts, for forty several persons, each of them to have
his part entire from the other. He was a commissioner for
granting dispensations for converting arable land into
pasture, and was some time organist of
Westminster-abbey and the Chapel-royal. He married Elizabeth daughter
and co-heir of John Somerville, of Somerville Aston le
Warwick; by whom he had issue: one son, Philip, our
author, and two daughters; Arabella, married to Henry
Clerke, esq. and afterwards married to Christopher Turnor, of the Middle Temple, esq. barrister at law, who, at
the Restoration, was knighted, and made a baron of the
exchequer.
, the historian of Halifax, was eldest son of Legh Watson by Hester daughter
, the historian of Halifax, was eldest
son of Legh Watson by Hester daughter and at last heiress
of John Yates, of Svvinton in Lancashire, and was born at
Lyrne-cum-Hanley, in the parish of Prestbury, in Cheshire, March 26, 1724. Having been brought up at the
grammar-schools of Eccles, Wigan, and Manchester, all
in Lancashire, he was admitted a commoner in BrazenNose-college, Oxford, April 7, 1742. In
Michaelmasterm, 1745, he took the degree of B. A. June 27, 1746,
he was elected a fellow of Brazen-Nose college, being
chosen into a Cheshire fellowship, as being a Prestburyparish man. On the title of his fellowship he was ordained
a deacon at Chester by bishop Peploe, Dec. 21, 1746.
After his year of probation, as fellow, was ended, and his
residence at Oxford no longer required, he left the college;
and his first employment in- the church was the curacy of
Runcorn, in. Cheshire here he stayed only three months,
and removed thence to Ardwick, near Manchester, where
he was an assistant curate at the chapel there, and private
tutor to the three sons of Samuel Birch, of Ardwick, esq.
During his residence here, he was privately ordained a priest
at Chester, by the above bishop Peploe, JMay 1, 1748, and
took the degree of M. A. at Oxford, in act- term the same
year. From Ardwick he removed to Halifax, and was licensed to the curacy there, Oct. 17, 1750, by Dr. Matthew Hutton, archbishop of York. June 1, 1752, he married Susanna, daughter and heiress of the late rev. Mr.
Allon, vicarof Sandbach, in Cheshire, vacating thereby
his fellpwship at Oxford. Sept. 3, 1754, he was licensed
by the above Dr. Hutton, on the presentation of George
Legh, LL. D. vicar of Halifax, to the perpetual curacy of
Ripponden, in the parish of Halifax. Here he rebuilt the
curate’s house, at his own expence, laying out above 400l.
upon the same, which was more than a fourth part of the
whole sum he there received; notwithstanding which, his
unworthy successor threatened him with a prosecution in
the spiritual court, if he did not allow him ten pounds for
dilapidations, v^hich, for the sake of peace, he complied
with. Feb. 17, 1759, he was elected F. S. A. After his
first wife’s death, he was married, July 11, 1761, at Ealand, in Halifax parish, to Anne, daughter of Mr. James
Jaques, of Leeds, merchant. August 17, 1766, he was
inducted to the rectory of Meningsby, Lincolnshire, which
he resigned in 1769, on being promoted to the rectory of
Stockport, in Cheshire, worth about 1500l. a year. His
presentation to this, by sir George Warren^ bore date
July 30, 1769, and he was inducted thereto August the 2d
following. April 11, 1770, he was appointed one of the
domestic chaplains to the right hon. the earl of Dysart.
April 24, 1770, having received his dedimus for acting as
a justice of the peace in the county of Chester, he was
sworn into that office on that day. Oct. 2, 1772, he
received his dedimus far acting as a justice of peace for tfie
county of Lancaster, and was sworn in accordingly. His
principal publication was “The History of Halifax,
” A History of the ancient earls of Warren and Surrey,
” with a view to represent his patron sir George Warren’s claim to those ancient titles; but it is thought by a
very acute examiner of the work and judge of the subject,
that he has left the matter in very great doubt.
This work is certainly replete with sound information and reasoning, but it produced in the learned historian no diffidence of his own powers, although he did not choose
The principles expressed by Mr Gibbon, in various parts
of the “History of the Rise and Declension of the Roman
Empire,
” called forth the zeal of Dr. Watson; whose
66 Apology for Christianity, in a series of letters, addressed
to Edward Gibbon, e*q " was published in 1776, 12mo,
and several times repr.nted. This work is certainly replete with sound information and reasoning, but it produced in the learned historian no diffidence of his own
powers, although he did not choose to exert them in controversy. A correspondence took place on that occasion
between the antagonists, which is preserved in the Life of
Gibbon by lord Sheffield. In this, which consists of only
two short letters, Dr. Watson must, we think, be allowed
to have carried his politeness or his liberality to the utmost verge .
, an elegant historian, was born at St. Andrew’s in Scotland, about 1730. He was the
, an elegant historian, was born at St. Andrew’s in Scotland, about 1730. He was the son of an apothecary of that place, who was also a brewer. Having gone through the usual course of languages and philosophy at the school and university of St. Andrew’s, and also entered on the study of divinity, a desire of being acquainted with a larger circle of literati, and of improving himself in every branch of knowledge, carried him, first, to the university of Glasgow, and afterwards to that of Edinburgh. The period of theological studies at the universities of Scotland is four years; but during that time young men of ingenious minds raid sufficient leisure to earry on and advance the pursuits of general knowledge. Few men studied more 'constantly than Mr. Watson. It was a rule with him to study eight hours every day; and this law he observed during the whole course of his life*. An acquaintance with the polite writers of England, after the union of the two kingdoms, became general in Scotland; and in Watson’s younger years, an emulation began to prevail of writing pure and elegant English. Mr. Watson applied himself with great industry to the principles of philosophical or universal grammar; and by a combination of these, with the authority of the best English writers, formed a course of lectures on style or language. He proceeded to the study of rhetoric or eloquence; the principles of which he endeavoured to trace to the nature of the human mind. On these subjects he delivered a course of lectures at Edinburgh, similar to what Dr. Adam Smith had delifered in the same city previous to his removal to Glasgow in 1751. To this he was encouraged by lord Kames, who judged very favourably of his literary taste and acquirements; and the scheme was equally successful in Watson’s as in Smith’s hands.
Besides these valuable discoveries, the historian of electricity informs us that Mr. Watson first observed the
Besides these valuable discoveries, the historian of electricity informs us that Mr. Watson first observed the different colour of the spark, as drawn from different bodies; that electricity suffered no refraction in passing through glass; that the power of electricity was not affected by the presence or absence of fire, since the sparks were equally strong from a freezing mixture, as from red-hot iron; that flame and smoke were conductors of electricity; and that the stroke was, as the points of contact of the non-electrics on the outside of the glass. This investigation led to the coating of phials, in order to increase the power of accumulation; and qualified him eminently to be the principal actor in those famous experiments, which were made on the Thames, and at Shooter’s Hill, in 1747 and 1748; in one of which the electrical circuit was extended four miles, in order to prove the velocity of electricity; the result of which convinced the attendants that it was instantaneous.
ucated at Winchester school, and studied afterwards at Oxford, but in what college is uncertain. The historian of Winchester is inclined to prefer New college, which is most
, the illustrious founder
of Magdalen college, Oxford, was the eldest son of Richard
Patten, or Harbour, of Waynflete in Lincolnshire, by Margery, daughter of sir William Brereton, knight; and had
for his brother John Patten, dean of Chichester, but the
precise time of his birth is no where ascertained. According to the custom of his day, he took the surname of Waynflete from his native place. He was educated at Winchester school, and studied afterwards at Oxford, but in what
college is uncertain. The historian of Winchester is inclined to prefer New college, which is most consistent with
the progress of education at Wykeham’s school. Wood
acknowledges that although his name does not occur among
the fellows of New college, nor among those of Merton,
where Holinshed places him, unless he was a chaplain or
postmaster, yet “the general vogue is for the college of
William of Wykehasn.
” Wherever he studied, his proficiency in the literature of the times, and in philosophy and
divinity, in which last he took the degree of bachelor, is
said to have been great, and the fame he acquired as schoolmaster at Winchester, with the classical library he formed,
is a proof that he surpassed in such learning as was then
attainable.
, a Scotch physician and historian, was born near Edinburgh 1652, and educated at Glasgow; whence
, a Scotch physician and historian, was born near Edinburgh 1652, and educated at Glasgow; whence he went over to Holland with his parents,
who were driven from Scotland in consequence of having
been suspected as accessary to the murder of archbishop
Sharp, in 1679. Having spent some years at Ley den, he
took his degrees in physic, and came over with king William at the revolution. He was then appointed one of the
king’s physicians for Scotland, and settled at Edinburgh,
and became very eminent in his profession, acquiring a
considerable fortune. Strongly attached to republican notions of civil government, he wrote a volume of “Memoirs
of England from 1588 to 1688,
” which although extremely
well writien, yet betray plain marks of a party-spirit. He
died at Edinburgh 1716, aged sixty-four.
nd impartiality, and most readers will concur in his opinion. !< His fidelity to the king,“says this historian,” was unshaken; but as he now employed all his counsels to support
It will be difficult to vindicate lord Wentworth in this
proceeding, although the attempt has been made by some
of his biographers. Hume speaks of it with mildness and
impartiality, and most readers will concur in his opinion.
