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

Of his principal work, the “Vitoe Italorum doctrina excelleutium, qua sceculis XVII. eV^Vui. floruerunt,” eighteen volumes were published in his life-time; and two more were afterwards added: the last contains some memoirs of his life written by himself, with illustrative notes, a short continuation, and a collection of letters addressed to him by various illustrious and learned characters. His lives are written with great accuracy and precision, and many of them are much fuller and more minute than was attempted by any preceding biographer; but his Latin, style, which he fancied to be pure, is deformed by many words and phrases of modern Latinity, and he has rendered many circumstances obscure by Latinizing the names of eminent persons of all nations.

His other works, not already mentioned, are, 1. f< Dialochi di Focione del Mably, trad, del Francese.“2.” Lettere del Magolotti,“Florence, 1769. 3.” Lettered'Uomini dotti a Leopoldo Medici.“4.” Istoria dell' arte del disegno.“5.” Dissertazione sulla fabola di Niobe.“5.” Prefazioni al I. e II. tomo degli Uomini Illustri Pisani.“6.” Vita Laurentii Medicei,“4to. 7.” Historia Lycaei Pisani,“3 vols. 4to. He was at one time rector of the university of Pisa, but his employment ceased with the incursions of the French army. 8.” Viaggi d'Anacarsi.“9.” Vita Leonis X.“4to. 10.” Vita Cosnii Medicei,“4to. 11.” Epistolae Francisci Petrarchae,“4to. 12.” Vita F. Petrarchae,“4to. 13.” Vita Pallantis Stroctii,“4to. 14.” Elogi d'illustri Italiani, cioe di Michelangelo Giacomelli, Eust. Zanotti, Tomaso Perelli, Paolo Frisi, Innocenzo Frugeni, e Pietro Metastasio.“15.” Elogi di Dante Alighieri, di Angelo Poliziano, di Ludovico Ariosto, e di Torquato Tasso,“Parma, 1800. 16.” Oratio ad S. R. E. Cardinales cum subrogandi Pontificis causa conclave Venetiis ingressuri essent,“Pisa, 1800. 17.” Oratio in funere Franc. Leopoldi Austriaci,“Pisa, 1800. 18.” Devoti AfFetti in prepa.;zione alle Feste del S. natale,“&c. ibid. 1801. 19.” Novena in onore di Maria S. S. Ausiliatrice, colP aggiunta di dodici Meditazioni," isa, 1803.

, a very learned lawyer and scholar, was born in 1580, at Aix in Provence, whither his father, a native of Nismes in Languedoc, had retired during the civil wars. After making very distinguished progress in Greek and Latin, the belles lettres, and jurisprudence, he was admitted doctor of laws in 1606, and then became an advocate in the parliament of Aix. Among the many friends of distinction to whom his talents recommended him, were M. de Peiresc, a counsellor of that parliament, and William de Vair, first president. By the interest of this last-mentioned gentleman, he was promoted to the law-professorship at Aix, which office he filled until 1617, when Du Vair being made keeper of the seals, invited him to Paris. On Du Vair’s death in 1621, Fabrot resumed his office in the university of Aix, where he was appointed second professor in 1632, and first professor in 1638. At this time he was absent, having the preceding year gone to Paris to print his notes on the institutes of Theophilus, an ancient jurist. This work he dedicated to the chancellor Seguier, who requested him to remain in Paris, and undertake the translation of 1 the Basilics, or Constitutions of the Eastern emperors, and gave him a pension of 2000 livres. This work, and his editions of some of the historians of Constantinople, which he published afterwards, procured him from the king the office of counsellor of the parliamentof Provence, but the intervention of the civil wars rendered this appointment null. During his stay at Paris, however, several of the French universities were ambitious to add him to the number of their teachers, particularly Valence and Bourges, offers which his engagements prevented his accepting. His death is said to have been hastened by the rigour of his application in preparing his new edition of Cujas; but his life had already been lengthened beyond the usual period, as he was in his seventy-ninth year when he died, Jan. 16, 1659. His works are: 1. “Antiquite’s de la ville de Marseille,” Lyons, 1615 and 1632, 8vo. This is a translation from the Latin ms. of Raymond de Soliers. 2. “Ad tit. Codicis Theodosiani de Paganis, Sacrificiis, et Templis notae,” Paris, 1618, 4to. 3. “Exercitationes duae de tempore humani partus et de numero puerperii,” Aix, 1628, 8vo; Geneva, 1629, 4to, with a treatise by Carranza, on natural and legitimate birth. 4. “Car. Ann. Fabroti Exercitationes XII. Accedunt leges XIV. quae in libris digestarum deerant, Gr. et Lat. mine primum ex Basilicis editnc,” Paris, 1639, 4to. 5. rt Thcophili Antecessoris InstituiK-iies,“Gr. et Lat. Paris, 1638 and 1657, 4to. 6.” Inatiuuiones Justiniani, cum notis Jacobi Cujacii,“ibid. I, 12mo. 7.” Epistolae de Mutuo, cum responsionc Claudii Salmasii ad ^gidium Menagium,“Leyden, 1645, 8vo. 8.” Replicatio adversus C. Salmasii refutationem,“&c. Paris, 1647, 4to. 9.” Basilicorum libri sexaginta,“Gr. et Lat. ibid. 1647, 7 vols. folio. The whole of the translation of this elaborate collection of the laws and constitutions of the Eastern emperors, was performed by Fabrot, except books 38, 39, and 60, which had been translated by Cujas, whose version he adopted. 10.” Nicetae Acominati Choniatoe Historia,“ibid. 1647, fol. 11.” Georgii Cedreni Compendium historiarum,“Gr. et Lat. ibid. 1647, 2 vols. fol. 12.” Theophylacti Simocattse Hist, libri octo,“ibid. 1647, fol. 13.” Anastasii Bibliothecarii Hist. Ecclesiastica,“ibid. 1649, fol. 14.” Laonici Chalcondyla? Hist. de origine ac rebus gestis Turcarum, libri decem,“ibid. 1650. fol. 15.” Praelectio in tit. Decret. Gregorii IX. de vitaet honestate Clericorum,“ibid. 1651, 4to. 16.” Constantini Manassis Breviarium Historicum,“Gr. et Lat. ibid, 1655, fol. 17.” Cujacii Opera omnia,“ibid. 1658, 10 vols. fol. 15.” J. P. de Maurize Juris Canonici Selecta,“ibid. 1659, 4to. 19.” Notae in T. Balsamonis collectionem constitutionum Ecclesiasticarum." This is inserted in the second volume of Justel and VoePs Bibliotheca of Canon law. Ruhnkenius published a supplementary volume to his edition of Cujas at Leyden in 1765.

, an English historian, was an alderman of London, and presents us with the rare instance of a citizen and merchant, in the fifteenth century, devoting himself to the pleasures of learning: but we know little of his personal history. There was nothing remarkable in his descent, and he made no great figure in public life. From his will it appears that his father’s name was John Fabyan; and there is reason to believe that, although he was apprenticed to a trade, his family were people of substance in Essex. Bishop Tanner says he was born in London. At what period he became a member of the Drapers’ company cannot now be ascertained. Their registers would probably have furnished a clue to guess at the exact time of his birth, but the hall of that ancient company was twice destroyed by fire, and they have no muniments which reach beyond 1602. From records, however, in the city archives, it appears that he was alderman of the ward of Farringdon Without; in 1493 he served the office of sheriff; and in the registers which go by the name of the “Repertory,” a few scattered memoranda are preserved of the part which he occasionally took, at a period somewhat later, in public transactions.

On the 20th of September, 1496, in the mayoralty of sir Henry Colet, we find him “assigned and chosen,” with Mr. Recorder and certain commoners, to ride to the king “for redress of the new impositions raised and levied upon English cloths in the archduke’s land.” This probably alludes to the circumstance of Philip, to whom the emperor Maximilian had resigned the Low Countries the year before, exacting the duty of a florin upon every piece of English cloth imported into his dominions; but which he desisted from in the articles of agreement signed by his ambassadors in London, July 7, 1497. In the following year, when the Cornish rebels marched towards London, alderman Fabyan was appointed with John Brooke, and John Warner, late sheriff, to keep the gates of Ludgate and Newgate, the postern of the house of Friars-preachers, and the Bar of the New Temple. A few months after, in the thirteenth of Henry VII. we find him an assessor upon the different wards of London, of the fifteenth which had been granted to the king for the Scottish war. In 1502, on the pretext of poverty, he resigned the alderman’s gown, not willing to take the mayoralty; and probably retired to the mansion in Essex, mentioned in his will, at Theydon Gernon. That he was opulent at this period cannot be doubted, but he seems to have considered that the expences of the chief magistracy were too great, even at that time, to be sustained by a man who had a family of sixteen children, for such is the number specified in his will, and whose figures in brass he ordered to be placed upon his monument. Stowe, in his “Survey of London,” gives the English part of the epitaph on Fabyan’s tomb, from the church of St. Michael, Cornhill, and says he died in 1511; adding that his monument was gone. Bale, who places Fabyan’s death on February 28, 1512, is probably nearest the truth, as his will", though dated July ilth, 1511, was not proved till July 12th, 1513; which, according to the ecclesiastical computation, would be somewhat less than five months after the supposed time of his death. His will, which affords a curious comment on the manners of the time of Henry VIII. may be seen in Mr. Ellis’ s late excellent edition of his Chronicle, to the preface to which edition this article is solely indebted.

From several passages in Fabyan’s history, it is evident that he was conversant in French, and no layman of the age he lived in is said to have been better skilled in the Latin language. With these accomplishments, with great opportunities, and with a taste for poetry, he endeavoured to reconcile the discordant testimonies of historians, and therefore named his work “The Concordance of Histories;” adding the fruits of personal observation in the latter and more interesting portion of his Chronicle. His poetry, indeed, is not of a superior cast. Mr. Warton considered “The Complaint of king Edward II.” to be the best of his metres but observes, that it is a translation from a Latin poem attributed to that monarch, but probably written by William of Wyrcestre. “Our author’s transitions,” he adds, “from prose to verse, in the course of a prolix narrative, seem to be made with much ease, and when he begins to versify, the historian disappears only by the addition of rhyme and stanza.”

Fabyan, like the old chroniclers in general, for fear of neglecting some important facts, went beyond the age of historical certainty in his details. He divides his Chronicles into seven portions, giving a copy of verses as an epilogue to each, under the title of the Seven Joys of the Blessed Virgin. The first six portions bring his history from the landing of Brute to the Norman conquest. The seventh extends from the conquest to the conclusion. That he was a little tinged with superstition must be allowed; but he was no great favourer of the monastic institution, and his observations on some of the miracles related in his history are too pointed to be mistaken.

There have been five editions of Fabyan; the first printed by Pynson, in 1516, the great rarity of which is attributed by Bale to cardinal Wolsey, who ordered some copies “exemplaria nonnulla” to be burnt, because the author had made too clear a discovery of the revenues of the clergy. This obnoxious part, Mr. Ellis thinks, was the abstract of the bill projected by the house of commons in the eleventh year of Henry IV. for depriving ecclesiastics of their temporal possessions. Bale’s assertion, however, is unsupported by any other writer. The second edition was printed by Rastell in 1533; the third by John Reynes in 1542; the fourth by Kingston in 1559, all in folio; and the fifth makes part of the series of Chronicles lately reprinted by a society of the most eminent booksellers of London, and was edited by Henry Ellis, esq. F. R. S. and F. S. A. with such collations and improvements as give it a very superior value. It is reprinted from Pynson’s edition of 1516, the first part collated with the editions of 1533, 1542, and 1559, and the second with a manuscript of the author’s own time, as well as the subsequent editions including the different continuations.

, a man of considerable learning, but unfortunately connected with the French prophets, was a native of Switzerland, whither his family, originally Italians, were obliged to take refuge, for religion’s sake, in the beginning of the reformation. He was born Feb. 16, 1664. His father intending him for the study of divinity, he was regularly instructed in Greek and Latin, philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy; learned a little of the Hebrew tongue, and began to attend the lectures of the divinity professors of Geneva: but his mother being averse to this, he was left to pursue his own course, and appears to have produced the first fruits of his studies in some letters on subjects of astronomy sent to Cassini, the French king’s astronomer. In 1682 he went to Paris, where Cassini received him very kindly. In the following year he returned to Geneva, where he became particularly acquainted with a count Fenil, who formed the design of seizing, if not assassinating the prince of Orange, afterwards William III. This design Faccio having learned from him communicated it to bishop Burnet about 1686, who of course imparted it to the prince. Bishop Burnet, in the first letter of his Travels, dated September 1685, speaks of him as an incomparable mathematician and philosopher, who, though only twenty-one years old, was already become one of the greatest men of his age, and seemed born to carry learning some sizes beyond what it had hitherto attained. Whilst Dr. Calamy studied at the university of Utrecht, Faccio resided in that city as tutor to two young gentlemen, Mr. Ellys and Mr. Thornton, and conversed freely with the English. At this time he was generally esteemed to be a Spinozist; and his discourse, says Dr. Calamy, very much looked that way. Afterwards, it is probable, that he was professor of mathematics at Geneva. In 1687 he came into England, and was honoured with the friendship of the most eminent mathematicians of that age. Sir Isaac Newton, in particular, was intimately acquainted with him. Dr. Johnstone of Kidderminster had in his possession a manuscript, written by Faccio, containing commentaries and illustrations of different parts of sir Isaac’s Principia. About 1704 he taught mathematics in Spitafnelds, and obtained about that time a patent fora species of jewel-watches. When he unfortunately attached himself to the new prophets, he became their chief secretary, and committed their warnings to writing, many of which were published. The connexion of such a man with these enthusiasts, and their being supported, likewise, by another person of reputed abilities, Maximilian Misson, a French refugee, occasioned a suspicion, though without reason, that there was some deep contrivance and design in the affair. On the second of December, 1707, Faccio stood in the pillory at Charing-cross, with the following words affixed to his hat: “Nicolas Fatio, convicted for abetting and favouring Elias Marion, in his wicked and counterfeit prophecies, and causing them to be printed and published, to terrify the queen’s people.” Nearly at the same time, alike sentence was executed upon Elias Marion, one of the pretended prophets, and John d'Ande, another of their abettors. This mode of treatment did not convince Faccio of his error; and, indeed, the delusion of a man of such abilities, and simplicity of manners, was rather an object of compassion than of public infamy and punishment. Oppressed with the derision and contempt thrown upon himself and his party, he retired at last into the country, and spent the remainder of a long life in silence and obscurity. He died at Worcester in 1753, about eightynine years old. When he became the dupe of fanaticism, he seems to have given up his philosophical studies and connections. Faccio, besides being deeply versed in all branches of mathematical literature, was a great proficient in the learned and oriental languages. He had read much, also, in books of alchymy. To the last, he continued a firm believer in the reality of the inspiration of the French prophets. Dr. Wall of Worcester, who was well acquainted with him, communicated many of the above particulars to Dr. Johnstone, in whose hands were several of Faccio’s fanatical manuscripts and journals; and one of his letters giving an account of count Fenil’s conspiracy, and some particulars of the author’s family was communicated to the late Mr. Seward, and published in the second volume of his Anecdotes. In the Republic of Letters, vol. I. we find a Latin poem by Faccio, in honour of sir Isaac Newton; and in vol. XVIII. a communication on the rules of the ancient Hebrew poesy, on which subject he appears to have corresponded with Whiston. There are also many of his original papers and letters in the British Museum; and among them a Latin poem, entitled “N. Facii Duellerii Auriacus Throno-Servatus,” in which he claims to himself the merit of having saved king William from the above-mentioned conspiracy.

, a learned Italian orator and grammarian, was born Jan. 4, 1682, at Toreglia, and studied principally at Padua, where he took his degree of doctor in divinity in 1704, and taught for some time, and afterwards was professor of philosophy for three years. He was then appointed regent of the schools. As the Greek and Latin languages were now his particular department, he bestowed much pains in providing his scholars with suitable assistance, and with that view, reviewed and published new and improved editions of the Lexicons of Calepinus, Nizolius, and Schrevelius. Some years after he was promoted to be logic professor, and in that as well as the former situation, endeavoured to introduce a more correct and useful mode of teaching, and published a work on the subject for the use of his students. In 1739, when the business of teaching metaphysics was united to that of logic, Facciolati was desirous of resigning, that he might return to his original employment; but the magistrates of Padua would by no means allow that their university should be deprived of his name, and therefore, allowing him to retain his title and salary, only wished him to take in hand the history of the university of Padua, which Papadopoli had written, and continue it down to the present time. This appears, from a deficiency of proper records, a very arduous task, yet by dint of perseverance he accomplished it in a manner, which although not perfectly satisfactory, as far as regards the “Fasti Gymnastici,” yet was entirely so in the “Syntagmata.” He wrote also some works in theology and morals, and had the ambition to be thought a poet, but his biographer Fabroni thinks that in this he was not successful. His principal excellence was as a classical scholar and critic, especially in the Latin, and his high fame procured him an invitation from the king of Portugal to superintend a college for the young nobility at Lisbon, but he excused himself on account of his advanced age. Fabroni mentions a set of china sent to him by this sovereign, which he says was a very acceptable present, and corresponded to the elegant furniture of Facciolati’s house. He had a garden in which he admitted no plants or fruittrees but what were of the most choice and rare kind, and four or five apples from Facciolati’s garden was thought no mean present. In every thing he was liberal to his friends, and most benevolent to the poor. He died in advanced age of the iliac passion, Aug. 27, 1769.

His works were, 1. “Orationes Latinse,” separately published, but collected and printed at Padua in 1744, 8vo, and reprinted with additions in 1767. 2. “Logica? disciplines rudimenta,” Venice, 1728, 8vo. 3. “Acroases dialecticae,” first published separately, and afterwards incorporated in a work, entitled “J. Facciolati logica tria complectens, Rudimenta, Institutiones, Acroases undecim,” Venice, 1750. 4. “De Vita Cardinalis Cornelii episcopi Patavini.” This life of one of his early patrons appeared in the “Acta Erudit.” Lips. 1722. 5. “Ortografia moderna Italiana,” Padua, 1721. 6. “Exercitationes in duas priores Ciceronis orationes,” Padua, 1731. 7. “Animadversiones Critics; in I. Litteram Latini Lexici cui titulus Magnum Dictionarium Latino Gallicum,” Padua, 1731, 8yo. 8. “Animadversiones criticse in X. Litterarum ejusdem Lexici.” This is in Calogera’s collection of scientific works, vol. XIX. Venice, 1739. 9. “Scholia in libros Ciceronis de officiis, de senectute, &c.” Venice, 8vo. 10. Monita Isocratea, Gr. et Lat.“Padua, 1741, 8vo. 11.” De Gymnasio Patavino syntagmata duodecim ex ejusdem Gymnasii fastis excerpta,“ibid. 1750, 8vo, 12.” Fasti. Gymnasii Patavini, ab anno 1260 ad annum. 1756,'Mbid. 1757, 4to. 13. “Sfera e geografia per le scuole de fanciulli.” 14. “Ciceronis Vita Literaria,” ibid. 15. Vita et acta Jesu Christi secundum utramque generationem, divinam ac humanam,“ibid. 1761. 16.” Vita et acta B. Mariae,“ibid. 1764. 17.” Viatica Theologica X. quibus adversus religionis dissidia catholicus viator munitur/' Padua, 1765. 18. Epistolse Latins CLXXI Jacobi Facciolati, 7 ibid. 1765. Besides these he was the author of some articles in the literary journals.