!< His fidelity to the king,“says this historian,
” was unshaken; but as he now employed all his counsels to support the prerogative, which he had formerly bent all his
powers to diminish, his virtue seems not to have been entirely pure, but to have been susceptible of strong impressions from private interest and ambition."
ny friends at court, so he could not but have enemies enough. But he was a man, continues that noble historian, of great parts and extraordinary endowments of nature, not
Stratford’s general character may be collected from the
preceding sketch; but is more fully illustrated in his “Letters,
” published in Life
and Correspondence of Sir George Radcliffe,
” for natural parts and abilities, and for improvement of knowledge by experience in
the greatest affairs, for wisdom, faithfulness, and gallantry
of mind, he left few behind him, that might be ranked
equal with him.
” Lord Clarendon acknowledges, indeed,
that the earl, in his government of Ireland, had been
compelled, by reason of state, to exercise many acts of
power, and had indulged some to his own appetite and passion; and as he was a man of too high and severe a deportment, and too great a contemner of ceremony, to have
many friends at court, so he could not but have enemies
enough. But he was a man, continues that noble historian, of great parts and extraordinary endowments of nature, not unadorned with some addition of art and learning, though that again was more improved and illustrated
by the other; for he had a readiness of conception, and
sharpness of expression, which made his learning thought
more than in truth it was. He was, no doubt, of great
observation, and a piercing judgment, both in things and
persons; but his too great skill in persons made him judge
the worse of things; for it was his misfortune to live in i
time wherein very few wise men were equally employed
with him, and scarce any but the lord Coventry (whose trust was more confined) whose faculties and abilities were
equal to his. So that, upon the matter, hr relied wholly
upon himself; and discerning many defects in most men,
he too much neglected what they s.id or did. Of all his
passions pride was most predominant; whkh a moderate
exercise of ill fortune might have corrected and reformed,
and which the hand of heaven strangeU punished by bringing his destriK tion upon him by two things that he most
despised, the people, and sir Harry Vane. In a word,
the epitaph, which Plutarch records, that Sylla wrote for
himself, may not unfitly be applied to him, “that no man
did ever exceed him, eitner in doing goo<l to his friends,
or in doing misch ef to his enemies;
” for his acts of both
kinds were most notorious.
diness and intrepidity with which he pursued them. The annotator on this character quotes an eminent historian as saying that lord Wharton” had as many friends as the constitution,
r' quest to lord Wharton, but without we have not character enough our>iccess and the answer Wharton is selves.“*aid to have given, which was never
in his character, at the same time that they used their utmost industry and invention to derogate from it; but that
it was for his honour, that those who were then his enemies, were always so; and that he had acted in so much
consistency with himself, and promoted the interests of his
country in so uniform a manner, that even those who. would
misrepresent his generous designs for the public good,
could not but approve the steadiness and intrepidity with
which he pursued them. The annotator on this character
quotes an eminent historian as saying that lord Wharton
” had as many friends as the constitution, and that only its
enemies were his that he made no merit of his zeal for
his country and that he expended above 80,000l. for its
service," &c.
saac Newton, and came accordingly; the same year, “The genuine works of Flavius Josephus, the Jewish historian, in English, as translated from the original Greek according
In 1721 a large subscription was made for the support
of his family, but principally, his son says, to reimburse
him the expences he had been at in attempting to discover the longitude, on which he had expended above Soo/.
This subscription amounted to 470l. and was, he tells us,
by far the greatest sum that ever was put into his hands by
his friends. It was upon contributions of this nature that
he seems chiefly to have depended; for, though he drew
profits from reading lectures upon philosophy, astronomy,
and even divinity; and also from his publications, which
were numerous; and from the small estate above mentioned, yet these, of themselves, would have been very
insufficient; nor, when joined with the benevolence and
charity of those who loved and esteemed him for his learning, integrity, and piety, did they prevent him from being
frequently in great distress. He spent the remainder of
his long life in the way he was now in; that is, in talking
and acting against Athanasianism, and for primitive Christianity, and in writing and publishing books from time to
time. In 1722 he published “An Essay towards restoring
the true Text of the Old Testament, and for vindicating
the citations thence made in the New Testament;
” in
The literal Accomplishment of Scripture-Prophecies,
” in answer to Mr. Collinses book upon the “Grounds
and reasons of the Christian Religion;
” in Of the
thundering Legion, or of the miraculous deliverance of
Marcus Antoninus and his army on the prayers of the Christians,
” occasioned by Mr. Moyle’s works, then lately published; in 1727, “A collection of authentic Records belonging to the Old and New Testament,
” translated into
English; in Memoirs of the Life of Dr. Samuel
Clarke;
” in A Vindication of the Testimony of
Phlegon, or an account of the great Darkness and Earthquake at our Saviour’s Passion, described by Phlegon,
” in
answer to a dissertation of Dr. Sykes upon that eclipse and
earthquake; in 1736, “Athanasian Forgeries, Impositions,
and Interpolations;
” the same year, “The Primitive Eucharist revived,
” against bishop Hoadly’s “Plain account
of the Lord’s Supper;
” in 17S7, “The Astronomical Year,
or an account of the many remarkable celestial phenomena,
of the great year 1736,
” particularly of the comet, which
was foretold by sir Isaac Newton, and came accordingly;
the same year, “The genuine works of Flavius Josephus,
the Jewish historian, in English, as translated from the
original Greek according to Havercamp’s accurate edition:
illustrated with new plans and descriptions of Solomon’s,
Zorobahel’s, Herod’s, and Ezekiel’s, temples, and with
correct maps of Judea and Jerusalem; together with proper notes, observations, contents, parallel texts of scripture, five complete indexes, and the true chronology of
the several histories adjusted in the margin: to which are
prefixed eight dissertations, viz. 1. The testimonies of Josephus vindicated; 2. The copy of the Old Testament, made
use of by Josephus, proved to be that which was Collected by
Neheimah; 3. Concerning God’s command to Abraham
to offer up his son Isaac for a sacrifice; 4. A large inquiry
into the true chronology of Josephus. 5. An extract out
of Josephus’s exhortation to the Greeks concerning Hades,
and the resurrection of the dead; 6. Proofs that this exhortation is genuine; 7. A demonstration that Tacitus, the
Roman historian, took his history of the Jews out of Josephus; 8 A dissertation of Cellarius against Hardouin, in Vindication of Josephus’s history of the family of Herod, from
coins; with an account of the Jewish coins, weights, and
measures,
” in folio, and since reprinted in 8vo. This is
reckoned the most useful of all Whiston’s learned labours,
and accordingly has met with the greatest encouragement.
In 1739 he put in his claim to the mathematical professorship at Cambridge, then vacant by the death of Saunderson, in a letter to Dr. Ashton, the master of Jesus college, who, his son avers, never produced it to the heads
who were the electors, and consequently no regard was
paid to it. In 174.5, he published his “Primitive NewTestament, in English;
” in Sacred History of
the Old and New Testament, from the creation of the
world till the days of Constarrtine the Great, reduced into
Annals;
”and the same year, “Memoirs of his own Life and
writings,
” which are curious as a faithful picture of an ingenuous, enthusiastic, and somewhat disordered mind. He
continued long a member of the Church- of England, and
regularly frequented its service, although he disapproved
of many things in it; but at last forsook it, and went over
to the baptists. This happened when he was at the house
of Samuel Barker, esq. at Lyndon, in Rutland, who had
married his daughter; and there it was that he dates the
following memorandum: “I continued in the communion
of the Church of England till Trinity Sunday, 1747: for,
though I still resolved to go out of the church if Mr. Belgrave continued to read the Athanasian Creed, so did he
by omitting it, both on Easter-day and Whitsunday this
year, prevent my leaving the public worship till TrinitySunday, while he knew I should go out of the church if he
begaq to read it. Yet did he read it that day, to my
great surprise; upon which I was obliged to go out, and
go to the baptist-meeting at Morcot, two miles off, as I
intend to go hereafter, while I am here at Lyndon, till
some better opportunity presents of setting up a more prijnitive congregation myself.
”
al books in the New Testament, from twenty-seven to fiftysix. In 1749 he gradually reached (says the historian of Arianism) the highest point of heretical perfection. He gravely
It was, as we have seen, in June 1708, that he began
to be first heard of as a reputed Arian. In the August following, he offered a small essay on the apostolical constitutions to the licenser of the press at Cambridge, and was
refused the licence. In 1709 he published a sermon against
the eternity of hell-punishments. In 1710 he boldly asserted the apostolical constitutions to be “of equal authority
with the four gospels themselves;
” and a tract included
in them, and called the doctrine of the apostles, to be “the
most sacred of the canonical books.
” In A
book of Common Prayer,
” that had been reformed the
backward way into Anabaptism and Arianism, and, two
years afterward, set up a meeting-house for the use of it;
having strangely drawn up his liturgy before he had provided his church. But he had still farther to go in his novelties. In 1723 he published a dissertation to prove the
Canticles not a canonical book of scripture; in 1727 another,
to prove the apocryphal book of Baruch canonical; in the
same year another, to prove the epistle of Baruch to the
nine tribes and a half equally canonical; jn the same year
another, to prove the second book of Esdras, equally canonical; in the same year another, to prove eighteen
psalms of a second Solomon equally canonical; in the same
year another, to prove the book of Enoch equally canonical; in the same year another, to prove “The Testaments
of the Twelve Patriarchs
” equally canonical; and another
to prove an epistle of the Corinthians to St. Paul, with St.
Paul’s answer to it, equally canonical. In 1745 he published his “Primitive New Testament in English, in four
parts,
” and added a page at the end “exhibiting the titles
of the rest of the books of the New Testament, not yet
known by the body of Christians/' Among these were
specified, besides, the works above recited, <: the Epistles
of Timothy to Diognetus, and the Homily;
” the “two
Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians;
” “Josephus’s homily concerning Hades;
” the “Epistles of Barnabas, Ignatius, and Polycarp;
” the “Shepherd of Hernias,
” and
the “Martyrdom of Polycarp.
” He thus, according to his
own enumeration, enlarged the number of the canonical
books in the New Testament, from twenty-seven to fiftysix. In 1749 he gradually reached (says the historian of Arianism) the highest point of heretical perfection. He
gravely asserted, first, that “neither a bishop, a presbyter,
nor a deacon, ought to be more than once married that
” primitive Christianity also forbad either bishops, presbyters, or deacons, to marry at all after their ordination
and that, “in the days of the apostles, a fourth marriage
was entirely rejected, even in the laity.
” He also ventured upon the bold presumption of ascertaining the very
year, “according to the scripture prophecies,
” for certain
events of the highest consequence to the world; and, sucli
was the ingenuous simplicity of the man, was confident
enough to name a year at no great distance. In this wayhe prophesied that the Jews were to rebuild their temple,
and the millenium was to commence before the year 1766.
But such a spirit as Whiston’s could not stop even here,
and in the same year he ventured to assert the falsehood of
some things in St. Paul’s epistles, as “no part of Christ’s
revelation to him,
” namely, where the apostle speaks of
original sin. Whiston says, they are rather “weak reasonings of his own, accommodated to the weak Jews at that
time only!
”
conversing with several of our most celebrated writers; among whom were Dr. Johnson, and Gibbon, the historian of the Roman Empire. It does not appear, indeed, that Johnson
In 1773 we find Mr. Whi taker the morning preacher of
Berkeley chapel, London; to which office he had been appointed in November, by a Mr. Hughes; but in less than
two months he was removed from that situation. This gave
occasion to “The Case between Mr. W. and Mr. Hughes,
relative to the Morning Preachership of Berkeley Chapel;
”
in which Mr. W. declares himself “unalterably determined
to carry the matter into Westminster-hall.
” But the fervour of his resentment threw him off his guard; and he expressed himself so indiscreetly, that his Case was considered
as a libel by the Court of King’s Bench. During his residence in London, he had an opportunity of conversing
with several of our most celebrated writers; among whom
were Dr. Johnson, and Gibbon, the historian of the Roman
Empire. It does not appear, indeed, that Johnson was much
attached to Whitaker. Both strong in understanding,
equally tenacious of opinion, and equally impassioned in
conversation, it is not probable that they should amicably
coalesce on all occasions. In the Ossianic controversy
they were decidedly hostile. With Gibbon Mr.Whitaker
was well acquainted; and the ms. of the first volume of
“The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
” was sub r
rnitted to his inspection. But he was greatly surprised
when, as he read the same volume in print, that chapter
which has been so obnoxious to the Christian world, was
then first introduced to his notice! That chapter Gibbon
had suppressed in tjie ms. overawed by Mr. Whitaker’s
high character, and afraid of his censure. And, in fact,
that the deist should have shrunk from his indignant eye,
may well be conceived, when we see his Christian principle and his manly spirit in the rejection of a living of considerable value, which was at this time offered him by an
Unitarian patron. Of his integrity, however, some recompense was now at hand: and about 1778, he succeeded as
fellow of Corpus Christi college, to the rectory of RuanLanyhorne, one of the most valuable livings in the gift of
that College; and into Cornwall he went, to reside upon
his rectory. There, it might have been expected that retirement and leisure would greatly favour the pursuits of
literature; and that, though “the converser
” (to use an expression of Mr. Whitaker’s) had disappeared, the author
would break forth with new energies. But Ruan-Lany-r
home was, for several years, no tranquil seat of the muses.
That pleasant seclusion was now the scene of unavoidable
contest. Mr. W. had proposed a tithe-composition with
his par shiontTs, by no means unreasonable. This they refused to pay: but he was steady to his purpose. A rupture ensued between the parties; the tithes were demanded
in kind; disputes arose upon disputes; animosities were
kindled; and litigations took place. That Mr. Whitaker
was finally victorious, afforded pleasure to the friends of
the rector, and to the friends of justice and truth; yet it
was long before harmony was restored to Ruan-Lanyhorne.
That his literary schemes had been so sadly interrupted,
was the subject of general regret. But the conscientious
pastor looked with a deeper concern to the spiritual welfare of his parishioners. He saw with sorrow their aversion to his preaching; their indifference to his instructions;
their repugnance“to his authority; and
” he laboured more
abundantly;“till, after a few years, he had the satisfaction
to perceive a visible alteration in the behaviour of the principal parishioners; and a mutual good understanding was
established between the pastor and his flock. His cordial,
his familiar manner, indeed, was always pleasing to those
whom prejudice had not armed against him; and, in proportion as they became acquainted with his kind disposition, the transitoriness of his resentments, and, after injuries, his promptness to forgive, and anxious wish to be
forgiven; they endeavoured more and more to cultivate
his friendship, and at length loved and revered him as
their father. Kothing can more fully display the warmth
of his affections, his zeal as a minister of Christ, or his impassioned style of eloquence, than those
” Sermons“upon
death, judgment, heaven, and hell, which he published in
1783, after having preached them to his parishioners, we
doubt not, with a voice and manner calculated to penetrate the conscience. That he should have published so
little in the line of his profession, is perhaps to be regretted. His
” Origin of Arianism,“however, is a large
volume, full of erudition and ingenious argumentation.
We have read no other work of Mr. W. in divinity, except
” The Real Origin of Government“(expanded into a v considerable treatise, from a sermon which he had preached before bishop Buller, at his lordship’s primary visitation),
and
” The Introduction to FlindelPs Bible.“This has
been much admired as a masterly piece of eloquence.
In the mean time the antiquary was not at rest. His
” Mary, queen of Scots,“published in 1787, in three octavo volumes; his
” Course of Hannibal over the Alps“his
” Ancient Cathedral of Cornwall;“and his
” Supplement to Polwhele’s Antiquities of Cornwall;“furnish good
evidence of an imagination continually occupied in pursuits which kindled up its brightest flame; though not
always of that judgment, discretion, or candour, which (if human characters had been ever perfect) we should have
expected from a Whitaker. But not even here were his
antiquarian stores exhausted.
” The Life of St Neot,“”The History of Oxford,“and
” The History of London,"
were works all at once projected, and no sooner projected
than executed in imagination, and more than half executed
in reality.
in two small octavo volumes. He occasionally displayed his powers in the several departments of the Historian, the Theologist, the Critic, the Politician, and the Poet. Versatility
In criticism, (where writing anonymously he would probably have written with the less restraint) we find him for
the most part candid and good-natured, not sparing of
censure, yet lavish of applause; and affording, in numerous instances, the most agreeable proofs of genuine benevolence. Even in the instance of Gibbon, where he has
been thought severe beyond all former example, we have
a large mixture of sweet with the bitter. It was his critique on Gibbon which contributed principally to the reputation of the “English Review;
” in which Mr. W. was
the author of many valuable articles. To his pen. also
the “British Critic,
” and “The Antijacobiu Review,*'
were indebted for various pieces of criticism. But the
strength of his principles is no where more apparent than
in those articles where he comes forward, armed with the
panoply of truth, in defence of our civil and ecclesiastical
Constitution. He was also a poet. That he contributed
some fine pieces of poetry to
” The Cornwall and Devon
Poets,“is well known. These were published in two small
octavo volumes. He occasionally displayed his powers in
the several departments of the Historian, the Theologist,
the Critic, the Politician, and the Poet. Versatility like
Whitaker’s is, in truth, of rare occurrence. But still
more rare is the splendor of original genius, exhibited in
walks so various. Not that Mr. W. was equally happy in
them all. His characteristic traits as a writer were, acute
discernment, and a Velocity of ideas which acquired new
force in composition, and a power of combining images in
a manner peculiarly striking, and of flinging on every
topic of discussion the strongest illustration. With little
scruple, therefore, we hazard an opinion, that though hi*
chief excellence be recognized in antiquarian research, he
would have risen to higher eminence as a poet, had he cultivated in early youth the favour of the Muses. Be this,
however, as it may; there are none who will deny him the
praise of a
” great“literary character. That he was
” good“as well as great, would sufficiently appear in the
recollection of any period of his life; whether we saw him
abandoning preferment from principle, and heard him
” reasoning of righteousness and judgment to come,“until
a Gibbon trembled; or whether, among his parishioners,
we witnessed his unaffected earnestness of preaching, his
humility in conversing with the poorest cottagers, his sincerity in assisting them with advice, his tenderness in offering them consolation, and his charity in relieving -their distresses. It is true, to the same warmth of temper, together
with a sense of good intentions, we must attribute an irritability at times destructive of social comfort; and an impetuousness that brooked not opposition, and bore down
all before it. This precipitation was in part also to be
traced to his ignorance of the world; to his simplicity in
believing others like himself precisely what they seemed
to be; and, oo the detection of his error, his anger at dissimulation or hypocrisy. But his general good humour,
his hospitality, and his convivial pleasantry, were surely
enough to atone for those sudden bursts of passion, those
flashes, which betrayed his human frailty, but still argued
genius. And they who knew how
” fearfully and wonderfully he was made," could bear from a Whitaker what they
would certainly have resented in another. We should add,
that in his family Mr. Whitaker was uniformly regular;
nor did he suffer, at any time, his literary cares to trench
on his domestic duties.