, a painter of history, Was born at Bologna in 1560. He began to paint when already grown up to manhood, at the advice of An. Caracci, who, on seeing a whimsical design of his in charcoal, concluded he would be an acquisition to his school. Of this advice he had reason to repent, not only because Facini roused his jealousy by the rapidity of his progress, but because he saw him leave his school, become his rival in the instruction of youth, and even lay snares for his life. Facini had two characteristics of excellence, a vivacity in the attitudes and heads of his figures, that resembled the style of Tintoretto, and a truth of carnation which made Annibal himself declare that his colours seemed to be mixed with human flesh Beyond this he has little to surprise; his design is weak, his bodies vast and undefined, his heads and hands ill set on, nor had he time to correct these faults, as he died young, in 1602. At St. Francesco, in Bologna, is an altar-piece of his, the marriage of St. Catherine, attended by the four tutelary saints of the city, and a number of infant angels, which shews the best of his powers. His children carolling, or at play, in the gallery Matvezzi, and elsewhere at Bologna, are equally admired; they are in the manner of Albani, but with grander proportions.

, a very learned man of the fifteenth century, was a native of Spezia, a sea-port in the Genoese territory. The most curious inquirers into the history of literature have not yet been able to ascertain the precise period of his birth. From many passages, however, which occur in his works, it appears, that he was indebted for instruction in the Latin and Greek languages to Guarino Veronese, whom he frequently mentions in terms of affectionate esteem. Facio was one of the numerous assemblage of scholars that rendered illustrious the court of Alphonsus, king of Naples, by whom he was treated with distinguished honour. He had been sent by the Genoese to Alphonsus on a political erraod, in which he failed; but the interviews he had gave the king so favourable an opinion of him, that he invited him into his service, and made him his secretary, an office which he filled for many years. During his residence at Naples, the jealousy of rival ship betrayed him into a violent quarrel with Laurentius Valla, against whom he composed four invectives, and as he happened to die soon after Valla, the circumstance occasioned the following lines:

His works, according to the catalogue given by Mehus, are, 1. 'De Bello Veneto Ciodiano ad Joannem Jacobum Spinulam, liber,“Leyden, 1568. 2.” De humanae vitæ felicitate,“Hanov. 1611, and with it,” De excellentia et prrcstantia hominis,“a work erroneously ascribed to Pius II. with whom Facio was intimately acquainted. 3.” De rebus gestis ab Alphonso primo Neapolitarum rege Commentariorum libri deceoi,“Leyden, 1560, 4to, and reprinted in 1562 and 1566. The first seven books were also published at Mantua in 1563, and it has been inserted in various collections of Italian history. 4.” Arriani de rebus gestis Alexandri libri octo, Latine redditi,“Basil, 1539, folio. This translation was made by Facio at the request of his patron Alphonsus. 5.” De viris illustribus liber,“published for the first time by the abbe Mehus, at Florence, 1745, 4to, with a life of the author, and some of his correspondence. Saxius has published in his Onomasticon a small tract of Facio’s,” de differentiis," or the difference between words apparently of the same meaning. Tiraboschi thinks Facio’s style much more elegant than that of any of his contemporaries, and in his lives of illustrious men, published by Mehus, he displays much impartial and just criticism.

, bishop of Hermianum in Asia, is noticed by ecclesiastic writers as having been present at the council of Constantinople, held by pope Vigilius in the year 547, where he was a strenuous defender of the writings called The Three Chapters,“which the council of Chalcedon had pronounced orthodox. The works so named were, 1. The writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia. 2. The books which Theodoret of Cyrus wrote, against the twelve anathemas published by Cyril against the Nestorians. 3. The letter which Ibas of Edessa had written to Maris, a Persian, concerning the council of Ephesus, and the condemnation of Nestorius. The question of condemning these writings, had been raised by Theodore bishop of Csesarea, for the sake of weakening the authority of the council of Chalcedon, and crushing the Nestorians. The emperor Justinian listened to this prelate, published an edict against The Three Chapters in the year 544, and in the council of Constantinople above-mentioned, forced the pope Vigilius to accede to the same sentence. Vigilius, agitated between the contending parties, changed his opinion and conduct four times; but Facundus remained firm, and was banished for his perseverance. He wrote twelve books on the subject, addressed to Justinian, which are still extant, and one against Mutianus, but^in fatft^ against Vigilius; both published with notes, by P. Sirmond, in 1629. There is also an” Epistola Catholics fidei pro defensione trium capitulorum," added to the edition of 1675. His style is animated, but he is frequently deficient in moderation.

, an elegant Latin poet and philologist, was born at Cremona in the early part of the sixteenth century, and by his accomplishments in polite literature, gained the esteem and friendship of the cardinal de Medicis, afterwards pope Pius IV. and of his nephew the cardinal Borromeo. Having acquired a critical knowledge of the Latin language, he was enabled to display much judgment in the correction of the Roman classics, and in the collation of ancient manuscripts on which he was frequently employed, and indeed had an office of that kind in the Vatican library. Ghilini says that he was equally learned in the Greek language, but Muret asserts that he was quite unacquainted with the Greek. That he was a very elegant Latin poet, however, is amply proved by his “Fables,” and perhaps his being accused of stealing from Phgedrus may be regarded as a compliment to his style. Thuanus appears to have first suggested this accusation. He says that the learned world was greatly obliged to him, yet had been more so, if, instead of suppressing, he had been content with imitating the Fables of Phaedrus, and asserts that Faeruo dealt unfairly with the public concerning Phoedrus, who was then unknown; having a manuscript of that author, which he concealed from the world for fear of lessening the value of the Latin fables he had made in imitation of Æsop. Perrault, however, who published a translation of Faerno’s Fables into French verse at Paris in 1699, has defended his author from Thuanus’s imputation. His words in the preface are as follow “Faerno has been called a second Phsedrus, by reason of the excellent style of his Fables, though he never saw Phaedrus, who did not come to our knowledge till above thirty years after his death; for Pithoeus, having found that manuscript in the dust of an old library, published it in the beginning of this century, Thuanus, who makes very honourable mention of our author in his history, pretends, that Phcedrus was not unknown to him; and even blames him for having suppressed that author, to conceal what he had stolen from him. But there is no ground for what he says; and it is only the effect of the strong persuasion of all those who are so great admirers of antiquity as to think that a modern author can do nothing that is excellent, unless he has an ancient author for his model. Out of the hundred fables which Faerno published in Latin verse, there are but five that had been treated by Phsedrus $ and out of those five there are but one or two that have been managed nearly in the same manner: which happened only because it is impossible that two men, who treat on the same subject, should not agree sometimes in the same thoughts, or in the same expressions.”

Faerno died in the prime of life, at Rome, Nov. 17,1561. Plow much might have been expected from his talents and habits of study, had he lived longer, ntay appear from, what he left: 1. “Terentii Comcediae,” Florence, 15.65, 2 vols. 8vo, a valuable and rare edition. There is no ancient editor to whom Terence is more indebted than to Faerno; who, by a judicious collation of ancient manuscripts and editions, especially the one belonging to Bembus (examined by Politian, and unknown to all preceding editors), has restored the true reading of his author 4n many important passages. Faerno’s edition became the basis of almost every subsequent one, and Dr. Bentley bad such an opinion of his notes that he reprinted them entire in his edition. 2. “Ciceronis Orationes Philippicae,” Rome, 1563, 8vo, very highly praised by Graevius. 3. “Centum Fabulae ex antiquis Autoribus delectae, et carminibus explicate,” Rome, 1564, 4to, with prints, from which it is said that the subjects for the fountains at Versailles were taken. There is another edition of London, 1743, 4to, very beautiful, but not so much valued as the former. It is said that this work was occasioned by a wish expressed by the pope that he would make a collection of the best of Esop’s fables, and those of other ancient authors, and put them into Latin verse for the instruction of the young. 4. “Censura emendationum Livianarum Sigonii.” Among the collections of Latin poetry written by Italian scholars are some attributed to Faerno, as “In Lutheranos, sectam Germanicam” “Ad Homobonum Hoffredum” a Physician of Cremona; “In Maledicum,” &c.

, a French comic writer of some eminence within the last century, was born at Paris in 1702. He was son of a clerk in a public office at Paris, in which he also obtained an appointment that gave him little trouble, and left him leisure for literary occupations. He wrote for several of the French theatres, and his works were collected into four volumes, 12mo,1760. The general character of his comedies is a delicate and natural liveliness. The most approved of them were, “The Rendezvous,” and “The Ward.” In his own character, as well as in talents, he was not unlike la Fontaine, indolent, averse to business, negligent of his appearance, absent, timid, and by no means likely to be taken by a stranger for a man of genius. He died April 28, 1755, at the age of fifty-three.

, a self-taught genius, was born in 1648 at Lisle en Albigeois in Languedoc. He drevr with the pen, or Indian ink, and arrived at such eminence in that branch as to be complimented upon it by Carlo Marat. He went to visit that painter, who received him with politeness, and offered him his pencil; when he declined using it, saying, that he had never practised painting. “I am glad to hear it,” said the artist, “for if I may judge from your drawings of the progress you would have made in painting, I must certainly have given place to you.” Fage lived irregularly, generally drawing at a public-house, and sometimes paying his bills by a sketch, produced upon the occasion. He died in 1690; Audran, Simoneau, and others, engraved a collection of one hundred and twenty-three prints from his designs, and Strutt mentions some prints engraved by himself.

, or sometimes Phagius, whose German name was Buchlein, a protestant minister, and one of the early reformers, was born at Rheinzabern in Germany, 1504, and laid the foundation of his learning in that town under the care of his father, who was a school-master. He was sent to Heidelberg at eleven, and at eighteen to Strasburgh; where not being properly supported, he had recourse to teaching others, in order to defray the expence of his own books and necessaries. The study of the Hebrew becoming fashionable in Germany, he applied himself to it; and by the help of Elias Levita, the learned Jew, became a great proficient in it. In 1527 he took upon him the care of a school at Isne, where he married and had a family. Afterwards, quitting the occupation of a schoolmaster, he entered into the ministry, and became a sedulous preacher among those of the reformed religion. Buffler, one of the senators of Isne, being informed of his perfect knowledge in the Hebrew tongue, and of his natural bias to the arts, erected a printing-house at his own charge, that Fagius might publish whatever he should deem useful to religion in that way; but the event did not answer the expence.

In 1541 the plague began to spread at Isne; when Fagius understanding that the wealthiest of the inhabitants were about to leave the place, without having any regard to the poorer sort, rebuked them openly, and admonished them of their duty; telling them that they should either continue in the town, or liberally bestow their alms before they went, for the relief of those they left behind; and declaring at the same time, that during the time of that calamity he would himself in person visit those that were sick, would administer spiritual comfort to them, pray for them, and be present with them day and night: all which he did, and yet escaped the distemper. At the same season the plague raged in Strasburg, and among many others, proved fatal to the reformer, Wolfang Capito; upon which Fagius was called by the senate to succeed him. Here he continued to preach till the beginning of the German wars, when the elector Palatine, intending a reformation in his churches, called Fagius from Strasburg to Heidelberg, and made him the public professor thefe: but the emperor prevailing against the elector, an obstruction was thrown in the way of the reformation. During his residence here, however, he published many books for the promotion of Hebrew learning, which were greatly approved by Bucer and others, and form the most important of the works he has left.

His father dying in 1548, and the persecution in Germany rendering that country unsafe to all who did not profess the Romish doctrine, he and Bucer came over to England in consequence of receiving letters from archbishop Cranmer, in which they had assurances of a kind reception and a handsome stipend, if they would continue here. They arrived in April 15*y, but Strype says in 1548 were entertained some days in the palace at Lambeth, and appointed to reside at Cambridge, where they were to undertake a new translation and illustration of the scriptures, Fagius taking the Old Testament, and Bucer the New, for their several parts. A pension of 100l. a year was settled on Fagius, and the same on Bucer, besides the salary they were to receive from the university. But this was all put an end to, by the sudden illness and death of both these professors. Fagius fell ill at London of a quartan fever, but would be removed to Cambridge, on hopes of receiving benefit from the change of air. He-died there Nov. 12, 1550; and Bucer did not live above a year after. Melcbior Adam and Verheiden suggested that Fagius was poisoned, but for this we find no other authority. By a disgraceful bigotry, both their bodies were dug up and burnt in the reign of queen Mary.

, a celebrated canonist of the seventeenth century, was regarded at Rome as an orator, and every cause which he took in hand as successful. He was for about fifteen years secretary to several popes, all of whom entertained a high respect for his talents, and frequently consulted him. He became blind at the age of forty-four, which misfortune does not appear to have interfered with his professional labours, for it was after this that he composed his celebrated " Commentary on the Decretals/' in 3 vols. folio, which extended his fame throughout all Europe. It was dedicated to pope Alexander VII. by whose order he had engaged in the undertaking, and was printed at Rome in 1661, and five times reprinted. The best edition is that of Venice, 1697, in which the entire text of the Decretals is given. Fagnani continued deprived of his sight, but in full possession of his mental faculties until his death in 1678, as it is supposed, in the eightieth year of his age. His memory appears to have been uncommon, and the stores of learning he had laid up before he was deprived of his sight he could bring forth with promptitude and accuracy, even to a quotation from the poets whom he studied in his youth.

, an eminent French physician in the reign of Louis XIV. was born at Paris, May 11, 1638. He was the son of Henry Fagon, commissioner in ordinary of war, and of Louisa de la Brosse, niece of Guy de la Brosse, physician in ordinary to Louis XIII. and grandson of a physician in ordinary to Henry IV. He studied first in the Sorbonne, under M. Gillot, an eminent doctor, with whom he resided as student, and who persuaded him to chuse the medical profession. M. Fagon never forgot M. Gillot in his highest prosperity; but, if he met him in the street, alighted from his coach, and conducted him to the house where he was going. This young physician had scarcely begun to dispute, when he ventured to maintain, in a thesis, the circulation of the blood, which was at that time held as a paradox among the old doctors; and also another on the use of tobacco, published long afterwards; “An frequens Nicotian ye usus vitam abbreviet,” Paris, 1699, 4to. He took his doctor’s degree 1664, M. Vallot wishing to repair and replenish the royal garden, M. Fagon offered his services; and going, at his own expence, to Auvergne, Languedoc, Provence, the Alps, and the Pyrenees, returned with an ample collection of curious and useful plants. He had the principal share in the catalogue of the plants in that garden, puhlished 1665, entitled “Hortus Regius,” to which he prefixed a little Latin poem of his own. M. Fagon was made professor of botany and chemistry at the royal garden, and began to have the plants engraved; but there are only forty -five plates finished, which are very scarce. The king appointed bim first physician to the dauphiness in 1680, and to the queen some months after. In 1693 he was made first physician to the king, and superintendant of the royal garden in 1698, to which he retired after the king’s death, and, for the improvement of which, he persuaded Louis XIV. to send M. de Tournfort into Greece, Asia, and Egypt, which produced the scientific voyage so well known to the learned world. Fagon died March 11, 1718, aged near eighty. The academy of sciences had chosen him an honorary member in 1699. He left “Les Qualités du Quinquina,” Paris, 1703, 12mo. He married Mary Nozereau, by whom he had two sons Anthony, the eldest, bishop of Lombez, then of Vannes, died February.16, 1742 the second, Lewis, counsellor of state in ordinary, and to the royal council, and intendant of the finances, died at Paris May 8, 1741, unmarried. The Fagonia, in botany, was so called by Tournfort in honour of him.

, the celebrated improver of the thermometer, was horn at Dantzic, May 14, 1686. He was originally intended for commerce, but having a decided turn for philosophical studies, employed himself in the construction of barometers and thermometers, which art he carried to great perfection. About 1720 he introduced an essential improvement in the thermometer, by substituting meccury for spirit of wine. He also made a new scale for the instrument, fixing the extremities of it at the point of severe cold observed by himself in Iceland in 1709, which he conceived to be the greatest degree of cold, and at the point where mercury boils, dividing the intermediate space into 600 degrees. His point of extreme cold, which is the same that is produced by surrounding the bulb of the thermometer with a mixture of snow, sal ammoniac, and sea salt, he marked 0, and carried his degrees upwards; though few thermometers have been practically formed which carry their degrees much above 212, the point at which water boils. Forty degrees below the [zero] of Fahrenheit, have since been observed at Petersburg, and elsewhere; and as this is the point at which mercury freezes, it would make a better limit to the scale, which would thus be confined between the utmost extremities of heat and cold that can be examined by means of that fluid. Our English philosophers have in general adopted the scale of Fahrenheit; those of France have preferred Reaumur’s. Fahrenheit published a dissertation on thermometers in 1724. He travelled to Holland, and in various parts of the continent, in pursuit of knowledge, and died Sept. 16, 1736.

, a French topographical writer, was born at Castelnaudari in Upper Languedoc, Oct. 30, 1616. after going through a course of studies at Toulouse, he was in 1638 appointed king’s advocate to the presidial of his native city, which office he resigned in 1655 on being chosen syndic to the city of Toulouse, and came to reside in the latter, where he was enabled to cultivate his taste for the belles lettres; and during the discharge of the duties of his office, which he executed with zeal and disinterestedness, the opportunity he had of inspecting the archives suggested to him the design of writing the annals of Toulouse. On making known his intentions, the parliament granted him permission to examine its registers, and the city undertook to defray the expense of printing his work. Having been advanced to the rank of capitoul, or alderman of the city, which office he served for the third time in 1673, he communicated to his brethren a plan of ornamenting their capitolium, or town -hall, with busts of the most distinguished personages who had filled the offices of magistracy, and they having allowed him to make choice of the proper objects, a gallery was completed in 1677 with the busts of thirty persons whom he had selected as meriting that honour. This, and other services which he rendered to the citizens of Toulouse, induced them to confer a handsome pension on him, and likewise to bestow the reversion of the place of syndic on his nephew, who dying before La Faille, they gave it to his grand-nephew. In 1694 the academy of the “Jeux Floraux” elected him their secretary, a situation which he filled for sixteen years with much reputation; for, besides the fame he had acquired as an historian and magistrate, he possessed considerable literary taste and talents, and even in his ninetieth year produced some poetical pieces in which there was more spirit and vivacity than could have been expected at that very advanced period. He died at Toulouse Nov. 12, 1711, in his ninety-sixth year. His “Annales de la ville de Toulouse” were published there in 2 vols. fol. 1687 and 1701. The style, although; somewhat incorrect, is lively and concise. The annals are brought down only to 1610, the author being afraid, if he proceeded nearer to his own times, that he might be tempted to violate the impartiality which he had hitherto endeavoured to preserve. He published also “Traité de la noblesse des Capitouls,” 1707, 4to, a very curious work,. which is said to have given offence to some of the upstart families. To the works of Goudelin of Toulouse, a poet, published in 1678, 12mo, he prefixed a life, and criticism on his poems. Some of his own poetical pieces are in the “Journal de Verdun,” for May 1709.