ded compliance with the reformed religion, and was set at liberty. Such is Strype’s account; but the historian of Winchester says that he lay in prison till the reign of queen
, bishop of Winchester, was the son of Robert White, of Farnham in Surrey, and was born there in 1511. He was educated at Winchester school, and thence removed to New college, Oxford, of which he became perpetual fellow in 1527. In 1534 he completed his degrees in arts, and being esteemed for his classical knowledge, was about that time appointed master of Winchester school. He was soon after made warden of Winchester college, and appears to have been principally instrumental in saving it, when the adjoining college of St. Elizabeth, the site of which he purchased, and so many others, were utterly destroyed. He was in 1551 promoted to the rectory of Cheyton in that neighbourhood; but in the preceding year, being suspected of corresponding with persons abroad, who opposed king Edward’s proceedings, he was examined by the council, and committed to the tower. After continuing some months in confinement, he pretended compliance with the reformed religion, and was set at liberty. Such is Strype’s account; but the historian of Winchester says that he lay in prison till the reign of queen Mary. However this may be, it is certain that on her accession, he was in such favour, as a zealous Roman Catholic, that she promoted him in 1554 to the bishopric of Lincoln. In the following year he was incorporated D. D. at Oxford, and in 1557 was translated to the see of Winchester, which, on account of his predilection for his native county, appears to have been the object of his wishes. This dignity, however, was granted him upon condition of his paying 1000l. yearly, out of the revenue of his see, to cardinal Pole, who complained that the temporalities of Canterbury (of which he was then archbishop) were so ruined by his predecessor, that he could not live in a manner suitable to his rank.
, an English historian, was born at Basingstoke, in Hampshire, of the great part of
, an English historian, was born at Basingstoke, in Hampshire, of the great part of which place his ancestors had been proprietors. He was educated at Winchester school, whence he was admitted fellow of New college, Oxford, in 1557. In the beginning of queen Elizabeth’s reign he obtained leave of absence for a set time, but his attachment to the Roman catholic religion being discovered, his fellowship was declared void, in 1564. He had gone abroad, and after Remaining some time at Louvain, settled at Padua, where he studied the canon and civil law, and received his doctor’s decree in both those faculties. Afterwards, being invited to Douay, he was made regius professor, and taught civil and canon law nearly twenty years. The universityappointed him their chancellor, or rector magnificus, not only on account of his own merit, but in consequence of the particular recommendation of the pope. At length he was created count palatine, a title conferred by the emperor upon lawyers that have distinguished themselves in their profession. He had married two wives, by both of whom he had fortunes, and when the last died, being desirous of entering into the church, he obtained a dispensation from the pope for that purpose. He was now ordained priest, and made a canon of St. Peter’s church, in Douay. He died in 1612, and was buried in St. James’s hurch, the cemetery of most of the English catholics.
ning out of his profession, and in his profession of signal reputation. “And though,” says the noble historian, “he did afterwards bow his knee to Baal, and so swerved from
The editor of his “Memorials
” give* him this character.
“He not only served the state in several stations and plaices
of the highest trust and importance botn at *Wn‘e and in
foreign countries, and acquitted himself with success and
reputation answerable to each respective character; but
likewise conversed with books, and made himself a large
provision from his studies and contemplation. Like that
noble Roman, Portius Cato, as described by Nepos, he
was `Reipublicae peritus, et jurisconsultus, et’nfttgnus iniperator, et probabilis orator, cupidissimus titerafttuf:' a
statesman and learned in the law, a great commander, an
eminent speaker in parliament, and an exquisite scholar.
He had all along so much business, one would not imagine
he ever had leisure for books yet who considers his studies
might believe he had been always shut up with his friend
Selden, and the dust of action never fallen on his gown.
His relation to the public was such throughout all the revolutions, that few mysteries of state could be to him any
secret. Nor was the felicity of his pen less considerable
than his knowledge of affairs, or did less service to the
cause he espoused. So we find the words apt and proper
for the occasion; the style clear, easy, and wichout the
least force or affectation of any kind, as is shewn in his
speeches, his narratives, his descriptions, and in every place
where the subject deserves the least care or consideration.
”
Lord Clarendon has left this testimony in favour of Whitelocke: whom, numbering among his early friends in life,
he calls, a man of eminent parts and great learning out of
his profession, and in his profession of signal reputation.
“And though,
” says the noble historian, “he did afterwards bow his knee to Baal, and so swerved from his allegiance, it was with less rancour and malice than other men.
He never led, but followed; and was rather carried away
with the torrent than swam with the stream; and failed
through those infirmities, which less than a general defection and a prosperous rebellion could never have discovered.
”
Lord Clarendon has elsewhere described him, as “from
the beginning concurring with the parliament, without any
inclinations to their persons or principles and,
” says he,
“he had the same reasons afterwards not to separate from
them. All his estate was in their quarters and he had a
nature, that could not bear or submit to be undone ‘though
to his friends, who were commissioners for the king, he
used his old openness, and professed his detestation of all
the proceedings of his party, yet could not leave them.’
”
nce against Wickliffe. This completely disconcerted them, and according to the evidence of their own historian, Walsyngham, changed their courage into pusillanimity. “Qui
Sueh confidence reposed in him by the higher powers
augured ill for the success of the prelates who had summoned him to appear before them. On the day appointed,
a vast concourse assembled, and Wickliffe entered, accompanied by the duke of Lancaster and the earl-marshal
Percy, who administered every encouragement, to him.
But before the proceedings began, an altercation was occasioned by the bishop oi London’s opposing a motion of
the earl-marshal, that Wickliffe should be allowed a seat.
The duke of Lancaster replied to the bishop in warm terms,
and said, although rather softly, that “rather than -take
such language from the bishop, he would drag him out of
the church by the hair of his head.
” But this being over-s
heard, the citizens present took part with their bishop, and
such a commotion ensued that the court broke up without
entering on the examination, while Wickliffe was carried
off by his friends in safety. The Londoners, in revenge,
plundered the duke of Lancaster’s palace in the Savoy, and
the duke turned the mayor and aldermen out of the magistracy for not restraining their violence. From these
circumstances it would appear that at this time WicklihVs
principles had not been espoused by many of the lower
classes, as is generally the case with innovations in religious
matters; yet it was not long before he had a strong party
of adherents even among them, for when he was a second
time cited by the prelates to appear before them at Lambeth, the Londoners forced themselves into the chapel to
encourage him, and intimidate his judges and accusers,
On this occasion Wickliffe delivered a paper to the court,
in which he explained the charges against him, but the
proceedings were again stopped by the king’s mother, who
sent sir Lewis Clifford to forbid their proceeding to any
definitive sentence against Wickliffe. This completely
disconcerted them, and according to the evidence of their
own historian, Walsyngham, changed their courage into
pusillanimity. “Qui quam iodevote,
” says he, “
quamsegniter commissa sibi mandata compleverint, inelius est
silere quam loqui.
” All they could do was to enjoin him
silence, to which he paid no regard; his followers increased; the death of pope Gregory XI. put an end to the
commission of the delegates; and when a schism ensued
by the double election of two popes, Wickliffe wrote a
tract, “Of the Schism of the Roman Pontiffs,
” and soon
after published his book “Of the Truth of the Scripture,'
”
in which he contended for the necessity of translating the
scriptures into the English language, and affirmed that the
will of God was evidently revealed in two Testaments; that
the law of Christ was sufficient to rule the church; and
that any disputation, not originally produced from thence,
must be accounted profane.
as the wisest clergyman I ever knew. He was a lover of mankind, and had a delight in doing good.“The historian mentions afterwards another quality Wilkins possessed in a supreme
Wilkins had two characteristics, neither of which was
calculated to make him generally admired: first, he avowed
moderation, and was kindly affected towards dissenters, for
a comprehension of whom he openly and earnestly contended: secondly, he thought 'it right and reasonable to
submit to the powers in being, be those powers who they
would, or let them be established how they would. And
this making him as ready to swear allegiance to Charles II.
after he was restored to the crown, as to the usurpers, while
they prevailed, he was charged with being various and unsteady in his principles; with having no principles at all,
with Hobbism, and every thing that is bad. Yet the
greatest and best qualities are ascribed to him, if not unanimously, at least by many eminent and good men. Dr.
Tillotson, in the preface to some “Sermons of Bishop
Wilkins,
” published by him in Historia & Antiquitates Universitatis Oxoniensis;
” “whether by the author,
” says he, “or
by some other hand, I am not curious to know:
” and
concludes his animadversions in the following words: “Upon
the whole, it hath often been no small matter of wonder to
me, whence it should come to pass, that so great a man,
and so great a lover of mankind, who was so highly valued
and reverenced by all that knew him, should yet have the
hard fate to fall under the heavy displeasure and censur6
of those who knew him not; and that he, who never did
any thing to make himself one personal enemy, should
have the ill fortune to have so many. I think I may truly
say, that there are or have been very few in this age and
nation so well known, and so greatly esteemed and favoured,
by so many persons of high rank and quality, and of singular worth and eminence in all the learned professions, as
our author was. And this surely cannot be denied him, it
is so well known to many worthy persons yet living, and
hath been so often acknowledged even by his enemies, that,
in the late times of confusion, almost all that was preserved
and kept up, of ingenuity and good learning, of good
order and government in the university of Oxford, was
chiefly owing to his prudent conduct and encouragement:
which consideration alone, had there been no other, might
bave prevailed with some there to have treated his memory
with at least common kindness and respect.
” The other
hand, Dr. Tillotson mentions, was Dr. Fell, the dean of
Christ church, and under whose inspection Wood’s
Athenæ Oxonienses“was translated into Latin and who,
among other alterations without the privity of that compiler, was supposed to insert the poor diminishing character of bishop Wilkins, to be found in the Latin version.
The friendship which subsisted between our author and
Dr. Tillotson is a proof of their mutual moderation, for
Wilkins was in doctrine a strict and professed Calvinism
We need quote no more to prove this, than what has been
already quoted by Dr. Edwards in his
” Veritas Redux,“p. 553.
” God might (says Dr. Wilkins) have designed us
for vessels of wrath; and then we had been eternally undone, without all possible remedy. There was nothing to
move him in us, when we lay all together in the general
heap of mankind. It was his own free grace and bounty,
that madehim to take delight in us, to chuse us from the
rest, and to sever us from those many thousands in the
world who shall perish everlastingly.“Gift of Prayer, c,
28. In his
” Ecclesiastes,“section 3, he commends to a
preacher, for his best authors, Calvin, Jiuiius, P. Martyr.
Musculus, Pargeus, Piscator, Rivet, Zanchius, &c. 9
” most eminent for their orthodox sound judgement.“Burnet, in his Life of Sir Matthew Hale, printed irt 1682,
declares of Wilkins, that
” he was a man of as great a mind,
as true a judgement, as eminent virtues, and of as good a
soul, as any he ever knew “and in his
” History“he says,
that, though
” he married Cromwell’s sister, yet he made
no other use of that alliance but to do good offices, and to
cover the university of Oxford from the sourness of Owen
and Goodwin. At Cambridge he joined with those who
studied to propagate better thoughts, to take men off from
being in parties, or from narrow notions, from superstitious conceits, and fierceness about opinions. He was also
a great observer and promoter of experimental philosophy,
which was then a new thing, and much looked after. He
was naturally ambitious, but was the wisest clergyman I
ever knew. He was a lover of mankind, and had a delight
in doing good.“The historian mentions afterwards another
quality Wilkins possessed in a supreme degree; and that
was, says he,
” a courage, which could stand against a
current, and against all the reproaches with which ill-natured clergymen studied to load him."
rted to this chapel was very great; and his table was generally well filled with gentry, so that the historian Sanderson, who is no friend to Williams, said, that “he lived
For four years after Williams was consecrated bishop
of Lincoln, the multiplicity of his affairs prevented his
visiting his clergy, yet his government, it is said, was such
as to give content to his whole diocese. He managed the
affairs of it with the greatest exactness by faithful substitutes, who gave him a just account of all matters, so that
he knew the name and character of every one of his clergy,
and took care to encourage the deserving. When now,
however, he came to Bugden, he found it necessary to
repair his house, and the chapel, which he did at a great
expence, and in a magnificent manner. The concourse
that resorted to this chapel was very great; and his table
was generally well filled with gentry, so that the historian
Sanderson, who is no friend to Williams, said, that “he
lived at Bugden more episcopally than any of his predecessors.
” All the great persons and nobility who had occasion to travel that way, used to call upon his lordship,
from whom they and their retinue were sure of a hearty
welcome, and the best entertainment. All the neighbouring clergy also, and many of the yeomanry, were free to
come to his table, and, indeed, he seldom sat down without some of the clergy. He was also extremely charitable
to the poor, and used to say, that " he would spend his
own while he had it; for he thought his adversaries would
not permit him long to enjoy it.' 7 Had he not lived in this hospitable manner, yet his conversation, and agreeable
manner of accommodating himself to his guests, were so generally pleasing, that he was not likely to be much alone.
Many members of both universities, the moit distinguished
for thejr wit and learning, made him frequent visits; so
that very often, taking the company and entertainment
together, Bugden was said to resemble one of the universities in commencement time. It was his custom, at his
table, to have a chapter in the English Bible read daily at
dinner by one of the choristers, and another at supper in
Latin by one of his gentlemen.
rest of the bishops, to withdraw always when that business was entered upon:“and so, adds the noble historian, betrayed a fundamental right of the whole order, to the great
When the earl of StrafFord came to be impeached in parliament, Williams defended the rights of the bishops, in a
very significant speech, to vote in case of blood, as Racket
relates; but lord Clarendon relates just the contrary. He
says, that this bishop, without communicating with any of
his brethren, very frankly declared his opinion, that '< they
ought not to be present; and offered, not only in his own
name, but for the rest of the bishops, to withdraw always
when that business was entered upon:“and so, adds the
noble historian, betrayed a fundamental right of the whole
order, to the great prejudice of the king, and to the taking
away the life of that person, who could not otherwise have
suffered. Shortly after, when the king declared, that he
neither would, nor could in conscience, give his royal assent
to that act of attainder; and when the tumultuous citizens
came about the court with noise and clamour for justice;
the lord Say desired the king to confer with his bishops for
the satisfaction of his conscience, and with bishop Williams
in particular, who told him, says lord Clarendon, that
” he
must consider, that as he had a private capacity and a public, so he had a public conscience as well as a private: that
though his private conscience, as a man, would not permit
him to do an act contrary to his own understanding, judgment, and conscience, yet his public conscience as a king,
which obliged him to do all things for the good of his
people, and to preserve his kingdom in peace for himself
and his posterity, would not only permit him to do that,
but even oblige and require him; that he saw in what commotion the people were; that his own life, and that of the
queen and the royal issue, might probably be sacrificed to
that fury: and it would be very strange, if his conscience
should prefer the right of one single private person, how
innocent soever, before all those other lives and the preservation of the kingdom. This,“continues lord Clarendon,
” was the argumentation of that unhappy casuist,
who truly, it may be, did believe himself:“yet he reveals
another anecdote, which shews, at least if true, that bishop
Williams could have no favourable intentions towards the
unfortunate earl of Strafford. It had once been mentioned
to the bishop, when he was out at court, whether by authority or no was not known, says the historian, that
” his
peace should te made there, if he would resign his bishopric and deanery of Westminster, and take a good
bishopric in Ireland:“which he positively refused, and
said,
” he had much to do to defend himself against the
archbishop (Laud) here; but, if he was in Ireland, there
was a man (meaning the earl of Strafford) who would cut
off his head within one month."
, a celebrated natural historian, was the only sort of sir Francis Willughby, knt, and was born
, a celebrated natural historian,
was the only sort of sir Francis Willughby, knt, and was
born in 1635. His natural advantages, with regard to
birth, talents, and fortune, he applied in such a manner as to procure to himself honours that might more
truly be called his own. He was addicted to study from
his childhood, and was so great an ceconomist of his time,
that he was thought by his friends to have impaired his
health by his incessant application, By this means, however, he attained great skill in all branches of learningand got deep insight into the most abstruse kinds of knowledge, and the most subtle parts of the mathematics. But
observing, in the busy and inquisitive age in which he
lived, that the history of animals was in a great measure
neglected by his countrymen, he applied himself particularly to that province, and used all diligence to cultivate
and illustrate it. To prosecute this purpose more effectually, he carefully read over what had been written by
others on that subject; and in 1660, we find him residing
at Oxford for the benefit of the public library. But he
had been originally a member of Trinity college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of A. B. in 1656, and of
A. M. in 1659. After leaving Oxford, he travelled, in
search of natural knowledge, several times over his native
country; and afterwards to France, Spain, Italy, Germany,
and the Low-Countries, attended by his ingenious friend
Mr. John Ray, and others; in all which places, says Wood,
he was so inquisitive and successful, that not many sorts
of animals, described by others, escaped his diligence.
He died July 3, 1672, aged only thirty-seven; to the great
loss of the republic of letters, and much lamented by those
of the Royal Society, of which he was an eminent member
and ornament. He left to Mr. Ray the charge of educating his two infant sons, with an annuity of 70/, which constituted ever after the chief part of Ray’s income. A most
exemplary character of him may be seen iti Ray’s preface
to his “Ornithology;
” whence all the particulars are concisely and elegantly summed up in a Latin epitaph, on a
monument erected to his memory in the church of Middleton in Warwickshire, where he is buried with his ancestors.
His works are, “Ornithologiae libri tres: in quibus aves
omnes hactenus cognitse in methodum naturis suis convenientem redactoe accurate describuntur, descriptiones iconibus elegantissimis, & vivarnm avium simillimis atri incisis
illustrantur,
” Historiae Piscium libri
quatuor, &c.
” Letter containing some considerable
observations about that kind of wasps called Ichneumones,
&c. dated Aug. 24, 1671.
” See the Phil. Trans. N* 76.
4. “Letter about the hatching a kind of bee lodged in old
willows, dated July 10, 1671.
” Trans. N fl 47. 5. “Letters of Francis Wiilughby, esq.
” added to “Philosophical
Letters between the late learned Mr. Ray and several of
his correspondents,
” 8vo, By William Derham.