, an ingenious poet, who flourished: in the reigns of queen Elizabeth and king James the First, was the second son of sir Thomas Fairfax, of Denton, Yorkshire, by Dorothy his wife, daughter of George Gale, of Ascham-Grange, esq. treasurer to the Mint at York. In what year he was born is not related. The family from which he sprang was of a very military turn. His father had passed his youth in the wars of Europe, and was with Charles duke of Bourbon, at the sacking of Rome, in 1527. His engaging in this expedition is said to have g'lYen such offence to sir William Fairfax, that he was disinherited; but this is not reconcileable to the fact of his succeeding to the family estate at Denton, which he transmitted to his descendants. It was in 1577, or, according to Douglas, in 1579, when far advanced in years, that he was knighted by queen Elizabeth. The poet’s eldest brother, Thomas, who in process of time became the first lord Fairfax of Cameron, received the honour of knighthood before Rouen in Normandy, in 1591, for his bravery in the army sent to the assistance of Henry the Fourth of France; and he afterwards signalized himself on many occasions in Germany against the house of Austria. A younger brother of Edward Fairfax, sir Charles, was a captain under sir Francis Vere, at the battle of Newport, fought in 1600; and in the famous three years’ siege of Ostend, commanded al) the English in that town for some time before it surrendered. Here he received a wound in his face, from the piece of a skull of a marshal of France, killed near him by a cannon-ball, and was himself killed in 1604.

While his brothers were thus honourably employed abroad, Edward Fairfax devoted himself to a studious course of life. That he had the advantages of a very liberal education cannot be doubted, from his intellectual acquirements, and the distinction which he soon obtained in the literary world. Indeed, his attainments were such, that he became qualified to have filled any employment, either in church or state. But an invincible modesty, and the love of retirement, induced him to prefer the shady groves and natural cascades of Denton, and the forest of Knaresborough, to the employments and advantages of a public station. Accordingly, having married, he fixed himself at Fuyistone [Fewston], as a private gentleman. His time was not, however, inactively or ingloriously spent. This was apparent in his poetical exertions, and in several compositions in prose, the manuscripts of which were left by him in the library of lord Fairfax, at Denton. The -tare and education of his children, for which he was so well qualified, probably engaged some part of his attention. We are informed, likewise, that he was very serviceable, in the same way, to his brother lord Fairfax; besides which, he assisted him in the government of his family and the management of his atVairs. The consequence of this was, that all his lordship’s children were bred scholars, and well principled in religion and virtue; that his house was famed for its hospitality, and, at the same time, his estate improved. Wiiat Mr. Edward Fairfax’s principles were, appears from the character which he gives of himself, in his book on dæmonology: “For myself,” says he, “I am in religion neither a fantastic puritan, nor a superstitious papist: but so settled in conscience, that I have the sure ground of God’s word to warrant all I believe, and the commendable ordinances of our English church to approve all I practise: in which course I live a faithful Christian, and an obedient subject, and so teach my family.” In these principles he persevered to the end of his days, which took place about 1632. He died at his own house, called Newhall, in the parish of Fuyistone [Fewston], between Denton and Knaresborough, and was buried in the same parish, where a marble stone, with an inscription, was placed over his grave.

Such are the few particulars that are related concerning the private life of Fairfax. But it is as a poet that he is principally entitled to attention; and in this respect he is held in jqst reputation, and deserves to have his name transmitted with honour to posterity. His principal work was his translation of Tasso’s heroic poem of “Godfrey of Bologne” out of Italian into English verse; and what adds to the merit of the work is, that it was his first essay in poetry, and executed when he was very young. On its appearance, it was dedicated to queen Elizabeth. The book was highly commended by the best judges and wits of the age in which it was written, and their judgment has been sanctioned by the approbation of succeeding critics. King James valued it above all other English poetry; and king Charles used to divert himself with reading it in the time of his confinement. All who mention Fairfax, do him the justice to allow that he was an accomplished genius. Dryden introduces Spenser and Fairfax almost on the level, as the leading authors of their times, and Waller confessed that he owed the music of his numbers to Fairfax’s Godfrey of Bologne. “The truth is,” says the author of Cibber’s Lives, “this gentleman is, perhaps, the only writer down to sir William Davenant, who needs no apology to be made for him on account of the age in which he lived. His diction is so pure, elegant, and full of graces, and the turn of his lines so perfectly melodious, that one cannot read it without rapture; and we can scarcely imagine the original Italian has greatly the advantage in either: nor is it very probable, that while Fairfax can be read, any author will attempt a new translation of Tasso with success.” Without disputing the general truth of this eulogium (which, however, might somewhat have been softened), it cannot fail to be observed, how much the biographer has been mistaken in his concluding conjecture. A new translation of Tasso has not only been attempted, but executed, by Mr. Hoole, with remarkable success and with distinguished excellence; and indeed in such a manner, that in the opinion of Dr. Johnson, Fairfax’s work will perhaps not soon be reprinted. Of Fairfax, it has been justly said that he had the powers of genius and fancy, and broke through that servile custom of translation which prevailed in his time. His liberal elegance rendered his versions more agreeable than the dry ness of Jonson, and the dull fidelity of Sandys and May; and he would have translated Tasso with success, had he not unhappily chosen a species of versification which was ill adapted to the English language. Mr. Hoole, in assigning the reasons for his giving a new version of Tasso’s “Jerusalem Delivered,” remarks that Fairfax’s stanzas cannot be read with pleasure by the generality of those who have a taste for English poetry: of which no other proof is necessary than that it appears scarcely to have been read at all. It is not only unpleasant, but irksome, in such a degree as to surmount curiosity, and more than counterbalance all the beauty of expression and sentiment, which is to be found in that work. He does not, however, flatter himself that he has excelled Fairfax, except in measure and versification; and, even of these, the principal recommendation is, that they are more modern, and better adapted to the ear of all readers of English poetry, except of the very few vtho have acquired a taste for the phrases and cadencies of those times, when our verse, if not our language, was in its rudiments.“The author of iris life in the Biog. Britannica, however, is of opinion that it was not necessary to the justification of Mr. Hoole’s new version, that he should pass so severe a censure on Fairfax’s measure. To say that” it is not only unpleasant, but irksome, in such a degree as to surmount curiosity, and more than counterbalance all the beauty of expression which is to be found in the work,“appears to be very unjust The perspicuity and harmony of Fairfax’s ver>ification are indeed extraordinary, considering the time in which he wrote; and in this respect he ranks nearly with Spenser. Nothing but a fine fancy and an elegant mind could have enabled him, in that period, to have made such advances towards perfection. Hume seems to be nearly of the same opinion.” Fairfax,“says that historian,” has translated Tasso with an elegance and ease, and at the same time with an exactness, which for that age are surprising. Each line in the original-is faithfully rendered by a correspondent line in the translation. Harrington’s translation of Ariosto is not likewise without its merit. It is to be regretted, that these poets should have imitated the Italians in their stanza, which has a prolixity and uniformity in it that displeases in long performances. They had otherwise, as well as Spenser, contributed much to the polishing and refining of English versification.

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

None of Fairfax’s writings in prose have ever been published. They most of them related to the controversy of religion with the church of Rome, and are represented as having afforded signal proofs of his learning and judgment. The person with whom the controversy was carried on was one John Dorrell, a Romish priest of no ordinary fame, at that time a prisoner in the castle of York. Between him and Mr. Fairfax a variety of letters passed, relative to the most distinguished tenets of popery. A copy of our author’s treatise on Dsemonology was in the possession of Isaac Reed, esq. entitled, “A Discourse of Witchcraft, as it was acted in the family of Mr. Edward Fairfax, of Fuyistone [Fewston], in the county of York, in the year 1621.” Fairfax left several children, sons and daughters. William, his eldest son, before mentioned, was a scholar, and of the same temper with his father, but more cynical. He translated Diogenes Laertius out of Greek into English. This gentleman was grammatical tutor to Mr. Stanley, the celebrated author of the History of Philosophy. It is asserted by Mrs. Cooper, that the greatest part of that work, as well as the notes on Euripides, truly belonged to Mr. William Fairfax, though his modesty and friendship declined the reputation of them. To such vague assertions little regard, we apprehend, is to be paid; and it was not Euripides, but Æschylus, that was published by Mr. Stanley.

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

Hitherto he had acquitted himself with undaunted bravery, and with great and deserved applause from his party. Had he stopped here, or at such times at least as the king’s concessions were in reason and equity a just ground for peace (which was more than once), he might have been honourably ranked among the rest of those patriots, who took up arms only for the redress of grievances. But his boundless ambition, and his great desire to rule, made him weakly engage, with the utmost zeal, in the worst and most exceptionable parts of the rebellion. When the parliamentarians thought fit to new-model their army, and to lay aside the earl of Essex, they unanimously voted sir Thomas Fairfax to be their general in his room, he being ready to undertake or execute any thing that he was ordered. To him Oliver Cromwell was joined with the title of lieutenant-general, but with intention of being his governor, exercising the superiority of deep art over a comparatively weak mind. Sir Thomas, being thus voted commander-in-chief of the parliament’s army on the 21st of January, 1644-5, received orders from the parliament speedily to come up from the north to London, where he arrived privatcsly, Feb. 18, and, the next day, was brought by four of the members into the house of commons, where he was highly complimented by the speaker, and received his commission of general. The 15th of the same month, an ordinance was made, for raising and maintaining of forces under his command: it having been voted, a few days before, that he should nominate all the commanders in his army, to be taken out of any of the other armies, with the approbation of both houses. March 25, the parliament ordered him 1500l. The 3d of April, he went from London to Windsor, where he appointed the general rendezvous and continued there till the last day of that month, new-framing and modelling the army or rather Cromwell doing it in his name. April 16, he was appointed, by both houses, governor of Hull. In the mean time, Taupton, in Somersetshire, one of the parliament’s garrisons, being closely besieged by the royalists, sir Thomas Fairfax received orders to hasten to its relief, with 8000 horse and foot. He began his march May 1, and by the 7th had reached Blandford in Dorsetshire: but, the king taking the field from Oxford, with strong reinforcements brought by the princes Rupert and Maurice, sir Thomas was ordered by the parliament to send 3000 foot and 1500 horse to relieve Taunton, and himself to return, with the rest of Juis forces, to join Oliver Cromwell and major-general Browne, and attend the king’s motions. The 14th of May he was come back as far as Newbury; where having rested three nights, he went and faced Dennington-castle, and took a few prisoners. Thence he proceeded to lay siege to Oxford, as he was directed by the committee of both kingdoms, and sat down before it the 22d. But, before he had made any progress in this siege, he received orders to draw near the king, who had taken Leicester by storm, May 31, and was threatening the eastern associated counties. Sir Thomas therefore rising from before Oxford, June 5, arrived the same day at Marsh-Gibbon, in Buckinghamshire on the llth he was at Wootton, and the next day at Gilsborough, in Northamptonshire where he kept his head-quarters till the 14th, when he engaged the king’s forces, at the fatal and decisive battle of Naseby, and obtained a complete victory. The king, after that, retiring into Wales, sir Thomas went and laid siege on the 16th to Leicester, which surrendered on the 18th. He proceeded, on the 22d, to Warwick; and thence (with 'a disposition either to go over the Severn towards the king, or to move westward as he should be ordered) he marched on through Gloucestershire towards Marlborough, where he arrived the 28th. Here he received orders from the parliament, to hasten to the relief of Taunton, which was besieged again by the royalists; letters being sent at the same time into the associated comities for recruits, and tfce arrears of pay for his army; but on his arrival at Bland ford, he was informed, that lord Goring had drawn off his horse from before Taunton, and left his foot in the passage to block up that place, marching himself with the horse towards Langport. Sir Thomas Fairfax, therefore, advancing against him, defeated him there on the 10th of July; and the next day^ went and summoned Bridgewater, which was taken by storm on the 22d. He became also master of Bath the 30th of the same month; and then laid close siege to Sherborne-castle, which was likewise taken by storm August 15. And, having besieged the city of Bristol from the 22d of August to the 10th of September, it was surrendered to him by prince Rupert. After this laborious expedition, the general rested some days at Bath, having sent out parties to reduce the castles of the Devises and Berkley, and other garrisons between the west and London; and on the 23d moved from Bath to the Devises, and thence to Warminster on the 27th, where he stayed till October 8, when he went to Lyme in Dorsetshire. From this place he came to Tiverton, of which he became master on the 19th; and then, as he could not undertake a formal siege in the winter season, he blocked up the strong city of Exeter, which did not surrender till the 13th of April following: in the mean time, he took Dartmouth by storm, January 18, 1645-6; and several forts and garrisons at different times. Feb. 16, he defeated thelord Hopton near Torrington. This nobleman retreating with his broken forces into Cornwall, sir Thomas followed him: in pursuit of whom he came to Launceston Feb. 25, and to Bodmin March 2. On the 4th, Mount Edgecornbe was surrendered to him; and Fowey about the same time. At last the parliament army approaching Truro, where lord Hopton had his head-quarters, and he being so hemmed in as to remain without a possibility of escaping, sir Thomas, on the 5th of March, sent and offered him honourable terms of capitulation, which after some delays, lord Hoptoit accepted, and a treaty was signed by commissioners on both sides, March 14 in pursuance of which, the royalists, consisting of above 5000 horse, were disbanded and took an oath never to bear arms against the parliament. But, before the treaty was signed, lord Hopton, and Arthur lord Capel, retired to Scilly, whence they passed into Jersey, April 17, with Charles prince of Wales, sir Kdtvard Hyde, and other persons of distinction. Thus the king’s army in the west being entirely dispersed by the vigilance and wonderful success of general Fairfax, he returned, March 31, to the siege of Exeter, which surrendered to him upon articles, the 13th of April, as already observed: and with the taking of this city ended his western expedition. He then marched, with wonderful speed, towards Oxford, the most considerable garrison remaining in the king’s hands, and arriving on the 1st of May, with his army, began to lay siege to it. The king, who was there, afraid of being enclosed, privately, and in disguise, departed thence on the 27th of April; and Oxford surrendered upon articles, June 24, as did Wallingford, July 22. After the reduction of these places, sir Thomas went and besieged Ragland-castle, in Monmouthshire, the property of Henry Somerset, marquis of Worcester, which yielded Aug. 19. His next employment was to disband major-general Massey’s brigade, which he did at the Devises. About that time he was seized with a violent fit of the ston, unjder which he laboured many days. As soon as he was recovered, he took a journey to London; where he arrived November 12, being met some miles off by great crowds of people, and the city militia. The next day, both houses of parliament agreed to congratulate his coming to town, and to give him thanks for his faithful services and wise conduct: which they did the day following, waiting upon him at his house in Queen-street*. Hardly had he had time to rest, when he was called upon to convoy the two hundred thousand pounds that had been granted to the Scotish army; the price of their delivering up their sovereign king Charles. For that purpose he set out from London, December 18, with a sufficient force, carrying at the same time 50,000l. for his own army. The king being delivered by the Scots to the parliament’s commissioners at Newcastle, Jan. 30, 1646-7, sir Thomas went and met him, Feb. 15, beyond Nottingham, in his way to Holmby; and his majesty stopping his horse, sir Thomas alighted, and kissed his hand; and afterwards mounted, and discoursed with him as they rode along. The 5th of March following, after long debate in parliament, he was toted general of the forces that were to be continued. He came to Cambridge the 12th of the same month, where he was highly caressed and complimented, and created master of arts.

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

, was born about 3691. He was the eldest son of Thomas, fifth lord Fairfax, of Cameron, in the kingdom of Scotland, by Catherine, only daughter and heiress of Thomas lord Culpepper; in whose right he afterwards possessed Leeds Castle, with several manors and estates in the county of Kent, and in the Isle of Wight; and that immense tract of country comprised within the boundaries of the rivers Potowmac and Rappahannoc in Virginia, called the Northern Neck; containing by estimation live millions seven hundred thousand acres. He had the misfortune to lose his father while young; and at his decease, he and his two brothers, Henry and Robert, and four sisters, one of whom, Frances, was afterwards married to Denny Martin, esq. of Loose, in Kent, came under the guardianship of their mother and grandmother, the dowager ladies Fairfax and Culpepper, the latter of whom was a princess of the house of Hesse Cassel.

Lord Fairfax, at the usual age, was sent to the university of Oxford to complete his education, and was highly esteemed there for his learning and accomplishments. His judgment upon literary subjects was then, and at other times, frequently appealed to; and his biographer informs us he was one of the writers of the Spectator, but the annotators on that work have not been able to ascertain any of his papers. After some years’ residence in the university, he took a commission in the regiment of horse called the Blues, and remained in it, as is supposed, till the death of the survivor of the two ladies above mentioned; who had usually resided at Leeds Castle. Some time before their decease, a circumstance happened, that eventually occasioned him much uneasiness. He had been persuaded, upon his brother Henry’s arriving at the age of twenty-one, or rather compelled by the ladies Culpepper and Fairfax, under a menace, in case of refusal, of never inheriting the Northern Neck, to cut off the intail, and to sell Denton Hall, and the Yorkshire estates, belonging to this branch of the Fairfax family, which had been in their possession for five or six centuries, in order to redeem those of the late lord Culpepper, that had descended to his heiress, exceedingly encumbered, and deeply mortgaged. This circumstance happened while lord Fairfax was at Oxford, and is said to have occasioned him the greater vexation, as it appeared afterwards, that the estates had been disposed of, through the treachery of a steward, for considerably less than their value; less even than what the timber that was cut down to discharge the purchase money, before the stipulated day of payment came, was sold for. He conceived, therefore, a violent disgust against the -ladies, who, as he used to say, had treated him with such unparalleled cruelty; and ever afterwards expressed the keenest sense of the injury that had been done, as he thought, to the Fairfax family. After entering into possession, he began to inquire into the value and situation of his estates; and he soon discovered that the proprietary lands in Virginia had been extremely mismanaged and under-let. An agent, who at the same time was a tenant, had been employed by the dowager lady Fairfax, to superintend her concerns in that quarter of the world; and he is said to have abused her confidence, and to have enriched himself and family, as is too frequently the case, at the expence of his employer. Lord Fairfax therefore wrote to William Fairfax, esq. his father’s brother’s second son, who held, at that time, a place of considerable trust and emolument under the government in New England; requesting him to remove to Virginia, and to take upon himself the agency of the Northern Neck. With this request Mr. Fairfax readily complied; and as soon as he conveniently could, he removed with his family to Virginia, and settled in Westmoreland county. He there opened an agencyoffice for the granting of the proprietary lands; and as the quit-rent demanded was only after the rate of two shillings for every hundred acres, the vacant lands were rapidly let, and a considerable and permanent income was soon derived from them.

Lord Fairfax, informed of these circumstances, determined to go himself to Virginia, to visit his estates, and the friend and relation to whom he was so greatly obliged. Accordingly, about 1739, he embarked for that continent; and on his arrival in Virginia, he went and spent twelve months with his friend Mr. Fairfax, at his house in Westmoreland county; during which time he became so captivated with the climate, the beauties and produce of the country, that he formed a resolution of returning to England, in order to prosecute a suit, which he had with the crown, on account of a considerable tract of land claimed in behalf of the latter by governor Gooch (which suit was afterwards determined in his favour); and, after making pome necessary arrangements, and settling his family affairs, to return to Virginia, and spend the remainder of his life upon his vast and noble domain there. It is not quite certain how long he remained in England to adjust all these concerns, but he appears to have finally settled in the Northern Neck in 1746, or 1747.