, an English historian, was the son of Richard Wilson, of Yarmouth, in the county of
, an English historian, was the son
of Richard Wilson, of Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, gentleman; and was born in that county, 1596. In
1609 he went to France, where he continued almost two
years; and upon his return to England was placed with sir
Henry Spiller, to be one of his clerks in the exchequer
office; in whose family he resided till having written some
satirical verses upon one of the maid-servants, he was dismissed at lady Spiller’s instigation. In 1613 he took a
lodging in Holborn, where he applied himself to reading
and poetry for some time; and, the year after, was taken
into the family of Robert earl of Essex, whom he attended
into the Palatinate in 1620; to the siege of Dornick, in
Holland, in 1621 to that of Rees in 1622 to Arnheim,
in 1623 to the siege of Breda in 1624 and in the expedition to Cadiz in 1625. In 1630 he was discharged the
earl’s service, at the importunity of his lady, who had conceived an aversion to him, because she had supposed him
to have been against the earl’s marrying her. He tells us,
in his own life, that this lady’s name, before she marrie,d
the earl, was Elizabeth Paulet; that “she appeared to the
eye a beauty, full of harmless sweetness; that her conversation was affable and gentle; and, as he was firmly persuaded, that it was not forced, but natural. But the height
of her marriage and greatness being an accident, altered
her very nature; for,
” he says, “she was the true image
of Pandora’s box,
” nor was he much mistaken, for this
lady was divorced for adultery two years after her marriage. In 1631 he retired to Oxford, and became gentlman commoner of Trinity college, where he stayed almost
two years, and was punctual in his compliance with the
laws of the university. Then he was sent for to be steward
to the earl of Warwick, whom he attended in 1637 to the
siege of Breda. He died in 1652, at Felstead, in Essex,
and his will was proved in October of that year. The earl
and countess of Warwick received from him the whole of
his library, and 50l. to be laid out in purchasing a piece of
gold plate, as a memorial, particularly applying to the
Jatter, “in testimony,
” as he adds, “of my humble duty
and gratitude for all her noble and 1 undeserved favours to
me.
” Gratitude seems to have been a strong principle
with Wilson, as appears from his life, written by himself,
and printed in Peck’s “Desiderata.
” Wood’s account of
him is, that “he had little skill in the Latin tongue, less
in the Greek, a good readiness in the French, and some
smattering in the Dutch. He was well seen in the mathematics and poetry, and sometimes in the common law
of the nation. He had composed some comedies, which
were acted at the Black Friars, in London, by the king’s
players, and in the act-time at Oxford, with good applause,
himself being- present; but whether they are printed I cannot yet tell; sure lam, that I have several specimens of
his poetry printed in divers books. His carriage was very
courteous and obliging, and such as did become a wellbred gentleman. He also had a great command of the
English tongue, as well in writing as speaking; and, had
he bestowed his endeavours on any other subject than that
of history, they would without doubt have seemed better.
For, in those things which he hath done, are wanting the
principal matters conducing to the completion of that
” faculty, viz. matter from record, exact time, name, and
place, which, by his endeavouring too much to set out his
bare collections in an affected and bombastic style, are
much neglected.“The history here alluded to by Wood,
is
” The Life and Reign of king James I.“printed in London in 1653, folio; that is, the year after his death and
reprinted in the 2d volume of
” -The complete History of
England,“in 1706, folio. This history has been severely
treated by many writers. Mr. William Sanderson says, that,
” to give Wilson his due, we may find truth and falsehood
finely put together in it.“Heylin, in the-general preface
to his
” Examen,“styles Wilson’s history
” a most famous
pasquil of the reign of king James; in which it is not easy to
judge whether the matter be more false, or the style more
reproachful to all parts thereof.“Mr. Thomas Fuller, in his
” Appeal of injured Innocence,“observes, how Robert
earl of Warwick told him at Beddington, that, whenWilson’s
book in manuscript was brought to him, his lordship expunged more than an hundred offensive passages: to which
Mr. Fuller replied,
” My lord, you have done well; and
you had done better if you had put out a hundred more.“Mr. Wood’s sentence is,
” that, in our author’s history,
may easily be discerned a partial presbyterian vein, that
constantly goes through the whole work: and it being the
genius of those people to pry more than they should into
the courts and comportments of princes, they do take occasion thereupon to traduce and bespatter them. Further
also, our author, having endeavoured in many things to
make the world believe that king James and his son after
him were inclined to Popery, and to bring that religion
into England, hath made him subject to many errors and
misrepresentations.“On the other band, archdeacon
Echard tells us, that
” Wilson’s History of the life and
reign of king James, though written not without some
prejudices and rancour in respect to some persons, and too
much with the air of a romance, is thought to be the best
of that kind extant:“and the writer of the notes on the
edition of it in the
” Complete History of England“remarks, that, as to the style of our author’s history,
” it is
harsh and broken, the periods often obscure, and sometimes
without connection; faults, that were common in most writers of that time. Though he finished that history in the
year 1652, a little before his death, when both the monarchy and hierarchy were overturned, it does not appear he
was an enemy to either, but only to the corruptions of
them; as he intimates in the picture he draws of himself
before that hook."
reason to doubt, for besides an account of him while there by one of his pupils, printed by Fox, the historian of Bene’t or Corpus Christ! college has inserted a short account
, one of the first martyrs for the protestant religion in Scotland, and a person of great distinction in the ecclesiastical history of that country, was born in the beginning of the sixteenth century, and appears to have very early felt the consequences of imbibing the spirit of the reformers. He was descended of the house of Pitarrow in the Mearns, an illustrious family in Scotland, and is said to have travelled into Germany, where he became acquainted with the opinions of Luther. Other accounts mention x his having been banished from his own country by the bishop of Brechin, for teaching the Greek 7‘estament in the town of Montrose, and that after this he resided for some years in the university of Cambridge. Of this latter circumstance there is no reason to doubt, for besides an account of him while there by one of his pupils, printed by Fox, the historian of Bene’t or Corpus Christ! college has inserted a short account of him, as one of the members of that house. In 1544, he returned to his native country, in the company of the commissioners who had been sent to negociate a treaty with Henry VIII. of England. At this time he was allowed to excel all his countrymen in learning, and to be a man of the most persuasive eloquence, irreproachable in life, courteous and affable in manners. His fervent piety, zeal, and courage, in the cause of truth, were tempered with uncommon meekness, modesty, patience, prudence, and charity. With these qualifications he began to preach in a very bold manner, against the corruptions of the Romish church, and the vices of the clergy. He met with a most favourable reception wherever he appeared, and was much followed and eagerly listened to, which so excited the indignation of cardinal Beaton, and the popish clergy in general, that a resolution was formed to take away his life by some means or other.
, a Scotch ecclesiastical historian, son to the rev. James Wodrow, professor of divinity in the
, a Scotch ecclesiastical historian,
son to the rev. James Wodrow, professor of divinity in the
university of Glasgow, was born there in 1679, and after
passing through his academic course, was chosen in 1698
librarian to the university. He held this office for four
years, during which he had many valuable opportunities for
indulging his taste in the history and antiquities of the
church of Scotland. In 1703 he was ordained minister of
the parish of Eastwood, in which humble station he continued all his life, although he had encouraging offers of
greater preferment in Glasgow and Stirling. He died in
1734, at the age of fifty-five. He published in 1721, in
2 vols. folio., a “History of the singular sufferings of the
Church of Scotland, during the twenty-eight years immediately preceding the Revolution,
” written with a fidelity
which has seldom been disputed, and confirmed, at the end
of each volume, by a large mass of public and private records. In England this work has been little known, except perhaps by an abridgment in 2 vols. 8vo. by the Rev.
Mr. Cruickshanks, but since the publication of the historical work of the Hop. Charles James Fox, as well as by the
writings of Messrs. Sommerville and Laing, it has greatly
risen in reputation as well as price. “No historical facts,
”
Mr. Fox says, “are better ascertained than the accounts
which are to be found in Wodrow. In every instance
where there has been an opportunity of comparing these
accounts with the records and authentic monuments, they
appear to be quite correct.
” Mr. Wodrow also left a greafc
many biographical memoirs of the Scotch reformers and
presbyterian divines, which are preserved in the university
library of Glasgow.
mbered with more respect as a benefactor to learning, was so obscure in his origin that scarcely any historian mentions the names of his father and mother. Their names, however,
, a celebrated cardinal and statesman, but to be remembered with more respect as a benefactor to learning, was so obscure in his origin that scarcely any historian mentions the names of his father and mother. Their names, however, are preserved by Rymer (Feed. vol. XIV. p. 355), in the pope’s bull of favours to those who came to Cardinal college in Oxford, and prayed for the safety of the said cardinal, and after his decease for the souls of him, his father Robert, and his mother Joan. This partly confirms the discovery of his zealous biographer, Dr. Fiddes, that he was the son of one Robert Wolsey, a butcher of Ipswich, where he was born in March 1471. Fiddes says that this Robert had a son whose early history corresponds with that of the cardinal, and that he was a man of considerable landed property. We may from other evidence conclude that his parents were either not poor, or not friendless, since they were able to give him the best education his native, town afforded, and afterwards to send him to Magdalen college. But in whatever way he was introduced here, it is certain that his progress in academical studies was so rapid that he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts at the age of fifteen, and from this extraordinary instance of precocity, was usually named the boy bachelor.
the constitution of this college, there is a considerable variation between the account given by the historian of Oxford, and that by Leonard Hutten, canon of Christ Church,
With respect to the constitution of this college, there is a considerable variation between the account given by the historian of Oxford, and that by Leonard Hutten, canon of Christ Church, in 1599, and many years sub-dean. His manuscript, now in the possession of the college, and quoted in the Monasticon, states that, according to Wolsey’s design, it was to be a perpetual foundation for the study of the sciences, divinity, canon and civil law, also the arts, physic, and polite literature, and for the continual performance of divine service. The members were to be, a dean, and sixty regular canous, but no canons of the second order, as Wood asserts.
from the author’s original manuscript.” Impartiality and veracity being qualities so essential in an historian, that all other qualities without them cannot make a history
Mr. Wood afterwards undertook his more important work,
which was published in 1691, folio; and a second edition
in 1721. folio, with this title: “Athenæ Oxonienses. An
exact history of all the writers and bishops who have had
their education in the most ancient and famous university
of Oxford, from the fifteenth year of king Henry the seventh, A.D. 1500, to the author’s death in November,
1695; representing the birth, fortune, preferment, and
death of all those authors and prelates, the great accidents
of their lives, and the fate and character of their writings.
To which are added, the Fasti, or annals of the skid university. In two volumes. The second edition, very much
corrected and enlarged; with the addition of above 500
new lives from the author’s original manuscript.
” Impartiality and veracity being qualities so essential in an historian, that all other qualities without them cannot make a
history good for any thing, Wood has taken some pains to
prove, that these great qualities were not wanting in him;
and for that purpose thought it expedient to prefix to his
work the following curious account of himself. “As to the
author himself,
” says he, “he is a person who delights to
converse more with the dead than with the living, and has
neither interest with, nor inclination to flatter or disgrace,
any man, or any community of men, of whatever denomination. He is such a universal lover of all mankind, that
he could wish there was such a standing measure of merit
and honour agreed upon among them all, that there might
be no cheat put upon readers and writers in the business
of commendations. But, since every one will have a double
balance herein, one for himself and his own party, and another for his adversary and dissenters, all he can do is, to,
amass and bring together what every side thinks will make
best weight for themselves. Let posterity hold the scales
and judge accordingly; suu m cuique decus. posteritas rependat. To conclude: the reader is desired to know, that
this Herculean labour had been more proper for a head
or fellow of a college, or for a public professor or officer
of the most noble university of Oxford to have undertaken
and consummated, than the author, who never enjoyed any
place or office therein, or can justly say that he hath eaten
the bread of any founder. Also, that it had been a great
deal more fit for one who pretends to be a virtuoso, and to
know all men, and all things that are transacted; or for one
who frequents much society in common rooms, at public
fires, in coffee-houses, assignations, clubs, &c. where the
characters of men and their works are frequently discussed;
but the author, alas! is so far from frequenting such company and topics, that he is as it were dead to the world,
and utterly unknown in person to the generality of scholars
in Oxon. He is likewise so great an admirer of a solitary
and retired life, that he frequents no assemblies of the said
university, hath no companion in bed or at board, in his
studies, walks, or journeys; nor holds communication with
any, unless with some, and those very few, of generous and
noble spirits, that have in some measure been promoters
and encouragers of this work: and, indeed, all things considered, he is but a degree different from an ascetic, as
spending all or most of his time, whether by day or night,
in reading, writing, and divine contemplation. However,
l>e presumes, that, the less his company and acquaintance
is, the more impartial his endeavours -will appear to the
ingenious and learned, to whose judgments only he submits them and himself.
”
cordingly, and public programmas of his expulsion are already affixed in the three usual places.” An historian who has recorded this censure says, that it was the more grievous
But, as unconnected as Wood represents himself with
all human things and persons, it is certain that he had his
prejudices and attachments, and strong ones too, for certain notions and systems; and these prejudices and attachments will always be attended with partialities for or
against those who shall be found to favour or oppose such
notions or systems. They had their influence upon Wood,
who, though he always spoke to the best of his judgment,
and often with great truth and exactness, yet sometimes
gave way to prejudice and prepossession. Among other,
freedoms, he took some with the earl of Clarendon, their
late chancellor, which exposed him to the censure of the
university. He had observed in the life of judge Glynne,
that “after the restoration of Charles II. he was made his
eldest serjeant at law, by the corrupt dealing of the then
chancellor,
” who was the earl of Clarendon: for which
expression, chiefty, the succeeding earl preferred an action in the vice-chancellor’s court against him for defamation of his deceased father. The issue of the process
was a hard judgement given against the defendant; which,
to be made the more public, was put into the Gazette in
these words: “Oxford, July 31, 1693. On the-29th instant, Anthony Wood was condemned in the
vice-chancellor’s court of the university of Oxford, for having written
and published, in the second volume of his book, entitled
`Athense Oxonienses,' divers infamous libels against the
right honourable Edward late earl of Clarendon, lord high
chancellor of England, and chancellor of the said university; and was therefore banished the said university, until
such time as he shall subscribe such a public recantation
as the judge of the court shall approve of, and give security not to offend in the like nature for the future: and his
said book was therefore also decreed to be burnt before the
public theatre; and on this day it was burnt accordingly,
and public programmas of his expulsion are already affixed
in the three usual places.
” An historian who has recorded
this censure says, that it was the more grievous to the
blunt author, because it seemed to come from a party of
men whom he had the least disobliged. His bitterness had
been against the Dissenters; but of all the zealous Churchmen he had given characters with a singular turn of esteem
and affection. Nay, of the Jacobites, and even of Papists
themselves, he had always t spoken the most favourable
things; and therefore it was really the greater mortification
to him, to feel the storm coming from a quarter where he
thought he least deserved, and might least expect it. For
the same reason, adds the historian, this correction was
some pleasure to the Presbyterians, who believed there was
a rebuke due to him, which they themselves were not able
to pay. Wood was animadverted upon likewise by Burnet,
in his “Letter to the bishop of Litchfield and Coventry,
concerning a book of Anthony Harmer (alias Henry Wharton), called `A Specimen of some Errors and Defects in
the History of the Reformation,' &c.
” upon which, in
Athenæ Oxonienses.
”
f his widow. Mr. Wood purchased it of the executors of Edward Gibbon, esq. whose son, the celebrated historian, was born there. The farm and pleasuregrounds which adjoin the
Mr. Wood had drawn up a great part of his “Essay on
Homer
” in the life-time of Mr. Dawkins, who wished it to
be made public. “But,
” says Mr. Wood, “while I was
preparing it for the press, I had the honour of being called
to a station, which for some years fixed my whole attention upon objects of so very different a nature, that it hecame necessary to lay Homer aside, and to reserve the farther consideration of my subject for a time of more leisure. However, in the course of that active period, the
duties of my situation engaged me in an occasional attendance upon a nobleman (the late earl Granville), who,
though he presided at his majesty’s councils, reserved
some moments for literary amusement. His lordship was
so partial to this subject, that I seldom had the honour of
receiving his commands on business, that he did not lead
the conversation to Greece and Homer. Being directed to
wait upon his lordship a few days before he died, with the
preliminary articles of the treaty of Paris, I found him so
languid, that I proposed postponing my business for another
time^ but he insisted that I should stay, saying,
” it could
not prolong his life, to neglect his duty:“and, repeating a
passage out of Sarpedon’s speech, dwelt with particular
emphasis on a line which recalled to his mind the distinguishing part he had taken in public affairs. His lordship
then repeated the last word several times with a calm and
determined resignation; and, after a serious pause of some
minutes, he desired to hear the treaty read; to which he
listened with great attention; and recovered spirits enough
to declare the approbation of a dying statesman (1 use his own words) on the most glorious war, and most honourable
peace, this country ever saw.
”
Mr. Wood also left behind him several Mss. relating to
his travels, but not sufficiently arranged to afford any
hopes of their being given to the public. The house in
which he lived in Putney is situated between the roads
which lead to Wandswprth and Wimbledon, and became
the residence of his widow. Mr. Wood purchased it of
the executors of Edward Gibbon, esq. whose son, the celebrated historian, was born there. The farm and pleasuregrounds which adjoin the house are very spacious, containing near fourscore acres, and surrounded by a gravel-walk,
which commands a beautiful prospect of London and the
adjacent country. Mr. Wood was buried in the cemetery
near the upper road to Richmond. On his monument
is the following inscription, drawn up by the hon. Horace
Walpole, earl of Orford, at the request of his widow:
biographer supposes, he had as yet only the clerical tonsure, or some of the lower orders, while the historian of Winchester thinks he was ordained priest by bishop Edyngdon.
With a sovereign of Edward III.'s magnificent taste, it
was but natural that Wykeham should now become a favourite, and accordingly we find that his majesty wished to
distinguish him by many marks of royal favour. In order
to facilitate this, it was necessary he should take orders,
as ecclesiastical promotion was more particularly within his
majesty’s pjwer, where the pope did not think proper to
interfere; but this part of Wykeham’s* history is not so
clearly detailed as could be wished. There is, on the contrary, some reason to think that he was in the church before he had given proof of his talents at Windsor and
Queenborough. In all the patents for the offices he held,
he is styled Clericus, but, as his biographer supposes, he
had as yet only the clerical tonsure, or some of the lower
orders, while the historian of Winchester thinks he was
ordained priest by bishop Edyngdon. The first preferment bestowed on him was the rectory of Pulham in Norfolk, in 1357, and as the court of Rome threw some obstacles in the way which kept him for a time out of that
living, the king, in 1359, granted him two hundred' pounds
a year over and above all his former appointments, until he
should get quiet possession of Pulham, or some other benefice, to the value of one hundred marks. But the disproportion between the worth of the living, and the compensation for delay, is so very striking as to incline us to think,
either that Dr. Lowth has by mistake inserted 200l. for 20l.
or that the king took this opportunity to shew a special
mark of his favour, for which the loss of the living should
be the ostensible motive. In the mean time he was presented to the prebend of Flixton in the church of Lichfieid, which he afterwards exchanged for some other benefice, and in 1359 he was constituted chief warden and surveyor of the king’s castles of Windsor, Leedes, Dover, and
Hadlam; and of the manors of old and new Windsor, Wichenier, and several other castles, manors, and houses,
and of the parks belonging to them. In 1360, the king
granted him the deanery of the royal free chapel, or collegiate church of St. Martin le Grand, London, which he
held about three years; during which he rebuilt, at his
own expense, the cloister of the Chapter-house, and the
body of the church. This is the first instance on record
in which he is noticed as a public benefactor. In 1361 he
was quietly settled in the rectory of Pulham, and in less
than two years received many other ecclesiastical preferments, specified by Dr. Lowth. The annual value of his
livings, for some years before he became bishop of Winchester, amounted to 842l. but “he only received the
revenues of the church with one hand, to expend them in
her service with the other.