On his return at this time, he went to Belvoir, the seat of his friend and relation Mr. William Fairfax, and remained several years in his family, undertaking and directing the management of his farms and plantations, and amusing himself with hunting and the pleasures of the field. At length, the lands about Belvoir not answering his expectation, and the foxes becoming less numerous, he determined to remove to a fine tract of land on the western side of the Blue Ridge, or Apalachian mountains, in Frederic county, about eighty miles from Belvoir where he built a small neat house, which he called Greenway-court; and laid out one of the most beautiful farms, consisting of arable and grazing lands, and of meadows two or three miles in length, that had ever been seen in that quarter of the world. He there lived the remainder of his life, in the style of a gentleman farmer, or rather of an English country gentleman. He kept many servants, white and black; several hunters; a plentiful, but plain table, entirely in the English fashion; and his mansion was the mansion of hospitality. His dress corresponded with his mode of life, and notwithstanding he had every year new suits of clothes, of the most fashionable and expensive kind, sent out to him from England, which he never put on, was plain in the extreme. His manners were humble, modest, and unaffected; not tinctured in the smallest degree with arrogance, pride, or self-conceit. He was free from the selfish passions, and liberal almost to excess. The produce of his farms, after the deduction of what was necessary for the consumption of his own family, was distributed and given away to the poor planters and settlers in his neighbourhood. To these he frequently advanced money, to enable them to go on with their improvements; to clear away the woods, and cultivate the ground; and where the lands proved unfavourable, and not likely to answer the labour and expectation of the planter or husbandman, he usually indemnified him for the expence he had been at in the attempt, and gratuitously granted him fresh lands of a more favourable and promising nature. He was a friend and father to all who held and lived under him; and as the great object of his ambition was the peopling and cultivating of that beautiful country of which he was the proprietor, he sacrificed every other pursuit, and made every other consideration subordinate, to this great point

Lord Fairfax had been brought up in revolution principles, and had early imbibed high notions of liberty, and of the excellence of the British constitution. He devoted a considerable part of his time to the public service. He was lord lieutenant and custos rotulprum of the county of Frederic; presided at the county courts held at Winchester, where during the sessions he always kept open table: and acted as surveyor and overseer of the highways and public roads. His chief if not sole amusement was hunting and in pursuit of this exercise he frequently carried his hounds to distant parts of the country; and entertained every gentleman of good character and decent appearance, who attended him in the field, at the inn or ordinary, where he took up his residence for the hunting season. So unexceptionable and disinterested was his behaviour, both public and private, and so generally was he beloved and respected, that during the late contest between Great Britain and America, he never met with the least insult or molestation from either party, but was suffered to go on in his improvement and cultivation of the Northern Neck; a pursuit equally calculated for the comfort and happiness of individuals, and for the general good of mankind.

Lord Fairfax, though possessed of innumerable good qualities, had some few singularities in his character. Early in life he had been disappointed in a love-match, and this is thought to have made a deep impression on lord Fairfax’s mind; and to have had no inconsiderable share in determining him to retire from the world, and to settle in the wild, and at that time almost uninhabited, forests of North America. It is thought also to have excited in him a general dislike of the sex, in whose company, unless he was particularly acquainted with the parties, it is said he was reserved, and under evident constraint and embarrassment. But his biographer thinks this has been misrepresented. He possibly might not entertain a very favourable opinion of the sex; owing partly to the above-mentioned circumstance, in which the lady behaved very treacherously, permitting the carriages, equipage, &c. to be prepared, and then accepting another offer; and partly to the treatment he had experienced from the ladies of Leeds Castle; but this does not seem to have influenced his general behaviour to them. He had lived many years retired from the world, in a remote wilderness, sequestered from all polished society, and perhaps might not feel himself perfectly at ease, when he came into large parties of ladies, where ceremony and form were to be observed; but he had not forgot those accomplished manners which he had acquired in his early youth; at Leeds Castle, at the university, and in the army. His motive for settling in America was of the most noble and heroic kind. It was, as he always himself declared, to settle and cultivate that beautiful and immense tract of country, of which he was the proprietor; and in this he succeeded beyond his most sanguine expectations, for the Northern Neck was better peopled, better cultivated, and more improved, than any other part of the dominion of Virginia.

Lord Fairfax lived to extreme old age at Greenwaycourt, universally beloved, and died as universally lamented, in January or February 1782, in the ninety-second year of his age. He was buried at Winchester, where he had so often and so honourably presided as judge of the court. He bequeathed Greenway-court to his nephew colonel Martin; and his barony descended to his only surviving brother Robert Fairfax, to whom he had before consigned Leeds Castle, and his other English estates. This Robert, seventh lord Fairfax, died at Leeds Castle in 1791, and bequeathed that noble mansion, and its appendages, to his nephew the reverend Denny Martin, who has since taken the name of Fairfax. The barony or title, by regular descent, is now vested in the reverend Bryan Fairfax, the present and eighth lord Fairfax, third son of William Fairfax, esq. above mentioned. His claim on the barony was confirmed, in 1800, by the house of peers.

, a very celebrated engraver, was born in London in the early part of the seventeenth century. He was the pupil of Peake, the printer and printseller, who was afterwards knighted, and worked with him three or four years. At the breaking out of the civil war, Peake espoused the cause of Charles I.; and Faithorne, who accompanied his master, was taken prisoner by the rebels at Basing-house, whence he was sent to London, and confined in Aldersgate. In this uncomfortable situation he exercised his graver; and a small head of the first Villiers, duke of Buckingham, in the style of Mallan, was one of his first performances. The solicitations of his friends in his favour at last prevailed; and he was released from prison, with permission to retire on the continent. The story of his banishment for refusing to take the oath to Oliver Cromwell, would have done him no discredit, had it been properly authenticated, but that does not appear to be the case. Soon after his arrival in France, he found protection and encouragement from the abbe* de Marolles, and formed an acquaintance with the celebrated Nanteuil, from whose instructions he derived very considerable advantages. About 1650, he returned to England, and soon after married the sister of a person who is called “the famous” captain Ground. By her he had two sons, Henry, who was a bookseller, and William, an engraver in mezzotinto.

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

is ranked among the Sicilian historians of the twelfth century, but his personal history is involved in obscurity. Muratori makes him a Sicilian, but Mongitori says he was only educated in Sicily, and that he was more of a Norman than a Sicilian, although he lived many years in the latter kingdom. The editors of the “L'Art de verifier les Dates” are of opinion that the true name of Falcandus is Fulcandus, or Fducanlt. According to them, Hugues Foucault, a Frenchman by birth, and at length abbot of St. Denys, had followed into Sicily his patron Stephen de la Perche, uncle to the mother of William II. archbishop of Palermo, and great chancellor of the kingdom. Yet Falcandus has all the feelings of a Sicilian and the title of alumnus which he bestows on himself, appears to indicate that he was born, or at least, according to Mongitori, was educated in that island. Falcandus has been styled the Tacitus of Sicily, and Gibbon seems unwilling to strip him of his title: “his narrative,” says that historian, “is rapid and perspicuous, his style bold and elegant, his observation keen; he had studied mankind, and feels like a man.” There are four editions of his history, one separate, Paris, 1550; a second in the Wechels’ collection of Sicilian histories, 1579, folio; a third in Carusio’s Sicilian library and a fourth in the seventh volume of Muratori’s collection. Falcandus appears to have been living about 1190. His history embraces the period from 1130 to 1169, a time of great calamity to Sicily, and of which he was an eye-witness.

, a historian of Benevento, of the twelfth century, was notary and secretary to pope Innocent II. and was also a judge or magistrate of Benevento. He wrote a curious chronicle of events strikingly told, but in a bad style, which happened from 1102 to 1140. Mirseus says that Falco’s readers are as much impressed as if they had been present at what he relates. This chronicle was first printed by Ant. Caraccioli, a priest of the order of regular clerks, along with three other chroniclers, under the title “Antiqui chronologi quatuor,” Naples, 1626, 4to. It has since been reprinted in Muratori’s and other collections.

, an English gentleman of extraordinary talents and attainments, was the son of William Falconer, esq. one of the magistrates of Chester, by his wife Elizabeth, the daughter of Ralph Wilbraham, esq. of Townsend in Cheshire, and was born in 1736. That his education had not been neglected appears evidently from the uncommon progress he made in classical learning and antiquities, to which he appears to have been early attached, and in the study of which he persevered during a long and painful course of years. He had a permanent indisposition, which lasted thirty-two years, and which he bore with pious resignation. Such was his thirst of knowledge during this period, that he used to read in a kneeling posture, the only one in which he had a temporary respite from internal uneasiness, from which he was never entirely free. He was a man of taste and science, of extraordinary memory, and pqwers of application, and singularly comprehensive in his reading, and judicious and communicative. He was particularly acquainted with voyages and travels, and retained a fondness for both to the last. His latter days, when indisposition permitted him, were chiefly dedicated to the preparation of an edition of Strabo, in which he had made a considerable progress at the time of his death, Sept. 4, 1792. He was buried in St. Michael’s church, within the city of Chester, where he died, but there is a marble tablet to his memory in St. John’s church, in which parish he resided until within a few years of his death. On this tablet is a just and elegant inscription to his memory from the pen of his brother Dr. William Falconer of Bath.

As Mr. Falconer had little ambition to appear often in the character of an author, his works bear small proportion to the extent of his knowledge. The only publications from his pen were, “Devotions for the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, with an Appendix containing a method of digesting the book of Psalms, so as to be applicable to the common occurrences of life. By a Layman,” 1786, which has often been reprinted; “Observations on Pliny’s Account of the Temple of Diana at Ephesus,” inserted in the Archaeologia, vol. XI. of which a very close examination and analysis may be seen in the British Critic, vol. VII.; and “Chronological Tables from the reign of Solomon to the death of Alexander the Great,” Clarendon press, 1796, 4to. This was found among his Mss. in a prepared state, and presented to the university of Oxford by the author’s brother. The prefatory discourse, which is replete with elaborate research and profound erudition, while it explains, in a very satisfactory way, the arrangement of the tables, and settles many dark and discordant points of ancient history, may also be considered as a dissertation on the fine arts during the aera which it comprises; and the chronological tables will be highly acceptable to those who adhere to archbishop Usher’s mode of computation. His very learned and elaborate edition of Strabo, after being many years in the Clarendon press, was finally published in 1807, 2 vols. folio, by his nephew the rev. Thomas Falconer, M. A. of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, the translator of Hanno’s Periplus, and the author of several works worthy of the fame of his father and uncle. Of the merits of this edition of Strabo, it would be unnecessary to enlarge in this place, as they have so recently been the subject of much critical controversy, which the work will, outlive with lasting reputation.

, an ingenious poet, was born about 1730, and was the son of a poor but industrious barber at Edinburgh, all of whose children, with the exception ofour author, were either deaf or dumb. William received such common education as might qualify him for some inferior employment, and appears to have contracted a taste for reading, and a desire for higher attainments than his situation permitted. In the character of Arion, unquestionably intended for his own, he hints at a farther progress in study than his biographers have been able to trace

It must indeed have been with reluctance that a boy who had begun to taste the sweets of literature, consented to serve an apprenticeship on board a merchant vessel at Leith, which we are told he did when very young. He was afterwards in the capacity of a servant to Campbell, the author of Lexiphanes, when purser of a ship. Campbell is said to have discovered in Falconer talents worthy of cultivation; and when the latter distinguished himself as a poet, used to repeat with some pride, that he had once been his scholar.

Falconer, probably by means of this friend, was made second mate of a vessel employed in the Levant trade, which was shipwrecked during her passage from Alexandria to Venice, and only three of the crew saved. The date of this event cannot now be ascertained; but what he saw and felt on the melancholy occasion made the deepest impression on his memory, and certainly suggested the plan and characters of his celebrated poem. Whether before this time he had made any poetical attempts we are not informed. The favours of a genuine muse are usually early, and it is at least probable that the classical allusions so frequent in “The Shipwreck,” were furnished by much previous reading.

In 1751 he appeared among the poets who lamented the death of Frederick prince of Wales, in a poem published at Edinburgh, which probably gratified the humble expectations of a friendly circle, without procuring him much encouragement. He is said, however, to have followed up his first effort, by some small pieces sen to that accustomed repository of early talent, the Gentleman’s Magazine. Mr. Clarke has pointed out “The Chaplain’s petition to the Lieutenants in the ward-room,” the “Description of a ninety-gun Ship,” and some lines “On the uncommon scarcity of Poetry.” Mr. Clarke has likewise presented his readers with a whimsical little poem, descriptive of the abode and sentiments of a midshipman, which was one of Falconer’s early productions; and offers some reasons for being of opinion that he was the author of the popular song “Cease, rude Boreas.”

Our author is supposed to have continued in the merchant service until he gained the patronage of his royal highness Edward duke of York, by dedicating to him “The Shipwreck,” in the spring of 1762; and it is mucti to the honour of his highness’ s taste that he joined in the praise bestowed on this poem, and became desirous to place the author in a situation where he could befriend him. With this view, the duke advised him to quit the merchant service for the royal jiavy; and before the summer had elapsed, Falconer was rated a midshipman on board sir Edward Hawke’s ship, the Royal George, which at the peace of 1763, was paid off; but previously to that event, Falconer published an “Ode on the Duke of York’s second departure from England as Rear-Admiral.” His highness had embarked on board the Centurion with commodore Harrison, for the Mediterranean; and Falconer composed this ode “during an occasional absence from his messmates, when he retired into a small space formed between the cable tiers and the ship’s side.” It is a rambling, incoherent composition, in which we discover little of the author of the Shipwreck.

As Falconer wanted much of that complementary time of service, which might enable him to arrive at the commission of Lieutenant, his friends advised him to exchange the military for the civil department of the royal navy; and accordingly, in the course of 1763, he was appointed purser of the Glory frigate of 32 guns. Soon after he married a young lady of the name of Hicks, the daughter of the surgeon of Sheerness Yard. With this lady, who had considerable taste, he appears to have lived happily, although his circumstances were reduced for want of employment. That this was the case appears from a whimsical incident related by his biographer. “When the Glory was laid up in ordinary at Chatham, commissioner Hanway, brother to the benevolent Jonas Hanway, became delighted with the genius of its purser. The captain’s cabin was ordered to be fitted up with a stove, and with every addition of comfort that could be procured; in order that Falconer might thus be enabled to enjoy his favourite propensity, without either molestation or expence.”

Here he employed himself, for some time, in various literary occupations. Among others he compiled an “Universal Marine Dictionary,” a work of great utility, and highly approved by professional men in the navy. In 1764, he published a new edition of the Shipwreck, in 8vo, corrected and enlarged, with a preface which indicates no great facility in that species of composition. In the following year, appeared “The Demagogue,” a political satire on lord Chatham, Wilkes, and Churchill, and intended as an antidote to the writings of the latter. It contains a sufficient proportion of the virulent spirit of Churchill, but lord Chatham and Wilkes were not at this time vulnerable, and “The Demagogue” was soon forgotten.

The Marine Dictionary was published in 1769, before which period he appears to have left his naval retreat at Chatham for an abode in the metropolis of a less comfortable kind. Here, depressed by poverty, but occasionally soothed by friendship, and by the affectionate attentions of his wife, he subsisted for some time on various resources. In 1768 he received proposals from the late Mr. Murray, the bookseller, to be admitted a partner in the business which that gentleman afterwards established.

No reason can be assigned with more probability for his refusing this liberal offer, than his appointment, immediately after, to the pursership of the Aurora frigate, which was ordered to carry out to India, Messrs. Vansittart, Scrofton, and Forde, as supervisors of the affairs of the Company. He was also promised the office of private secretary to those gentlemen, a situation from which his friends conceived the hopes that he might eventually obtain lasting advantages. Dis aliter msum. The Aurora sailed from England on the 30th of September, 1769, and after touching at the Cape, was lost during the remainder of the passage in a manner which left no trace by which the cause of the calamity could be discovered. The most probable conjecture is, that she foundered in the Mosambique channel.

“In person,” says Mr. Clarke, “Falconer was about five feet seven inches in height of a thin light make, with a dark weather-beaten complexion, and rather what is termed hard-featured, being considerably marked with the small-pox his hair was of a brownish hue. In point of address, his manner was blunt, awkward, and forbidding but he spoke with great fluency and his simple yet impressive diction was couched in words which reminded his hearers of the terseness of Swift. Though he possessed a warm and friendly disposition, he was fond of controversy, and inclined to satire. His observation was keen and rapid; his criticisms on any inaccuracy of language, or expression, were frequently severe; yet this severity was always intended eventually to create mirth, and not by any means to show his own superiority, or to give the smallest offence. In his natural temper he was cheerful, and frequently used to amuse his messmates by composing acrostics on their favourites, in which he particularly excelled. As a professional man he was a thorough seaman; and, like most of that profession, was kind, generous, and benevolent. He often assured governor Hunter, that his education had been confined merely to reading English, writing, and a 4ittle arithmetic; notwithstanding which he was never at a loss to understand either French, Spanish, Italian, or even German.”

The principal objection to this poem is the introduction of sea-terms; and although it must be confessed that he has softened these by an exquisite harmony of numbers, some of his descriptions must ever remain unintelligible to indolent readers. But Falconer did not need to be told of this objection, and in his introduction, he deprecates what he had full reason to expect. If, however, we attend to his design, it will become evident that the introduction of sea-terms was absolutely necessary. “The Shipwreck” is didactic, as well as descriptive, and may be recommended to a young sailor, not only to excite his enthusiasm, but to improve his knowledge of the art. Mr. Clarke, whose judgment on this subject may be followed with safety, and whose zeal for the reputation of the British navy does honour both to his head and heart, says, that, the Shipwreck “is of inestimable value to this country, since it contains within itself the rudiments of navigation; if not sufficient to form a complete seaman, it may certainly be considered as the grammar of his professional science. I have heard many experienced officers declare, that the rules and maxims delivered in this poem, for the conduct of a ship in the most perilous emergency, form the best, indeed the only opinions which a skilful mariner should adopt.”

With such views it was impossible to exclude a language which is uncouth only where it is not understood, and which as being the language of those heroes who have elevated the character of their country beyond all precedent and all comparison, merits higher veneration than the technical terms of common mechanics; nor, upon this account, ought the Shipwreck to involve the blame which attaches to the “Cyder” of Philips, or the “Fleece” of Dyer. No art can give dignity to such subjects, nor did they demand the aid of poetry to render them more useful or more pleasing. Falconer’s subject was one of the most sublime inflictions of Providence. He described it for those who might be destined to behold it, and he knew that if among sailors he found no acute critics, he would find intelligent and sympathizing readers. When therefore we consider his whole design, the objection may admit of some apology even from those who will yet regret that a poet of such genuine skill should have narrowed his fame by writing for a class.

, born at Lyons in 1671, was bred a physician, in which profession his family had long been celebrated, but distinguished himself more iii general literature than in medicine. He settled at Paris, became a friend of Malebranche, and in 1716 was elected into the French academy. He had a library of forty-five thousand volumes, from which, in 1742, he presented to the royal library all those that were wanting to that collection. He died Feb. 8, 1762, at the age of 91, being supposed (like Fagon), to have prolonged his life by his skill. He was of a lively disposition, with a ready natural eloquence; and though he was not so famous in the practice of medicine, he was much esteemed in consultation. His chief works are, 1. A translation of Viliemont’s “Systema Planetarum,” published in 1707. 2. An edition of the Greek pastoral of “Daphnis and Chloe,” translated by Amyot, with curious notes. 3. An edition of Desperier’s “Cymbalum Mundi,” with notes. 4. Several dissertations in the inemoirs of the academy; and some medical theses. He was uncle to Stephen Falconet, the celebrated sculptor, of whom we regret that no good account has yet reached this country, where he has long been known for his writings.

, a Roman poetess, who flourished about 395, under the emperor Honorius, was a native of Horta, or Hortanum, in Etruria. There is still extant by her, a cento from Virgil, giving the sacred history from the creation to the deluge; and the history of Christ, in verses selected from that poet, introduced by a few lines of her own. Authors have sometimes confounded her with Anicia Falconia Proba, the mother of three consuls: and some have said she was that Valeria Proba, who was the wife of Adelfius, a proconsul. Her poem was first published with Ausonius, at Venice, 1472, under the title “Probae Falconiae, cento ^Virgilianus, seu Centimetrum de Christo, versibus Virgilianis compaginatum.” The last edition is that of Wolfius in the “Mulierum Grxcarum Frag.” Hamb. 1734, 4to.

, an Italian poet of the sixteenth century, was a native of Savona, in the state of Genoa. He published in 1557 a poem, in ottava rima, on the wars of Charles V. in Flanders, and other miscellaneous poems; and in 1558, twelve of his orations were published at Venice by Aldus, in folio. He wrote on the causes of the German war under Charles V. and an Italian translation of Athenagoras on the resurrection, 1556, 4to. He was also one of the authors of the celebrated collection under the title of “Polyanthea.” He was distinguished as a statesman, an orator, and an historian, as well as a poet, and was deputed on an embassy to Venice by Hercules Antestini, duke of Ferrara.

, one of the scientific travellers, employed by the late empress of Russia to explore her vast dominions, was born in Westrogothia, a province in Sweden, about 1727. He studied medicine in the university of Upsal, and went through a course of botany under the celebrated Linnæus, to whose son he was, tutor. He publicly defended the dissertation (in the Linnaei “Amcenitates Academics”) which that famous botanist had composed on a new species of plants, which he called astromeTi'a. In 1760, he was so deeply affected with depression of spirits, that Linnæus, in order to amuse his mind, sent him to travel over the island of Gothland, to make a collection of the plants it produces, and the various kinds of corals and corallines which the sea leaves on its shores; but this journey was attended with no diminution of his distemper, which found a continual supply of aliment in a sanguine melancholy temperament, in a too sedentary way of life, and in the bad state of his finances.

Professor Forskael having left Upsal for Copenhagen in 1760, Falk followed him thither, in hopes of being appointed his assistant in his famous journey through Arabia, but the society that were to go on that important expedition being already formed, his application failed, and being obliged to return, he herborised as he travelled, and enriched the Flora Suecica with several new discoveries. A man in office at St. Petersburgh having written to Linnæus to send him a director for his cabinet of natural history, Falkaccepted the post, which led him to the chair of professor of botany at the apothecaries’ garden at St. Petersburgh, a place that had been long vacant; but his hypochondriac complaint still continued to torment him. When the imperial academy of sciences was preparing in 1768 the plan of its learned expeditions, it took Falk into its service, though his health was uncertain. He was recalled in 1771, but having got only to Kasan in 1773, he there obtained permission to go and use the baths of Kissiar, from which he returned again to Kasan at the end of the year, with his health apparently better; but his disease soon returned with redoubled violence, and his mind being deranged he put a period to his life on March 31, 1774. His fate was generally and justly lamented. His papers were found in the greatest disorder. They contained, however, very useful and important relations. He particularly made it his business to inquire about the Kirguises and the other Tartarian nations; and as he frequently remained for the space of nine months together in the same place, he was enabled to procure satisfactory reports concerning the objects of his investigations. The imperial academy, in 1774, appointed professor Laxmann to arrange his manuscripts in order for publication; which was done accordingly, but they were not published until 1735, when they appeared at Petersburgh in 3 vols. 4to.

, a voluminous compiler of historical documents, was born in Franconia in 1682, and died in 1760. In 1724 he was appointed director of the university of Erlangen, but turning catholic, he entered into the service of the bishop of Eichstadt, and after the death of that prelate, obtained the patronage of the margrave of Anspach. Among other compilations of a similar kind, without taste or arrangement, but which may be useful to future historians, are his “Antiquities of Nordgau in the bishopric of Eichstadt,” 3 vols. fol.

, a learned man, was born in the isle of Jersey in 1655, and in 1669 became a commoner of Exeter college in Oxford; from whence he removed to St. Alban’s hall, and took both his degrees in arts, that of master in July 1676. Afterwards he went into orders, retired to his native country, where he was made rector of St. Saviour’s, and was afterwards chosen deputy from the states of that island to king William and queen Mary. He was also rector of Shenley, in Hertfordshire, where he built an elegant house at the expense of 1000l. King William recommended him to a prebend in Durham. The golden prebend was then vacant, but the bishop removed Dr. Pickering to it, and gave Dr. Falle the fourth stall, of which he afterwards complained. The repairing of the prebendal house cost him 200l. He died at Shenley, in 1742, and left his excellent library (excepting a collection of sacred music, which he gave to the library at Durham), to the island of Jersey. He published three sermons; one preached at St. Hilary’s in Jersey, in 1692; another at Whitehall in 1694; and another before the mayor of London in 1695. He was the author also of “An account of the isle of Jersey, the greatest of those islands that are now the only remainder of the English dominions in France: with a new and accurate map of that island,” 1694, 8vo. This is much quoted by bishop Gibson.

, a most celebrated physician and anatomist of Italy, was descended from a noble family, and born at Modena, most probably in 1523, although some make him born in 1490. He enjoyed a strong and vigorous constitution, with vast abilities of mind, which he cultivated by an intense application to his studies in philosophy, physic, botany, and anatomy. In this last he made some discoveries, and, among the rest, that of the tubes by which the ova descend from the ovarium, and which from him are called the “Fallopian tubes.” He travelled through the greatest part of Europe, and penetrated by his labour the most abstruse mysteries of nature. He practised physic with great success, and gained the character of one of the ablest physicians of his age. He was made professor of anatomy at Pisa in 1548, and was promoted to the same office at Padua in 1551; at which last place he died October 9, 1563, according to the common opinion, in the prime of life, but not so, if born in 1490.

, was a celebrated Danish critic and philologer of Flensburg, the exact time of whose birth and death we have not been able to learn. His chief works, which are all of a curious and interesting nature, and published between the years 1717 and 1731, are: 1. “Supplementum Lingua Latinae,” consisting of observations on Cellarius’s edition of Faber; Flensburg, 1717. 2. “Animadversiones Epistolicae,” of a similar nature, published at the same place and time. 3. “Quaestiones Romanae,” containing an idea of the literary history of the Romans, with memorials of eminent writers and works; Flensburg, 1718. 4. “Cogitationes Philologicae,” Lips. 1719. 5. “Sermo Panegyricus de variarum gentium bibliothecis,” ibid. 1720. 6. “Vigilia prima noctium Ripensium,” containing observations on A. Gellius, Hafnicc, 1721. 7. “Amcenitates Philologicae,” Amst. 1729 32, 3 vols. And, 7. “A Danish translation of the fourteenth satire of Juvenal,” Hafn. 1731, in 4to, the rest are 8vo.

, a celebrated medallist, was the son of a jeweller, and born at Stockholm in 1658. His father dying in his infancy, he was sent to Stettin to the care of his maternal uncle, and afterwards being brought back to Stockholm, employed himself in goldsmith’s work, painting, and modelling in wax. In 1680 he went to Copenhagen, and thence to Lubeck, Hamburgh, and many other places, for the sake of improvement in his art. At Augsburgh he learned to work on steel. In 1683, after studying the French language, he went to Paris, and was employed by Cheron the French king’s medallist, and having acquired a very high reputation for his workmanship, he began business on his own account, and executed a great number of excellent medals illustrative of the history of Louis XIV. who was so well pleased with his performances as to settle a pension of 1200 livres upon him, besides paying him liberal prices for his works. In 1686 he took a trip to the Netherlands, and thence into England. After returning to the continent, he re-visited his native country, Sweden, where the king gave him an handsome pension; and in 1688, Frederic, elector of Brandenburgh, invited Falz to his court, and appointed him his medallist. After increasing his fame in Sweden, at Berlin, and at Hanover, he died at Berlin May 26, 1703.

, a native of the West of England, who may be termed the inventor of circulating libraries, was, at the beginning of the last century, pastor of a congregation of protestant dissenters in Salisbury, where he had a number of pupils for near twenty years. Professing a creed very different from, the opinions of Calvin, as appears by his numerous publications, he incurred the displeasure of persons of that persuasion, and a controversy arose in which clergymen of the establishment and the dissenters had an equal share. It turned on the divine prescience, the freedom of the human will, the greatness of the divine love, and the doctrine of reprobation. Driven from a comfortable settlement to the great metropolis, where he acquired no new one as a teacher, Mr. Fancourt, about 1740 or 1745, established the first circulating library for gentlemen and ladies, at a subscription of a guinea a year for reading; but in 1748 extended it to a guinea in all, for the purchase of a better library, half to be paid at the time of subscribing, the other half at the delivery of a new catalogue then in the press, and twelve pence a quarter beside, to begin from Michaelmas 1754, to the librarian. Subscriptions were to be paid without further charge to the proprietors, but to pay only from the time of subscribing; out of which quarterly payments were to be deducted the rent of the rooms to receive the books, and accommodate subscribers, a salary to the librarian to keep an open account, and to circulate the books; a stock to buy new books and duplicates as there was occasion; the expence of providing catalogues, and drawing up writings for settling the trust. This trust was to be vested in twelve or thirteen persons chosen by ballot out of the body of proprietors; and the proposer, Mr. Fancourt himself, was to be the first librarian, and to continue so as long as he discharged his office with diligence and fidelity. Every single subscriptionentitled the subscriber to one book and one pamphlet at a time, to be changed ad libitum for others, and kept ad Libitum, if not wanted by other subscribers. Mr. Fancourt advertised himself also in these proposals as a teacher of Latin, to read, write, and speak it with fluency in a year’s time or less, at twelve guineas a year, one guinea a month, or twelve pence an hour, allowing five or six hours in a week. The great hypercritic of Mr. Fancourt’s design was the late Dr. C. Mortimer. Not to trace the poor librarian through every shifting of his quarters, he fixed at last at the corner of one of the streets in the Strand, where, encumbered with a helpless and sick wife, turned out of fashion, and outplanned by a variety of imitators, and entangled with a variety of plans, not one of which could extricate him from perplexities, this poor man, who may be said to have first circulated knowledge among us, sunk under a load of debt, unmerited reproach, and a failure of his faculties, brought on by the decay of age, precipitated by misfortunes. His library became the property of creditors, and he retired in humble poverty to Hoxton-square, where some of his brethren relieved his necessities till the close of his life, in his ninetieth year, June 8, 1768. As a preacher, though neither what is now called popular, nor pastor of a London congregation, he was occasionally called upon to fill up vacancies, and is said to have preached with a considerable degree of manly eloquence.

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

, a statesman, negociator, and poet of the last century, was the youngest son, and tenth child, of sir Henry Fanshawe, knt. remembrancer of the exchequer, and brother of lord viscount Fanshawe, of Dromore, in the kingdom of Ireland, and was born at Ware-park in Hertfordshire, in the month of June 1608. Being only seven years of age when his father died, the care of his education devolved upon his mother, who placed him under the famous schoolmaster Thomas Farnaby. November 12, 1623, he was admitted a fellow-commoner of Jesus college, Cambridge, under the tuition of Dr. Beale, where he prosecuted his studies with success, and discovered a genius for classical learning. Thence he was removed to the Inner Temple, Jan. 22, 1626; but at his mother’s death he resolved to pursue a line of life better adapted to his genius and inclination, and accordingly he travelled to France and Spain, for the purpose of acquiring the languages, and studying the manners of those countries. On his return home he was appointed secretary to the embassy at Madrid, under lord Aston, and was left resident there from the time of lord Aston’s resignation to the appointment of sir Arthur Hopton in 1638.

Being in England at the breaking-out of the civil war, he declared early for the crown, and was employed in several important matters of state. In 1644, attending the court at Oxford, he had the degree of D. C. L. conferred upon him, and was appointed secretary at war to the prince of Wales, whom he attended into the western parts of England, and thence into the islands of Scilly and Jersey. In 1648 he was appointed treasurer to the navy under prince Rupert, which office he held till 1650, when he was created a baronet, and sent to Madrid to represent the necessitous situation of his master, and to beg a temporary assistance from Philip IV. He was then sent for to Scotland, and served there in the capacity of secretary of state to the great satisfaction of all parties, although he took neither covenant nor engagement . About this time he was recommended by the king to the York party, who received him with great kindness, and entrusted him with the broad seal and signet. In 1651 he was taken prisoner at the battle of Worcester, and committed to close custody in London; but, having contracted a dangerous sickness, he had liberty allowed him, upon giving bail, to go for the recovery of his health to any place he should chtise, provided he stirred not five miles thence without leave from the parliament. In 1654 he was at Tankersley park in Yorkshire, which place he hired of his friend lord Sirafford, to whom he dedicated his translation of the “Lusiad of Camoens,” written during his residence there. In February 1659 (under pretence of travelling abroad with the eldestson of Philip earl of Pembroke), he obtained his bail to be returned, and repaired to king Charles II. at Breda, who knighted him in April following; and appointed him master of requests, and secretary of the Latin tongue.

Upon his majesty’s restoration he expected to be appointed secretary of state, from a promise wfoich had formerly been made him of that office; but to his great disappointment, it was, at the instance of the duke of Albemarle, given to sir William Morrice, which circumstance lady Fanshawe states thus: “The king promised sir Richard that he should be one of the secretaries of state (at the Restotion), and both the duke of Ormond and lord chancellor Clarendon were witnesses of it; yet that false man made the king break his word for his own accommodation, and placed Mr. Morrice, a poor country gentleman of about 200l. a year, a fierce presbyterian, and one who never saw the king’s face; but still promises were made of the reversion to sir Richard.”

He was elected one of the representatives of the university of Cambridge in the parliament which met the 8th of May 1661, and was soon after sworn a privy counsellor of Ireland. Having by his residence in foreign courts qualified himself for public employments abroad, he was sent envoy extraordinary to Portugal, with a dormant commission to the ambassador, which he was to make use of as occasion should require. Shortly after, he was appointed ambassador to that court, where he negotiated the marriage between his master king Charles II. and the infanta donna Catharina, daughter of king John VI. and returned to England towards the end of the same year. It appears that he was again sent ambassador to that crown in 1661, and was, upon his return to England the following year, sworn of his majesty’s privy-council. His integrity, abilities, and industry, became so well known in Portugal, that he was recommended and desired by that crown to be sent to Spain as the fittest person to bring about an accommodation between Spain and Portugal. In the beginning of 1664 he was sent ambassador to Philip IV. king of Spain^ and arrived, February the 29th, at Cadiz, where he was saluted in a manner unexampled to others, and received with several circumstances of particular esteem. It appears from one of sir Richard’s letters, that this extraordinary respect was paid him not only upon his own, but also upon his master the king of England’s account. He says, “I had not been three hours on shore (at Cadiz) when an extraordinary messenger arrived from Madrid with more particular orders than formerly, from his catholic majesty, importing that our master’s fleet, when arrived, and his ambassador, should be pre-saluted from the city in a manner unexampled toothers, and which should not be drawn into example hereafter. Moreover (and this so likewise), that I and all my company must be totally defrayed, both here and all the way up to Madrid, upon his catholic majesty’s account; with several other circumstances of particular esteem for our royal master, above all the world beside.” From a passage in another letter of his it is evident, that the hope the Spaniards entertained, of having Tangier and Jamaica restored to them by England, was, “that which made his arrival impatiently longed for, and so magnificently celebrated.” During his residence at this court, however, after all that apparent good will, he experienced such frequent mortifications as ministers use to meet with in courts irresolute and perplexed in their own affairs, and had made a journey to Lisbon upon the earnest desire of Spain, and returned without effect. ^On a sudden, when the recovery of Philip IV. grew desperate, a project for a treaty was sent to the ambassador, containing more advantages of trade to the nation, and insisting upon fewer inconvenient conditions than had ever been in any* of the former, and urging the immediate acceptation or rejection of it, on account of the king’s illness, “which,” they declared, “might make such an alteration in counsels, that, if it were not done in his life-time, they knew not what might happen ' after.” The ambassador, surprised with this overture, compared what was offered with what he was to demand by his instructions; and what was defective in those particulars he added to the articles presented to him, with such farther additions, as, upon his own observation and conference with the merchants, occurred to him; which being agreed to, he signed the treaty, with a secret article respecting Portugal, and sent it to England. The treaty was no sooner brought to the king, and perused in council, but many faults were found with it, and in the end the king concluded that he would not sign it; and the ambassador was recalled.

Sir Richard was preparing for his return to England; when, June 4, 1666, he was seized at Madrid with a violent fever, which put an end to his life the 16th of the same month, the very day he had designed to set out on his return home. Hfts body, being embalmed, was conveyed by his lady, with all his children then living, by land to Calais, and afterwards to All Saints church in Hertford, where it was deposited in the vault of his father-in-law, sir John Harrison, till May 18, 1671, and then was removed into a new vault, made on purpose for him and his family in thl parish-church of Ware. Near the vault there is a handsome monument erected to his memory. He was remarkable for his meekness, sincerity, humanity, and piety; and also was an able statesman and a great scholar, being in particular a complete master of several modern languages, especially Spanish, which was perfectly familiar to him.

Although much of his life was spent in active business, he found leisure to produce the following works: 1. An English translation in rhyme of Guarini’s “II Pastor Fido, or the Faithful Shepherd,” 1646, 4to. 2. A translation from, English into Latin verse of Fletcher’s “Faithful Shepherdess,” 1658. 3. In the octavo edition of “The Faithful Shepherd,” are inserted the following poems of our author; An Ode on his majesty’s Proclamation in 1630, commanding the gentry to reside upon their estates in the country; an English translation of the fourth book of Virgil’s Aneid Odes of Horace, translated into English; and a summary Discourse of the Civil Wars of Rome. 4. He translated from Portuguese into English, Canpens’ “Lusiad, or Portugal’s Historical Poem,” 1655, folio. 5. After his decease were published two pieces in 4to, 1671 r “luerer per solo querer,” “To love only for love’s sake,” a dramatical romance, represented before the king and queen of Spain and “Fiestas de Aranjeuz,” Festival at Aranjeuz. Both written in Spanish by Antonio de Mendoza, upon celebrating the birth-day of Philip VI. in 1623, at Aranjuez; and translated by our author in 1654, during his confinement. 6. His correspondence was published in 1701, in one volume, 8vo, under this title: “'Original Letters of his excellency sir Richard Fanshawe during his embassy in Spain and Portugal; which, together with divers letters and answers from the chief ministers of state in England, Spain, and Portugal, contain the whole negotiations of the treaty of peace between those three crowns.” The publisher received these letters from the hands of a daughter of sir Richard, who had them in her possession. He also composed other things, remaining in manuscript, which he wrote in his younger years, but had not tha leisure to complete. Even some of the preceding printed pieces have not all the perfection which our ingenious author could have given them: for, as his biographer observes, “being, for his loyalty and zeal to his master’s service, tossed from place to place, and from country to country, during the unsettled times of our anarchy, some of his manuscripts falling by misfortune into unskilful hands, were printed and published without his consent or knowledge, and before he could give them his last finishing strokes.” But that was not the case with his translation of “II Pastor Fido,” which was published by himself, and procured him much reputation.