”
, by his twelve fellows, and seventy scholars, intended to allude to the apostles and disciples. The historian of Winchester informs us that the same design entered into the
During the progress of the building, he established in form that society at Winchester which was to supply New college with its members. The charter of foundation is dated Oct. 20, 1382, and the college named Seinee Marie College of Wynchestrea. The year after New college was finished he began this other upon the scite where stood the school at which he received his early education. This, likewise, was completed in six years, with a magnificence scarcely inferior to that of New college, and was opened for the reception of its intended inhabitants, March 28, 1393. The society resembles that of his other institution, consisting of a warden, seventy scholars, to be instructed in grammatical learning, ten secular priests, perpetual fellows, three priests, chaplains, three clerks, and sixteen choristers: and for the instruction of the scholars, a schoolmaster, and an undermaster or usher. The founder of Queen’s college, by his twelve fellows, and seventy scholars, intended to allude to the apostles and disciples. The historian of Winchester informs us that the same design entered into the contemplation of Wykeham. The warden and ten priests represented the apostles, with the omission of Judas. The head master and second master, with the seventy scholars, denoted the seventy-two disciples, as in the vulgate, for the English bible, which is translated from the Greek, has only seventy the three chaplains, and three inferior clerks marked the six faithful deacons Nicholas; one of the number, having apostatized, has therefore no representative; and the sixteen choristers represented the four greater, and the twelve minor prophets.
ynton, not inferior to Fordun in historic merit, has also an equal claim to the title of an original historian of Scotland: for, though he survived Fordun, it is certain that
The Chronicle of Wynton was suffered to remain in ms. for the space of several centuries, until in 1795 a splendid edition of that part of it which relates more immediately to the affairs of Scotland, was published by the late Mr. David Macpherson, in 2 vols. 8vo. The editor has added a copious glossary, a series of learned and valuable annotations, and other useful appendages. He says, with truth, that Wynton, not inferior to Fordun in historic merit, has also an equal claim to the title of an original historian of Scotland: for, though he survived Fordun, it is certain that he never saw his work; and his Chronicle has the advantage, not only of being completed to the period which he proposed, but even of being revised and greatly improved by himself in a second copy. It has also the further advantage, for such it surely ought to be esteemed, of being written in the language of the country
unlearned part of mankind under the veil of a dead or a foreign language. In Wyntbwn’s Chronicle the historian may find what, for want of more ancient records, which have
whereas the information contained in all the other histories of Scotland preceding the middle of the seventeenth century, if we except the brief chronicle subjoined to some manuscripts of Wyntown, and the translations of Ballenden and Read, was effectually concealed from the unlearned part of mankind under the veil of a dead or a foreign language. In Wyntbwn’s Chronicle the historian may find what, for want of more ancient records, which have long ago perished, we must now consider as the original accounts of many transactions, and also many events related from his own knowledge or the reports of eye-witnesses. His faithful adherence to his authorities appears from comparing his accounts with unquestionable vouchers, such as the Fcedera Anglise, and the existing remains of the Register of the priory of St. Andrew’s, that venerable monument of ancient Scottish history and antiquities, generally coaeval with the facts recorded in it, whence he has given large extracts, almost literally translated. All these we have hitherto been obliged to take at second or third hand in copies by Bower and others, with such additions and embellishments as they were pleased to make to Wyntown’s simple and genuine narrative. An ecclesiastical historian of Scotland can no where find so good an account of the bishops of St. Andrew’s, with occasional notices concerning the other sees, as from Wyntown, who in describing the churches, their buildings and paraphernalia, shews himself quite at home. The compiler of a Scottish peerage may obtain from Wyntown more true information concerning the ancient noble families of Scotland, than is to be found in any work extant, except the accurate and elaborate research made by the late lord Hailes in the celebrated Sutherland case, wherein he has repeatedly had recourse to our author for proofs of the laws and customs of succession. In this view the lawyer will also find the Chronicle of Wyntown an useful addition to his library, and may consult it with advantage, when called upon to adjust a disputed inheritance in an ancient family. Mr. Ellis, who allows that Wynton is highly valuable as a historian, adds that his versification is easy, his language pure, and his style often animated.
, an illustrious philosopher, soldier, and historian, was an Athenian, the son of Gryllus, a person of high rank,
, an illustrious philosopher, soldier, and
historian, was an Athenian, the son of Gryllus, a person
of high rank, and was born in the third year of the eightysecond Olympiad, or B. C. 450. Few particulars of his
early life are known. Laertius tells us, that meeting Socrates in a narrow lane, after he was pretty well grown up,
he stopped the philosopher with his staff; and asked him,
“Where all kinds of meats were to be sold ?
” To which
Socrates made a serious answer: and then demanded of
him, “Where it was that men were made good and virtuous?
” At which Xenophon pausing, “Follow me,
then,
” said Socrates, “and learn:
” from which time he
became the disciple of that father of ancient wisdom.
, a Greek historian, who lived about 1120, held some considerable posts at the court
, a Greek historian, who lived about
1120, held some considerable posts at the court of the emperors of Constantinople. He afterwards entered the monastic order of St. Basil. He has left “Annals,
” to the
death of Alexius Comnenus, Annals,
” although valuable for their information, are written with
little accuracy or critical skill, and discover too much credulity. President Cousin has translated into French what
relates to the Roman history. We have also some “Commentaries
” by Zonaras, on the canons of the apostles and
of the councils, Paris, 1618, folio; and some “Tracts.
”
, an ancient historian, who lived at the end of the fourth, and the beginning of the
, an ancient historian, who lived at the end
of the fourth, and the beginning of the fifth, century, was
a man of quality and place, having the title of count, and
being advocate of the treasury. There are extant six books
of history, in the first of which he runs over the Roman
affairs in a very succinct and general manner, from Augustus to Dioclesian: the other five books are written more
largely, especially when he comes to the time of Theodosius the Great, and of his children Arcadius and Honorius,
with whom he was contemporary. Of the sixth book we
have only the beginning, the rest being lost. Zosimus drew
his narrative from historians now lost, viz. Dexippus, Eunapius, and Olympiodorus. His style is far superior to that
of the writers of the age in which he lived, and he is an historian of authority for his account of the changes introduced
by Constantine and Theodosius in the empire. He contains, however, many superstitious accounts, and being a
zealous pagan, he must be read with caution as to what relates to the Christian princes. Photius says, “that he barks
like a dog at those of the Christian religion:
” and few
Christian authors till Leunclavius, who translated his history into Latin, made any apology for him. “To say the
truth,
” says La Mothe le Vayer, “although this learned
German defends him very pertinently in many things, shewing how wrong it would be to expect from a Pagan historian, like Zosimus, other sentiments than those he professed; or that he should refrain from discovering the vices
of the first Christian emperors, since he has not concealed
their virtues; yet it cannot be denied, that in very many
places he has shewn more animosity than the laws of history
permit. 7 ' Some have said that his history is a perpetual
lampoon on the plausible appearances of great actions.
The six books of his
” History" have been published, with
the Latin version of Leunclavius, at Frankfort, 1590, with
other minor historians of Rome, in folio; at Oxford, 1679,
in 8vo, and at Ciza the same year, under the care of Cellarius, in 8vo. This was dedicated to Graevius, and reprinted at Jena, 1714, in 8vo. But the best edition is that
of Jo. Frid. Reitemeier, Gr. and Lat. with Heyne’s notes,
published at Leipsic in 1784, 8vo. The prolegomena are
particularly valuable.
of William Powell, alias Huison, esq. Wood says, “He was an exact artist, a subtle logician, expert historian, and for the knowledge in the practice of the civil law, the
On the death of Dr. Gerard Langbaine, he offered himself as a candidate against Dr. Wallis for the place of custos archivorum to the university, but was unsuccessful.
(See Wallis.) On the restoration he was reinstated in his
post of judge of the admiralty, and was made one of the
commissioners for regulating the university, but did not
survive that year, dying at his apartments in Doctors’ Commons, March 1, 1660. He was interred at Fulham church,
Middlesex, near the grave of his eldest daughter, sometime the wife of William Powell, alias Huison, esq. Wood
says, “He was an exact artist, a subtle logician, expert
historian, and for the knowledge in the practice of the
civil law, the chief person of his time, as his works, much
esteemed beyond, the seas (where several of them are reprinted) partly testify. He was so well versed in the statutes of the university, and controversies between the members thereof and the city, that none after (Bryan) Twine’s
death went beyond him. As his birth was noble, so was
his behaviour and discourse; and as he was personable
and handsome, so he was naturally sweet, pleasing, and
affable.
”