His lady, by whom he had six sons and eight daughters, of whom one son and four daughters survived him, was the daughter of sir John Harrison by Margaret his wife, daughter of Robert Fanshawe, of Fanshawe-gate, esq. great uncle to si* Richard, to whom she was married in Wolvercot church, near Oxford, May 18, 1644. She compiled, for the use of her only son, “Memoirs of the Fanshawe Family,” containing a particular account of their sufferings in the royal cause, in which she and her sister Margaret Harrison (who in 1654 married sir Edmund Tumor, of StokeRochford, co. Lincoln, knt.) bore a considerable share, being the constant companions of sir Richard in those perilous times. The description of her and her husband’s taking leave of Charles 1. when he was a prisoner at Hampton-court, is a very affecting specimen of these Memoirs, and is told with great simplicity. During the king’s stay at Hampton-court, I went three times to pay my duty to him, both as I was the daughter of his servant, and the wife of his servant; the last time I ever saw him I could not refrain from weeping. When I took my leave of the king, he saluted me, and I prayed God to preserve his majesty with long life and happy years. The king stroked me on the cbeek, and said, “Child, if God pleaseth it shall be so, but both you and I must submit to God’s will; and you know in what hands I am in.‘ Then turning to my husband, he said, ’ Be sure, Dick, to tell my son all that I have said, and deliver these letters to my wife. Pray God bless her; and I hope 1 shall do well.” Then taking my husband in his arms, he said, “Thou hast ever been an honest man; I hope God will bless thee, and make thee a happy servant to my son, whom I have charged in my letter to continue his love and trust to you;‘ adding, ’ And I do promise you, if I am ever restored to my dignity, I will bountifully reward you both for your services and sufferings.' Thus did we part from that glorious sun, that within a few months afterwards was extinguished, to the grief of all Christians, who are not forsaken of their God.”

These memoirs, from the variety of interesting matter they contain, might, if they were published, prove an acceptable present to the public. The excellent writer of them was no less distinguished for her strength of mind and courage than for her piety and virtue. When the vessel that carried her from Ireland to Spain was attacked, she put on men’s clothes, and fought with the sailors. In the second volume of Mr. Seward’s “Anecdotes” are many other curious extracts from lady Fanshawe’s Memoirs.

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

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

, a celebrated professor of astronomy and natural history at Padua, was born in 1650, of a noble family, at Tripani in Sicily. He entered the third order of St. Francis; taught mathematics at Messina, and theology at Rome, where he had taken a doctor’s’ degree in the college della Sapienza. Francis II. duke of Modena made him professor of philosophy and geometry in his capital; but he gave up that situation to go to Venice, where he quitted the Franciscan habit in 1693, by permission of the pope, and took that of a secular priest. He was afterwards appointed professor of astronomy and physic in the university of Padua, and died at Naples, from a second attack of an apoplexy, January 2, 1718. Fardella had a lively genius and fertile imagination, but became 50 absent, by a habit of profound thought, that he sometimes appeared to have lost his senses. He left sereral works on literature, philosophy, and mathematics; some in Latin, others in Italian. The principal are, “Universae Philosophise Systema,” Venice, 16iU, 12mo; “Universae Usualis Mathematics Theoria,” 12mo; “Animoe humanae Natura ab Augustino detecta,” 1698, folio; several works in favour of Descartes’s philosophy, &c.

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

, a learned minister of the church, and most intrepid reformer, was the son of a gentleman of Dauphine in France, and born at Gap in 1489. He studied philosophy, and Greek and Hebrew, at Paris with great success, and was for some time a teacher in the college of cardinal le Moine. Briyonnet, bishop of Meaux, hem.; inclined to the reformed religion, invited him to preach in his diocese in 1521; but the persecution raised there against the early protestants who were styled heretics, in 1523, obliged him to provide for his security out of France. He then retired to Strasburgh, where Bucer and Capito admitted him as a. brother; and he was afterwards received as such by Zwinglius at Zurich, by Haller at Berne, and by Oecolampadius at Basil. As he was thought well qualified by zeal and knowledge for such a task, he was advised to undertake the reformation of religion at Montbeliard, in which design he was supported by the duke of Wittenberg, who was lord of that place; and he succeeded in it most happily. He was a man on some occasions of too much warmth and enthusiasm against popery, which, however, he tempered a little, by the advice of Oecolampadius. Once on a procession-day, he pulled out of the priest’s hand the image of St. Antony, and threw it from a bridge into the river, a boldness and imprudence which was unnecessary, and might have cost him his life. Erasmus by no means liked Farel’s temper, as appears from what he wrote of him to the official of Besancon. “You, have,” says he, “in your neighbourhood the new evangelist, Farel; than whom I never saw a man more false, more virulent, more seditious.” Erasmus has also given a very unfavourable character of him elsewhere: but he thought Farel had censured him in some of his writings, and therefore is not to be altogether believed in every thing he says of him; nor indeed was a man of decision and intrepidity likely to be a favourite with the timid and time-serving Erasmus.

In 1528, he had the same success in promoting the reformation in the city of Aigle, and soon after in the bailU wick of Morat. He went afterwards to Neufchatel in 1529, and disputed against the Roman catholic party with so much strength, that this city embraced the reformed religion, and established it entirely Nov. 4, 1530. He was sent a deputy to the synod of the Waldenses, held in the valley of Angrogne. Hence he went to Geneva, where he laboured against popery: but the grand vicar and the other clergy resisted him with so much fury, that he was obliged to retire. He was called back in 1534 by the inhabitants, who had renounced the Roman catholic religion; and was the chief person that procured the perfect abolition of it the next year. He was banished from Geneva with Calvin in 1533, and retired to Basil, and afterwards to Neufchatel, where there was great probability of a large evangelical harvest. From thence he went to Metz, but had a thousand difficulties to encounter; and was obliged to retire into the abbey of Gorze, where the count of Jurstemberg protected him and the new converts. But they could not continue there long; for they were besieged in the abbey, and obliged at last to surrender, after a capitulation. F. rel very happily escaped, though strict search was made alter him, having been put in a cart among the sick and infirm. He took upon him his former functions of a minister at Neufchatel, whence he took now and then a journey to Geneva. When he went thither in 1553, he was present at Servetus’s execution. He went again to Geneva in 1564, to^take his last leave of Calvin, who was dangerously ill. He took a second journey to Metz in 1565, being invited by his ancient flock, to witness the success of his lubours, but returned to Neufchatel, and died there Sept. 13, or, as Dupin says, Dec. 3, in the same year.

He married at the age of sixty-nine, and left a son, who survived him but three years. Though he was far better qualified to preach than to write books, yet he was the author of some few publications of the controversial kind, among which are a treatise “Upon the true use of the Cross,” Paris, 1560, and another “Upon the authority of the Word of God, and human traditions.”

, a French wit and poet, was born in 1600 at Bourg en Bresse, and going very young to Paris, attached himself to Vaugeias, Boisrobert, and Coeffetau; and was afterwards made secretary to the count d'Harcourt, and then steward of his house. Faret was one of the first members of the French academy, and employed to settle its statutes. He was very intimate with St. Amand, who celebrates him in his verses, as an illustrious debauchee, inertly to furnish a rhyme to Cabaret. He was at length appointed secretary to the king, and died at Paris in September 1640, leaving several children by two marriages. His works are, a translation of Eutropius; “L'Honnete Homme,” taken from the Italian of Castiglione, J2mo; “Vertus necessaires a un Prince;” and several poems in the collections of his time. He also left a life of Rene II. dhke of Lorraine, and Memoirs of the famous count d'Harcourt, ms.

, one of the most celebrated historians and poets of his nation in the seventeenth century, was born March 18, 1590, at Sonto near Caravilla in Portugal, of a noble family, both by his father’s and mother’s side. His father’s name was Arnador Perez d'Eiro, and his mother’s Louisa Faria, but authors are not agreed in their conjectures why he did not take his father’s name, but preferred Faria, that of his mother, and Sousa, which is thought to have been his grandmother’s name. In his infancy he was very infirm, yet made considerable progress, even when a puny child, in writing, drawing, and painting. At the age of ten, his father sent him to school to learn Latin, in which his proficiency by no means answered his expectations, owing to the boy’s giving the preference to the Portuguese and Spanish poets. These he read incessantly, and composed several pieces in verse and prose in both languages, but he had afterwards the good sense to destroy his premature effusions, as well as to perceive that the Greek and Roman classics are the foundation of a true style, and accordingly he endeavoured to repair his error by a careful study of them. In 1604, when only in his fourteenth year, he was received in the Tank of gentleman into the household of don Gonzalez de Moraes, bishop of Porto, who was his relation, and afterwards made him his secretary; and during his residence with this prelate, which lasted ten years, he applied himself indefatigably to his studies, and composed some works, the best of which was an abridgment of the historians of Portugal, “Epitome de las historias Portuguesas, desde il diluyio hasta el anno 1628,” Madrid, 1628, 4to. In this he has been thought to give rather too much scope to his imagination, and to write more like an orator than a historian. In 1612 he fell in love with a lady of Porto, whom he calls Albania, and who was the subject of some of his poems; but it is doubtful whether this was the lady he married in 1614, some time after he left the bishop’s house, on account of his urging him to go into the church, for which he had no inclination. -He remained at Porto until 1618, when he paid his father a visit at Pombeiro. The year following he went to Madrid, and into the service of Peter Alvarez Pereira, secretary of state, and counsellor to Philip the III. and IV. but Pereira did not live long enough to give him any other proof of his regard than by procuring to be made a knight of the order of Christ in Portugal. In 1628 he returned to Lisbon with his family, but quitted Portugal in 1631, owing to his views of promotion being disappointed. Returning to Madrid, he was chosen secretary to the marquis de Castel Rodrigo, who was about to set out for Rome as ambassador at the papal court. At Rome Faria was received with great respect, and his merit acknowledged; but having an eager passion for study, he visited very few. The pope, Urban VIII. received him very graciously, and conversed familiarly with him on the subject of poetry. One of his courtiers requested Faria to write a poem on the coronation of that pontiff, which we find in the second volume of his poems. In 1634, having some reason to be dissatisfied with his master, the ambassador, he quitted his service, and went to Genoa with a view to return to Spain. The ambassador, piqued at his departure, which probably was not very ceremonious, wrote a partial account of it to the king of Spain, who caused Faria to be arrested at Barcelona. So strict was his confinement, that for more than three months no person had access to him; until Jerome de Villa Nova, the prothonotary of Arragon, inquired into the affair, and made his innocence known to the king. This, however, had no other effect than to procure an order that he should be a prisoner at large in Madrid; although the king at the same time assured him that he was persuaded of his innocence, and would allow him sixty ducats per month for his subsistence. Faria afterwards renewed his solicitations to be allowed to remove to Portugal, but in vain; and his confinement in Madrid, with his studious and sedentary life, brought on, in 1647, a retention of urine, the torture of which he bore with great patience. It occasioned his death, however, on June 3, 1640. He appears to have merited an excellent character, but was too little of a man of the world to make his way in it. A spirit of independence probably produced those obstacles which he met with in his progress; and even his dress and manner, we are told, were rather those of a philosopher than of a courtier. Besides his History of Portugal, already mentioned, and of which the best edition was published in 1730, folio, he Wote, 1. “Noches claras,” a collection of moral and political discourses, Madrid, 1623 and 1626, 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “Fuente de Aganipr, o Rimes varias,” a collection of his poems, in 7 vols. Madrid, 1644, &c. 3. “Commentarios sobra las Lusiadas de Luis de Camoens,” an immense commentary on the Lusiad, ibid. 1639, in 2 vols. folio. He is said to have began it in 1614, and to have bestowed twentyfive years upon it. Some sentiments expressed here had alarmed the Inquisition, and the work was prohibited. He was permitted, however, to defend it, which he did in, 4. * Defensa o Information por'los Commentaries, &c.“Madrid, 1640 or 1645, folio. 5.” Imperio de la China, &e.“and an account of the propagation of religion by the Jeuits, written by Semedo: Faria was only editor of this work, Madrid, 1643, 4to. 6.” Nobiliario del Concle D. Petro de Barcelos,“&c. a translation from the Portuguese, with notes, ibid. 1646, folio. 7.” A Life of Don Martin Bapt. de Lanuza,“grand justiciary of Arragon,” ibid. 1650, 4to. 8. “Asia Portuguesa,” Lisbon, 1666, &c. 3 vols. folio. 9. “Europa Portuguesa,” ibid. 1678, 2 vols. folio. 10. “Africa Portuguesa,” ibid. 1681, folio. Of this we have an English Edition by John Stevens, Lond. 1695, 3 vols. 8vo. 11. “America Portuguesa.” All these" historical and geographical works have been considered as correct and valuable. Faria appears to have published some other pieces of less importance, noticed by Antonio.

, an eminent lawyer, was born October 30, 1554, at Rome. He was a Roman advocate, and fiscal procurator ^ took pleasure in defending the least supportable causes, and is said to have acted with extreme rigour and severity in his office of fiscal procurator. This conduct drew him into very disagreeable situations, and would have proved his ruin, had not some cardinals, who admired his wit and genius, interceded for him with Clement VIII. who said, alluding to the name of Farinaccio, that “the farina was excellent, but the sack which contained it was good for nothing.” Farinaccio died at Rome October 30, 1618, aged sixty-four. His works have been printed at Antwerp, 1620 and the following make 13 vols.' folio “Decisiones Rotse,” 2 vols. “Decisiones Rotas novissimse,” 1 vol. “Decisiones Rotae recentissimae,” 1 vol.; “Repertorium Judiciale,” 1 vol.; “De Haeresi,” i Tol.; “Consilia,” 2 vols. “Praxis Criminalis,” 4 vols. “Succus praxis criminalis,” 1 vol. All these were considered as valuable works by the Roman lawyers.

, an Italian painter, was born at Verona in 1522; his mother dying in labour of him. He was a disciple of Nicolo Golfino, and an admirable designer, but not altogether so happy in his colouring: though there is a piece of his painting in St. George’s church at Verona, 50 well performed in both respects, that it does not seem inferior to one of Paul Veronese, which is placed next to it. He was famous also for being an excellent swordsman, and a very good orator, and Strutt mentions some engravings by him. He had considerable knowledge in sculpture and architecture, especially that part of it which relates to fortifications. His last moments are said to have been as remarkable as his first, on account of the death of his nearest relation. He lay upon his death-bed in 1606; and his wife, who was sick in the same room, hearing him cry out r 4< He was going,“told him,” She would bear him company; and actually did so, as they both expired at the same minute.

, an English divine, was born at Sunning in Berks, 1596. He was admitted scholar of Trinity college, Oxford, in 1612, and elected fellow in 1617. Three years after, he took a master of arts degree; about which time entering into orders, he became a celebrated preacher in those parts, an eminent tutor in the college, and, as Wood says, an example fit to be followed by all. In 1634, being then bachelor of divinity, he was made vicar of Bray near Maidenhead in Berks, and soon after divinity-reader in the king’s chapel at Windsor. He con^ tinued at the first of these places, though not without some trouble, till after the civil commotions broke out; and then he was ejected, and reduced with his wife and family to such extremities, as to be very near starving. Lloyd says that his house was plundered by Ireton, in mean revenge, because Mr. Faringdon had reproved him for some irregularities when at Trinity college. At length sir John Robinson, alderman of London, related to archbishop Laud, and some of the parishioners of Milk-street, London, invited him to be pastor of St. Mary Magdalen in that city, which he gladly accepted, and preached with great approbation from the loyal party. In Io47, he published a folio volume of these sermons, and dedicated them to his patron Robinson, “as a witnesse or manifesto,” says he to him, “of my deep apprehension of your many noble favours, and great charity to me and mine, when the sharpnesse of the weather, and the roughnesse of the times, had blown all from us, and well-neer left us naked.”

, an English artist of great promise, the fourth son of the rev. William Farington, B. D. rector of Warrington, and vicar of Leigh in Lancashire, was born in 1754, and received his first instructions in the art from his brother Joseph, one of the present royal academicians; but his inclinations leading him to the study of historical painting, he acquired farther assistance from Mr. West. He was for some time employed by the late alderman Boy dell, for whom he executed several very excellent drawings from the Houghton collection. He studied long in the royal academy, and obtained a silver medal in 1779; and in 1780, obtained the golden medal for the best historical picture, the subject of which was the cauldron scene in Macbeth. In 1782 he left England, and went to the East Indies, being induced to undertake that voyage by some advantageous offers. In India he painted many pictures; but his principal undertaking was a large work, representing the Durbar, or court of the nabob, at Mershoodabad. Whilst employed on this work, he imprudently exposed himself to the night air, to observe some ceremonies of the natives, in order to complete a series of drawings begun for that purpose, when he was suddenly seized with a complaint, which, in a few days, unfortunately terminated his life in 1788.

, a learned divine among the-protestant dissenters, was born in 17 14, at a village near Shrewsbury, where his parents resided, and being early designed for the dissenting ministry, received the first part of his grammatical learning in a school in Llanegrin, nearTowyn, Merionethshire, which had been founded by two of his progenitors. From tiiis place he was sent to perfect his classical education under the tuition of Dr. Owen of Warrington and in 1730, began his academical studies at Northampton, under the care of Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Doddridge, being one of the doctor’s earliest pupils. After Mr. Farmer had finished his academical course, he became chaplain to William Coward, esq. of Waltham-Stowe, Essex, and preacher in a meeting-house which had been lately erected by that gentleman, whose name is of great note^ among the dissenters, on account of the large bequests which he made for the education of young men for the ministry, and for other beneficent purposes. Mr. Coward was remarkable for the peculiarities and oddities of his temper; and in this respect many pleasant stories are related concerning him. Amongst his other whimsies, his house was shut up at an uncommon early hour, we believe at six in the winter, and seven in the summer; and whoever, whether a visitant or a stated resident, trespassed upon the time, was denied admission. Mr. Farmer having one evening been somewhat too late, was of course excluded. In this exigence he had recourse to a neighbouring family, that of William Snell, esq. a solicitor, in which he continued more than thirty years, during the lives of Mr. and Mrs. Snell, by whom he was treated more like an equal than an inferior. Here he enjoyed a long series of peaceful leisure, which he employed in collecting a large fund of sacred and profane literature, and in his duties as a pastor. His congregation, which, when he accepted the charge of it, was very small, gradually became one or the most wealthy dissenting societies in or near the city of" London.

Mr. Farmer’s first appearance as an author was in a discourse on the suppression of the rebellion of 1745. It was preached on the day of public thanksgiving appointed upon that occasion in 1746, and printed in the same year. This was the only sermon that we recollect his having ever committed to the press. His abilities, though they might have been usefully displayed in that way, led him to those novel opinions on which his temporary fame was founded. Iiv 1761, he published “An Inquiry into the nature and design of Christ’s Temptation in the Wilderness” the general intention of which is to show, that this part of the evangelical history is not only to be understood as a recital of visionary representations, but that the whole was a divine vision, premonitory of the labours and offices of our Lord’s future ministry. An interpretation so new and singular, could not pass unnoticed. In 1762 there appeared a pamphlet against the Inquiry, entitled “Christ’s Temptations, real facts: or, a Defence of the Evangelic History; shewing that our Lord’s temptations may be fairly and reasonably understood as a narrative of what was really transacted.” A second edition of Mr. Farmer’s treatise was soon called for; in which the subject received additional illustration from a considerable number of new notes. Besides this, he published in 1764, an appendix to the “Inquiry,” containing some farther observations on the point in debate, and an answer to objections. Another tract, the publication of which was occasioned by the “Inquiry,” was entitled “The Sovereignty of the Divine Administration vindicated, or a rational Account of our blessed Saviour’s remarkable Temptation in the Wilderness; the Possessed at Capernaum, the Demoniacs at Gadara, and the Destruction of the Swine: with free Remarks on several other important passages in the New Testament.” This was a posthumous piece, which had been written before Mr. Farmer’s work appeared, by Mr. Dixon, who had been a dissenting minister, first at Norwich, and afterwards at Bolton in Lancashire. Mr. Dixon proposes a figurative or allegorical interpretation of our Lord’s temptation. A third edition, with large additions, of Mr. Farmer’s “Inquiry” was published in 1776. In 1771, he published “A Dissertation on Miracles, designed to shew that they are arguments of a divine interposition, and absolute proofs of the mission and doctrine of a Prophet,” 8vo. Not long -after the appearance of the “Dissertation,” a notion was propagated, that Mr. Farmer had made considerable use of a treatise of Le Moine l s on the same subject, without acknowledging it; and it was asserted, that his book had the very same view with Mr. Le Moine’s, and was a copy of his work.Mr. Farmer therefore endeavoured to vindicate himself in a pamphlet, published in 1772, entitled “An Examination of the late rev. Mr. Le Moine’s Treatise on Miracles,” in which he enters into a particular discussion of that performance, and a defence of himself; but the accusation continued to be repeated, particularly by a writer in th? London Magazine.

In 1775, Mr. Farmer gave to the world “Essay on the Demoniacs of the New Testament,” in which his opinions were too far remote from those of the Christian world to give much satisfaction. It was ably attacked by Dr. Worthington, a learned clergyman, who had already favoured the public with some pious and valuable writings, in “An impartial Inquiry into the case of the Gospel Demoniacs, with an Appendix, consisting of an essay on Scripture Demonology,” 1777. There were some things advanced in this work, which, in Mr. Farmer’s opinion, deserved to be considered; and he thought that certain parts of the subject were capable of farther and fuller illustration. He printed, therefore, in 1778, “Letters to the rev. Dr. Worthington, in answer to his late publication, entitled An impartial Inquiry into the case of the Gospel Demoniacs.” Another of Mr. Fanner’s antagonists was the late rev. Mr. Fell, a dissenting minister, at that time of Thaxted in Essex, and afterwards one of the tutors of the dissenting academy at Homerton. This gentleman pubJished in 177l>, a treatise, entitled “Demoniacs an inquiry into the lieathen and the Scripture doctrine of Daemons; in which the hypotheses of the rev. Mr. Farmer, and others, on this subject, are particularly considered,” In this Mr. Fell deduces the injurious consequences to natural and revealed religion which he apprehends to result from the doctrines advanced in the “Dissertation on Miracles,” and the “Essay on the Demoniacs,” but acquits Mr. Farmer of any evil design, and allows “that he really meant to serve the cause of virtue, which he thought could not be more effectually done than by removing every thing which appeared to him in the light of superstition.”

Mr. Farmer’s last work appeared in 1783, and was entitled “The general prevalence of the worship of Human Spirits in the ancient lieathen Nations asserted and proved.” In this work, which had liule success, there arc a number of notes referring to Mr. Fell, and which shew Mr. Farmer’s sensibility to the attack that had been made upon him by that writer. Indeed, says his panegyrist, we cannot approve of the oblique manner in which some of these notes are composed. It would have been far preferable in our author, either not to have taken any notice of Mr. Fell at all, or to have done it in a more open and manly way. Mr. Fell was not backward in his own vindication. This appeared in 1785, in a publication entitled “The Idolatry of Greece and Rome distinguished from that of other heathen nations: in a letter to the reverend Hugh Farmer.” At the same time that in this tract ample retaliation is made upon Mr. Farmer for his personal severities, it appears to us to contain many things, which, if he had continued to publish on the subject, would have been found deserving of consideration and reply.

As a minister Mr. Farmer received every mark of honour from the dissenters which it was in their power to bestow. For a great number of years he preached twice a day at Walthamstow: but, an associate being at length provided for him at that place, he became in 1761 afternoonpreacher to the congregation of Salters-hall, and some time after was chosen one of the Tuesday-lecturers at Salters-hall. He was also a trustee of the rev. Dr. Daniel Williams’ s various bequests; and he was likewise one of Mr. Coward’s trustees; in which capacity he became a dispenser of the large charities that had been left by the gentleman with whom he had been connected in early life. As Mr. Farmer advanced in years, he gradually remitted of his employments as a divine. He resigned first, in 1772, the being afternoon-preacher at Salters-hall; after which, in 1780, he gave up the Tuesday lectureship of the same place. In his pastoral relation at Walthamstow he continued a few years longer, when he quitted the pulpit entirely. In these several cases his resignations were accepted with peculiar regret. After he had ceased to be a preacher, it was his general custom to spend part of the winter at Bath. Early in 1785, Mr. Farmer was afflicted with almost a total failure of sight, which, however, was restored by the skill, first of Baron Wenzel, and afterwards of Mr. Wathen. Infirmities, however, growing upon him, he departed this life on the 6th of February, 1787, in the seventy-third year of his age, and was buried in Walthamstow church-yard, in the same grave with his friends Mr. and Mrs. Snell. On Sunday, the 18th, his funeral sermon was preached by Mr. Urvvick, of Clapham, whose discourse was printed. In his last will, besides providing handsomely for his relations, and remembering his servants, he left a hundred pounds to the fund for the widows of dissenting ministers, and forty pounds to the poor of Walthamstow parish. His regard to the family with which he had so long been connected, and to which he had been so peculiarly obliged, was testified by his bequeathing pecuniary legacies to every member of that family. Smaller legacies were left by him to others of his friends. His executors were William Snell, esq. of Clapham, and William Hood, esq. of Chancery-lane, barrister; the first the son, and the second one of the grandsons of Mr. Farmer’s great patron. To another grandson, the rev. Robert Jacomb, our author bequeathed his library, with the exception of such classic books as Mr. Snell might select; who also was a residuary legatee, in conjunction with his sister, Mrs. Hood. In this will he also made his request (for that is the term used), that his executors would burn his sermons and manuscripts, unless he should direct otherwise by a separate paper; and, in case they should not do it, the legacies of a hundred pounds each, which he had left them, were to be null and void. He had nearly completed a second volume on the demonology of the ancients; a curious dissertation on the story of Balaam, which he had transcribed for the press, and for the printing of which he had given his directions, and had made preparations for a second edition of his Treatise on Miracles, by which it would have been considerably enlarged, and highly improved; all which were destroyed, as, in the opinion of the executors, coming within the intent of his will. His biographer laments bitterly this undistinguishing destruction, which, indeed, seems rather too much to resemble what happened in Don Quixote’s library.

As to his general character, we are told that he was particularly excellent in the pulpit, and that his sermons were rational, spiritual, evangelical, and not unfrequcntly pathetic; that he had an admirable talent, without trimming, of pleasing persons of very different sentiments, and that when he was speaking of the doctrines of the gospel, there was a swell in his language that looked as if he was rising to a greater degree of orthodoxy* in expression than some persons might approve; but it never cam6 to that point. In conversation he was lively and brilliant to an uncommon degree; and, like Doddridge, he sometimes went far enough in his complimentary language to persons present. He was likewise very backward in readily declaring his sentiments, when asked them, concerning particular topics, living writers, or recent publications. Any question of this kind not un frequently produced from him, what has been ascribed to the quakers, another question in return. He appears, however, to have been no philosopher, for we are told that it was probably some feeling of his last work’s not having met with the attention he expected, which dictated the order concerning the burning of his manuscripts. He had great generosity of disposition, and in his distributions to charitable designs and objects went to the utmost extent of his property.

, D. D. a learned critic and distinguished scholar, was the descendant of a family long seated at Ratcliffe Culey. a hamlet within the parish of Shepey, in the county of Leicester. His grandfather (who died in 1727, aged sixty-three) is described on his tomb in St. Mary’s church at. Leicester as “John Farmer of Nuneaton, gent.” His father, who was largely engaged in Leicester in the business of a maltster, married in 1732-3, Hannah Knibb, by whom he had five sons and four daughters. He died in 1778, at the age of eighty, and his widow in 1808, at the advanced age of ninetyseven. The subject of this article was their second son, and was born in Leicester, Aug. 23, 1735. He received the early part of his education under the rev. Gerrard Andrewes (father of the present dean of Canterbury) in the free grammar-school of Leicester, a seminary in which many eminent persons were his contemporaries. About 1753 he left the school with an excellent character for temper and talents, and was entered a pensioner at Emamiei college, Cambridge, when Dr. Richardson, the biographer or the English prelates, was master, and Mr, Bickham and Mr. Hubbard were tutors. Here Mr. Farmer applied himself chiefly to classical learning and the belles lettres, with a predilection for the latter, in which, in truth, he was best qualified to shine. He took his degree of B. A. in 1757, ranked as a senior optime, and gained the silver cup given by Ernanuel college to the best graduate of that year, which honorary reward is still preserved with great care in his family. His only Cambridge' verses were a poem on laying the foundation-stone of the public library in 1755, and a sonnet on the late king’s death in 1760.

In 1760 he proceeded M. A. and succeeded as classical tutor to Mr. Bickham, who was at that time presented to the college-rectory of Loughborough, in Leicestershire. He proved an excellent classical tutor, and had the art of gaining the esteem of his pupils; but, having less attachment to theology and mathematics, he is thought to have been less zealous in recommending those studies, although he never remitted what was necessary for the purposes of initiation, and more can perhaps seldom be achieved by any tutor in the short time he has to direct the pursuits of his scholars. At what time he took orders is not mentioned, but during his being tutor he served the curacy of Swavesey, a village about eight miles from Cambridge. The bent of his private studies being to ancient literature and antiquities, he was in 1763 recommended to, and elected a fellow of, the society of antiquaries. In 1765 he served the office of junior proctor of the university. In May of the following year he published, from the university press, proposals for a history of the town of Leicester, “originally collected by William Staveley, esq. barrister at Jaw, now first offered to the public from the author’s ms. with very large additions and improvements, &c.” It is somewhat singular that Mr. Farmer should mistake the name of Staveley, which was Thomas, both in these proposals and in the imprimatur which he obtained for it in 1767. That however he set about this work with full intention of pursuing it with diligence, is evident from the tenour of many of the letters which he addressed at that period to some eminent antiquaries, his friends; but, in a very few months, he began to perceive that the task he had undertaken was much more lahorious than he had at first imagined. He. clung to it, however, through many delays, sometimes flattering himself, and sometimes his subscribers, that it would be completed, until, at length, when he had actually begun to print it, he took the advantage of his promotion to the mastership of Emanuel college, and urging that as an excuse for discontinuing his labours, advertised to return the subscription-money, which was punctually done when called for. He then presented the Mss. and plates to Mr. Nichols, who has since completed the history both of the town and county of Leicester, with a degree of spirit, ability, and industry, perhaps unprecedented in this department of literature.

In 1766 Mr. Farmer published his justly celebrated “Essay on the Learning of Shakspeare,” a thin octavo volume, which completely settled a much litigated question, contrary to the opinions of many eminent writers, in a manner that carried conviction to the mind of every one who had either carefully or carelessly reflected on the subject. It may in truth be pointed out as a masterpiece, whether we consider the sprightliness and vivacity with xvliich it is written, the clearness of the arrangement, the force and variety of the evidence, or the compression of scattered materials into a narrow com pass; materials which inferior writers would have expanded into a large volume. A second edition of this valuable performance was called for in 1767, in which are a few corrections of style; and a third was printed in 1789, without any additions, except a note at the end, accounting for his finally abandoning his intended publication of the Antiquities of Leicester. It was afterwards added to the prolegomena of Steevens’s Shakspeare, 1793, 15 vols. and in the two subsequent editions of 21 vols. by Mr. Reed in 1803, and Mr. Harris in 1812.

In 1767 Mr. Farmer took the degree of B. D. and in 1769 was appointed by Dr. Terrick, then bishop of London, to be one of the preachers at the chapel royal, Whitehall. During the residence in London which this office required, he lodged with the celebrated Dr. Askew, in Queen’s Square, Bloomsbury, and became himself a collector of books at a time when such as are now thought invaluable could be picked up at stalls at the most trifling prices. In 1775, on the death of Dr. Richardson, he was chosen master of Emanuel college; Mr. Hubbard, the senior fellow, who had been chosen, declining it, with, says Mr. Cole, “his wonted moderation and disinterestedness, and giving his full suffrage to his friend Mr. Farmer.” He now took the degree of D. D. and was very soon succeeded in his tutorship by Dr. William Bennet, the present very learned and amiable bishop of Cloyne. In 1775-6, Dr. Farmer served, in his turn, the office of vicechancellor. During his holding this office an event occurred, which would scarcely be worth mentioning in a life of Dr. Farmer, had it not been grossly misrepresented. When the disturbances in America had become serious, the university of Cambridge, with numberless other loyal bodies, voted an address to the king, approving of the measures adopted by government to reduce the colonies to their duty; the address, however, was not carried unanimously, and was, in particular, opposed by Dr. John Jebb, so well known for his free opinions in politics and religion, and by some others, of whom, one man, a member of the caput, carried his opposition so far, as actually to refuse the key of the place which contained the seal necessary on such occasions. In this emergency the vicechancellor, Dr. Farmer, is said to have forced open the door with a sledge-hammer; and this act of violence is called courtly zeal, and all his subsequent preferments are attributed to it. But the fact'is, that the opening of this door (of a chest) was not an act of intemperate zeal. The sense of the university had been taken; the senate, by its vote, had given its sanction to the measure before the vicechancellor exerted his authority, and gave his servant his official orders to break open the chest.

On the death of Dr. Barnardiston, master of Bene't college, Dr. Farmer was, on June 27, 1778, unanimously elected proto-bibliothecarius, or principal librarian of the university, to which he was well entitled from his literary character, and in which office he afforded easy access to the public library to men of learning of all parties, an obligation which some have not repaid by the kindest regard for his memory. Not so the late Mr. Gilbert Wakefield, who, besides other grateful notices, says, in p. 94 95 of his Life, that he is “acquainted with striking instances of liberality in Dr. Farmer towards those of whose integrity he was convinced, however opposite their sentiments” a character, which, although Mr. Wakefield is here speaking of the mastership of the college, may be applied to Dr. Farmer throughout the whole progress of his life.

In April 1780, Dr. Farmer was collated by bishop Kurd, then bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, to the prebend of Aldrewas, and the chancellorship annexed, founded in the cathedral church of Lichfield. In February 1782 he was made prebendary of Canterbury, as it is supposed, through the recommendation of the then first minister, lord North, which he resigned in 1788, on being preferred by the late Mr. Pitt to a residentiaryship of St. Paul’s. A few hours after this appointment, he jocosely said to his friend Mr. Nichols, ' I could now, if I thought proper, cheat the minister, for I have in my pocket an appointment to the residentiaryship of St. Paul’s, without having resigned the prebend of Canterbury."

Dr. Farmer had now attained the utmost of his wishes; and although both an English and an Irish bishoprick were offered to him, he declined them, for which various reasons have been assigned. One is certainly erroneous. It has been said “that in early life he had felt the power of love, and had suffered such a disappointment as had sunk deep in his mind, and for a time threatened his understanding. From that period, though he retained his faculties entire, he acquired some peculiarities of manner, of which he was so far conscious, as to be sensible that they would hardly become the character of a bishop; being likewise strongly attached to dramatic entertainments (which, if we mistake net, the English bishops never witness), and delighting in clubs where he could have rational conversation without state or ceremony of any kind, he very wisely preferred his residentiaryship to the highest dignity in the church.” What is here said as to his habits being incompatible with the character of a bishop, cannot be denied; but these habits were partly natural, from indolence and a love of ease, and partly acquired by a seclusion from polished society. The lady to whom Dr. Farmer is said to have been attached, was the eldest daughter of sir Thomas’ Hatton, with whom he became acquainted while curate of Swavesey. Cole says, sir Thomas refused his consent, and this refusal appears to have been given in 1782, when Dr. Farmer was in his forty-seventh year, and if, as Cole affirms, the lady was then only twenty-seven or twenty-eight years of age, she must have been an infant when Dr. Farmer became acquainted with her father. The whole, however, may be only one of Cole’s gossiping stories; and whether so or not, Dr. Farmer, neither at this or any previous time, exhibited any symptoms of-“disappointed love.” It is more rational to suppose, with his last biographer (Mr. Nichols), that when he arrived at that situation, as to fortune, which gave him a claim to the object of his affections, he found, on mature reflection, that his habits of life were then too deeply rooted to be changed into those of domestic arrangements with any probable chance of perfect happiness to either party. As to his promotion to a bishopric, it may yet be added, that although few men have been more beloved by an extensive circle of friends than Dr. Farmer, there was not, perhaps, one of them who did not applaud his declining that station, or who did not think, with all their respect for him, that he would not have appeared to advantage in it. It is not as a Divine that Dr. Farmer was admired by his contemporaries, or can be known to posterity.

Few circumstances of Dr. Farmer’s life remain to be noticed. His latter years were nearly equally divided between Emanuel college and the residentiary-house in Ameu Corner. His town residence was highly favourable to his love of literary society, and for many years he was a member of different clubs composed of men of letters, by whom he was much esteemed. He died, after a long and painful illness, at the lodge of Emanuel college, Sept. 8, 17^7, and was buried in the chapel. His epitaph in the cloisters was written by Dr. Parr, who, in another place, and while he was living, said of him, “His knowledge is various, extensive, and recondite, with much seeming negligence, and perhaps in later years some real relaxation; he understands more, and remembers more, about common and uncommon subjects of literature, than many of those who would be thought to read all the day, and meditate half the night. In quickness of apprehension, and acuteuess of discrimination, I have not often seen his equal. Through many a convivial hour have I been charmed with his vivacity and upon his genius I have reflected in many a serious moment with pleasure, with admiration but not without regret, that he has never concentrated and exerted all the great powers of his mind in some great work, upon some great subject. Of his liberality in patronizing learned men 1 could point out numerous instances. Without the smallest propensities to avarice, he possesses a large income; and without the mean submissions of dependence, he is risen to high station. His ambition, if he has any, is without insolence his munificence is without ostentation his wit is without acrimony and his learning without pedantry.” The value of this elegant character is its liberality, for Dr. Parr avows that “upon some ecclesiastical, and many political matters,” there could be no coincidence of opinion. From rooted principle and ancient habit, Dr. Fanner was a tory, and Dr. Parr is a whig; it must be a third character, grown out of the corruption of all principle, that would injure the fair fame of Dr. farmer by attributing his rise in the world to clerical or political Subserviency.

Besides the very liberal and faithful discharge of his duties as master of his college, Dr. Farmer may be considered as a benefactor to the town of Cambridge, for by his exertions every improvement and convenience introduced for the last thirty years of his life, were either originally proposed, or ultimately forwarded and carried into execution by him. The plan for paving, watching, and lighting the town, after many ineffectual attempts, was accomplished in his second vice-chancellorship, greatly to the satisfaction of all parties. As a magistrate, he was active and diligent; and on more than one Occasion of riots, displayed great firmness of mind in dangerous conjunctures. In his office of residentiary of St. Paul’s, if he was not the first mover, he was one of the most strenuous advocates for introducing the monuments of our illustrious heroes and men of talents into the metropolitan cathedral.

His library, which was particularly rich in scarce tracts and old English literature, was sold by Mr. King in 1798, a sale of thirty-five days, which produced 2,210l. although the books are supposed to have cost him less than 500l. This and his other property he bequeathed to his brother Joseph, a gentleman many years a much respected resident at Leicester, who died in 1813. Such was his indifference to money matters, that his accounts with some of his pupils were never settled to the day of his death. Under such circumstances, it became necessary to remind them of the debts they had early contracted with their worthy tutor, and which still remained uncancelled. The application was in most instances attended with the desired success. The debt was no sooner stated than discharged. The mention of Dr. Farmer’s name precluded the necessity of further inquiry. His life, they knew, was distinguished by the most disinterested acts of generosity and friendship. Some names might indeed be mentioned of persons who were disposed to controvert the justice of these claims, and to prevaricate rather than to settle; but they were few.

, a learned grammarian, was born in London about 1575. His father was a carpenter in that city his grandfather had been mayor of Truro in Cornwall and his great-grandfather was an Italian musician, who had settled in England. After having received a proper grammatical education, he was admitted of Merton-college, Oxford, in the beginning of 1590, where he became servitor to Mr. Thomas French, fellow of that college, and soon distinguished himself as a youth of lively parts and great hopes. Being, however, of an unsettled disposition, he abruptly quitted the university, and, abandoning both his religion and his country, passed over to Spain, and was for some time educated there in a college belonging to the Jesuits. At length, growing weary of the severe discipline of the institution, he found a way to leave it, and went with sir Francis Drake and sir John Hawkins in their last voyage, in 15^5. By the former of these great naval commanders he is said to have been held in some esteem. Mr. Farnabie is afterwards reported to have served as a soldier in the Low Countries. No advantage was gained by him in these expeditions; for, having been reduced to much distress, he landed in Cornwall, and from the urgency of his necessities was obliged to descend to the humble employment of teaching children their horn-book. Whilst he was in this low situation he did not cbuse to go by his own name, but changed it to Thomas Baimafe, the anagram of Farnabie. By degrees he rose to those higher occupations of a school-master for which he was so well qualified, and after some lime, he fixed at Martock in Somersetshire, where he taught a grammarschool with great success. In 1646, when Mr. Charles Darby was called to teach the same school, he found in that town, and the neighbourhood, many persons who had been Mr. Farnahie’s scholars, and who, in their grey hairs, were ingenious men and good grammarians. From Martock Mr. Farnabie removed to London, and opened a school in Goldsmiths’-rents, behind Red-Cross-street, near Cripplegate, where were large gardens and handsome houses, together with all the accommodations proper for the young noblemen and gentlemen committed to his care. So established was his reputation, that at one time the number of his scholars amounted to more than three hundred. Whilst he was at the head of this school, he was created master of arts in the university of Cambridge, and on the 24th of April, 1616, was incorporated to the same degree at Oxford.

After a course of years, on account of some differences with his landlords, and the frequent sicknesses which occurred in the city, Mr. Farnabie determined, in 1636, to quit London, and reside at Sevenoaks in Kent, in the neighbourhood of which town (at Otford) he had purchased an estate. Here he renewed his former occupation, and, from the number of noblemen’s and gentlemen’s sons who boarded with him, grew o rich as to add considerably to his landed property. One of the estates purchased by him was near Horsham in Sussex. His works, which have transmitted his name with honour to posterity, were not only well received at home, but abroad, and have been applauded by several eminent foreign scholars. When the civil commotions broke out, in 1641, our author was esteemed to be ill-affected to the parliament, because, on occasion of the protestation’s being urged that year, he had said, that “it was better to have one king than five hundred.” Being afterwards suspected of having favoured the rising of the county for the king about Tunbridge, in 1643, he was imprisoned in Newgate, and thence carried on shipboard. It was even debated in the house of commons whether he should be sent to America; but this motion being rejected, he was removed to Ely-house in Holborn, where he remained for a considerable time. It is insinuated by Anthony Wood, that some of the members of both houses, who had been his scholars, were amongst those who urged his being treated with severity. Mr. Farnabie departed this life on the twelfth of June, 1647, aged seventy-two, and was interred in the chancel of the church ut Sevenoaks. He was twice married. His first wife was Susanna, daughter of John Pierce, of Launcells, in Cornwall, gent. By her he had a son named John, who becaoie a captain in king Charles’s army, and inherited his father’s estate in Sussex, where he lived in good esteem, and died about the beginning of 1673. Mr. Farnabie’s second wife was Anne, the daughter of Dr. John Howson, bishop of Durham, by whom he had several children. One of them, Francis", succeeded to his father’s estate at Kippington, in the parish of Sevenoaks. From this gentleman Anthony Wood derived his information concerning the particulars of our famous school-master’s life, and asserts that he was the chief grammarian, rhetorician, poet, Latinist, and Grecian, of his time. Wood adds, that his school was so much frequented, that more churchmen and statesmen issued from it, than from any school taught by one man in England.1

His works are: 1. “Notse ad Juveualis et Persu Satyras,” Lond. 1612, 8vo. The third edition was printed at London, in 1620, under the following title “Junii Juvenalis et Auli Persii Flacci Satyrse cum annotationibus ad marginem, quse obscurissima quseque dilucidare possint. Tertia Editio, prioribus multo emendatior et auctior.” book is dedicated to Henry prince of Wales, who received the author very kindly, and in some measure commanded him to write such comments on all the Latin poets. 2. “Notae ad Seneca? Tragcedias,” Lond. 1613, 8vo. The third edition was printed at the same place, in 1634, under the following title: “L. et M, Annaei Senecte Trngccdisc. Post omnes omnium editiones recensionesque editio tertia auctior et emendatior, opera et studio Thorn te Farnabii.” To this edition is prefixed a privilege granted him from the king, dated October 1634, for the sole printing of that, and several other of his works, for one-and-twenty years. The book is accompanied with commendatory verses, by Daniel Heinsius, Richard Andrews, M. D. Hugh Holland, Laurence Whitaker, and Na, Tomkins. 3. “Notrc ad Martialis Epigrammata,” Lond. 1615, 8vo. Other editions in 12 mo, were afterwards printed, both at London and Geneva. These notes were dedicated to sir Robert Killegrew. 4. “Lucani Pharsalia, sive de Bello Civili Caesaris et Pompeii Libri X. Adjeclis ad marginem notis T. Farnabii, quae loca obscuriora illustrent,” London, 1618, 8vo. Dedicated to sir Francis Stuart. To this edition are prefixed commendatory verses by R. A. M. D.and Mr. Selden. 5. “Index Rhetoricus Scholis et Institutioni tenerioris Ætatis accommodatus,” Lond. 1625, 8vo. To an edition published in the same city, in 1646, were added, “Formulae Oratoriae et Index Poeticus.” The fifth edition was printed at London, in 1654, under the following title: “Index Rhetoricus et Oratorius, Scholis et Institutioni tenerioris Ætatis accommodatus. Cui adjiciuntur Formula; Oratoriae et Index Poeticus. Opera et studio Thomae Farnabii. Editio quinta, prioribus emendation” This book is dedicated to Dominico Molino, Senator of Venice. The Index Poeticus, annexed to this, was first printed at London in 1634. In the preface to the “Index Rhetoricus,” Mr. Farnabie informs his readers, that he had published, about twenty years before, his Scheme of Tropes, in verse, without his nume which, meeting with success, was claimed by a certain plagiary upon which our author composed his “Index Rhetoricus.” Mons. Gibert speaks of this work with commendation, and observes that Mons. BaiHet has passed a favourable judgment upon it. Father Vavasseur, though he afiirms that Mr. Farnabie' s Latin is sometimes exceptionable, allows him, nevertheless, to have been a diligent and learned writer. 6. “Florilcgium Epigrammatum Graecorum, eorumque Latino versu a variis redditorum,” London, 1629, 8vo, &c. 7. “Notae ad Virgilium,” London, 1634, 8vo. 8. Ci Systeraa Grammaticum,“London, 1641, 8vo. King Charles the First ordered Mr. Farnabie to write a Latin grammar, for the use of all the schools, when that which had been established by law, and against which many complaints had been made, was to be reformed. 9.” Notae in Ovidii Metamorphoses,“Paris, 1637, folio; and London, in 12mo, 1677, &c. 10.” Phrasiologia Anglo-Latina,“London, 8vo. 11.” Tabula? Graeca? Linguae,“London, 4to. 12.” Syntaxis,“London, 8vo. 13.” Notse in Terentium.“Our author had finished his notes upon Terence only as far as the fourth comedy, when he died. But Dr. Meric Casaubon completed the two last comedies, and published the whole at London, 1651, 12mo. Anthony Wood hath added to the catalogue,” Epistolac variae ad doctissimos Viros." But this article does not refer to a distinct publication, but to the letters occasionally written by Farnabie to learned men, and particularly to Vossius.

, distinguished by translating some capital authors, was born (as is presumed) at Bonteshall in Derbyshire, where his father, of the same names, was rector. He was bred first at Chesterfield school under Mr. William Burrow, a celebrated master, and afterwards removed to Eton. He was admitted of Jesus college, Cambridge; and matriculated Dec. 17, 1730. In 1734 he took his degree of B. A, and in 1738 that of M. A. In 1762 he was presented by Dr. James Yorke, dean of Lincoln, to the rectory of Carsington in Derbyshire; but did not enjoy it long, as he died March 25, 1763, His publications were, 1. “The life of Pope Sixtus V. translated from the Italian of Gregorio Leti, with a preface, prolegomena, notes, and appendix, 1754,” folio. 2. “Davila’s History of France,” 1757, 2 vols. 4to. 3. “A translation of the works of Machiavel, illustrated with annotations, dissertations, and several new plans on the art of war,” 1761, 2 vols. 4to: reprinted in 1775, 4 vols. 8vo. 4. “A short history of the Israelites, from the French of the -abbe” de Fleury,“1756, 8vo, has been attributed to him, but it was his only by the kindness of Mr. Thomas Bedford (son of Hilkiah), who gave him the translation, in hopes that he might raise some money by it, as he was then poor. None indeed of his works appear to have been profitable* although his translation of Maehiavel, which he literally” hawked round the town/' nowsells at a very high price. On one occasion Dr. Addenbroke, dean of Lichfield, recommended him to translate Spelman’s Life of Alfred from the Latin into English, and Farneworth was about to have begun, when Dr. Pegge luckily informed him that the Life of Alfred was originally written in English, and thence translated into Latin. Mr. Farneworth is supposed to have been the author of a ludicrous and pleasant account of Powell, the fire-eater, in Gent. Mag. 1755, signed Philopyrphagus Asliburniensis. He was at that time curate to the rev. John Fitzherbert, vicar of Ashbourne.

, an ingenious comic writer, was the son of a clergyman in Ireland, and born at Londonderry in 1678, where he received the rudiments of education, and discovered a genius early devoted to the muses. When he was very young, he gave specimens of his poetry; and discovered a force of thinking, and turn of expression, much beyond his years. His parents, having a numerous issue, could bestow on him no other fortune than a liberal education therefore, when he was qualified for the university, he was sent in 1694 to Trinitycollege, in Dublin. He made great progress in his studies, and acquired a considerable reputation: but his gay and volatile disposition could not long relish the gravity and retirement of a college life, and therefore, soon quitting it, he betook himself to the diversions of the stage, and got admitted into the company of the Dublin theatre. He had the advantage of a good person, and was well received as an actor, though his voice was somewhat weak: for which reason he resolved to continue on the stage, till something better should offer. But his resolution was soon broken by an accident: being to play the part of Guyomar, who kills Vasquez, in Dryden’s “Indian Emperor,” and forgetting to exchange his sword for a foil, in the engagement he wounded his brother tragedian, who represented Vasquez, very dangerously; and though the wound did not prove mortal, yet he was so shocked at it, that he determined never more to appear on the stage.

Soon after this, having now no inducement to remain at Dublin, he went to London, where, in 1696, the celebrated actor Wilks prevailed upon him to write a play, and, knowing his humour and abilities, assured him, that he was considered by all as fitter to furnish compositions for the stage, than to act those of other writers. Another encouragement, which suffered him to exercise his genius at leisure, he owed to the earl of Orrery, a patron as well as a master of letters, who conferred a lieutenant’s commission upon him in his own regiment in Ireland, which Farquhar held several years, and gave several proofs both of courage and conduct. In 1698, his first comedy, called “Love in a Bottle,” appeared on the stage; and for its sprightly dialogue and busy scenes, was well received by the audience. In 1700 he produced his “Constant Couple, or, Trip to the Jubilee,” it being then the jubilee year at Rome, when persons of all countries flocked thither, for pardons or amusements. In the character of sir Harry Wildair, our author drew so gay and airy a character, so suited to Wilks’s talents, and so animated by his gesture and vivacity of spirit, that the player gained almost as much reputation as the poet. Towards the end of this year, Farquhar was in Holland, probably upon his military duty: and he has given a very facetious description of those places and people, in two of his letters, dated from the Brill and from Leyden: in a third, dated from the Hague, he very humourously relates how merry he was there, at a treat made by the earl of Westmoreland; while not only himself, but king William, and others of his subjects, were detained there by a violent storm. There is also among his poems, an ingenious copy of verses to his mistress upon the same subject. This mistress is supposed to have been Mrs. Oldfield, whom he first recommended to the stage. In 1701 he was a spectator, if not a mourner, at Dryden’s, funeral; for the description he has given of it in one of his letters, affords little indication of sorrow.

Encouraged by the great success of his last play, he wrote a continuation of it, in 1701, called, “Sir Harry Wildair, or, The Sequel of the Trip to the Jubilee:” in which Mrs. Oldfield obtained as much reputation, and was as greatly admired in her part, as Wiiks was m his. In 1702 he published his “Miscellanies, or, collection of poems, letters, and essays,” which contain a variety of humourous and pleasant sallies of fancy. It is said, that some of the letters were published from copies returned to bun. at his request, by Mrs. Oldfield, There is at the end of them, “A discourse upon Comedy, in reference to the English stage;” and in one of the letters, ' The Picture,“containing a description and character of himself, from which we learn that he was very ingenuous, very good-natured, and very thoughtless. In 1703 he brought out another lively comedy called” The Inconstant, or, the way to win him:" but the fashion now turning towards Italian and French operas, this comedy, although not inferior, was received more coldly than the former. Farquhar was married this year, and, as was at first reported, to a great fortune; which indeed he expected, but was miserably disappointed. The lady had fallen in love with him, and so violent was her passion, that she resolved to have him at any rate: and as she knew he was too much dissipated to fall in love, or to think of matrimony, unless advantage was annexed to it, she first caused a report to be spread of her being a great fortune, and then had him persuaded that she was in love with him. He married her: and though he found himself deceived, his circumstances embarrassed, and his family increasing, he never once upbraided her for the imposition, but behaved to her with all the delicacy and tenderness of an indulgent husband.

Very early in 1704, a farce called “The Stage-coach,” in the composition of which he was jointly concerned with another, made its first appearance, and was well received. His next comedy, named “The Twin-Rivals,” was played in 1705; and in 1706, his comedy, called “The Recruiting Officer.” ' He dedicated this “to all friends round the Wrekin,” a noted hill near Shrewsbury, where he had been to recruit for his company; and where, from his observations on country life, the manner in which Serjeants inveigle clowns to enlist, and the loose behaviour of the officers towards the milk-maids and country girls, he collected matter sufficient to form a comedy which still holds its place on the stage. His last comedy was “The Beaux Stratagem,” of which he did not live to enjoy the full success. The characters in this play were all said to have been taken from originals then living in or near the city of Litchfield; and the last of them, Thomas Bond, a servant in the family of sir Theophilus Biddulph, died in 1759. He was the Scrub. This perhaps of all his pieces has remained longest, and is oftenest acted on the stage. Towards the close of his short life, he was unhappily oppressed some debts; and this obliged him to make application to a courtier, who had formerly made him many professions of friendship. His pretended patron advised him to convert his commission into the money he wanted, and pledged his honour that in a short time he would provide him another. This circumstance appearing favourable, and unable to bear the thoughts of want, he sold his commission: but when he renewed his application, and represented his distressed situation, his noble patron had forgot his promise, or rather, perhaps, had never the least intention to fulfil it. This distracting disappointment so preyed upon his mind, as to occasion his death, April, 1707, before he was thirty years of age. Soon after, the following letter to Mr. Wilks was found among his papers: “Dear Bob, I have not any thing to leave thee to perpetuate my memory but two helpless girls look upon them sometimes, and think of him that was to the last moment of his life, thine, George Farquhan” This recommendation, which resembled the celebrated testament of Eudamidas, was duly regarded by Wilks; and when the girls became of an age to be put out into the world in business, he procured a benefit for each of them, to supply the necessary resources.

The success of Farquhar’s comedies is said, in general, far to have exceeded his own expectations; and of his merits as a writer, various opinions have been entertained. It may be allowed, however, that he was usually happy in the choice of his subjects, and adorned them with a great variety of characters and incidents that his style is pure and unaffected his wit natural and flowing and his plots generally well contrived. Licentiousness has been justly objectecl to his comedies, which was the vice of the times. Pope used to call him a farce-writer; but his productions were so pleasing, that many years ago his works had gone through eight editions; and to this day his comedies keep their rank upon the stage.

Of his family, his wife died in circumstances of the utmost indigence: one of his daughters was married' to an inferior tradesman, and died soon after. The other in 1764 was living, in indigent circumstances, without any knowledge of refinement in sentiments or expences; she seemed to take no pride in her father’s fame, and was in every respect fitted to her humble station.

, an eminent physician at Taunton, was born in 1741, of parents who were protestant dissenters, and was first educated at the dissenting academy at Warrington, from whence he removed to Edinburgh, and there and at Leyden pursued his medical studies, taking his degree at the latter university* He afterwards settled at Taunton, where he was highly esteemed for his skill and personal character. To the learning which peculiarly qualified him for his profession, he united a considerable acquaintance with general literature and science; and with medical knowledge and judgment, he possessed the powers of instructing and entertaining, as the lively and sensible companion of the social hour. He died March 11, 1795, at the house of John Fisher, esq. Upcott, near Taunton. His publications, in most of which he discovers much original observation, extensive experience, and correct theory, were, 1. “An Essay on the medical virtues of Acids,” 1769, 12mo. 2. “Aphorismi de Marasmo, ex summis medicis collecti,” 1772, 12mo. His attention to the subject of consumption produced again, 3. “Inquiry into the propriety of Blood-letting in Consumption,” 1775, *vo. Although he does not absolutely prohibit bloodletting, he seems to place little reliance on it in this cruel disorder. 4. “The History of Epidemics; by Hippocrates, in seven books, translated into English from the Greek, with notes and observations, and a preliminary dissertation on the nature and cause of infection,” 1781, 4to. In this work are not a few errors in judgment, proceeding, probably, from a too great attachment to the authority of Hippocrates. Dr. Farr acquired more reputation by his last work, 5. “The Elements of Medical Jurisprudence; to which are added, directions for preserving the Public Health,” 1788, 8vo.

, of Pavia, an artist who flourished about 1518, was a pupil or imitator of Lionardo da Vinci, and the most successful of all his imitators, Luino perhaps excepted, if he be judged by the only picture, which, without hesitation, may be ascribed to him. This picture, which belonged to the gallery of prince Braschi, was carried by the French to that of the Louvre, and represents, in a groupe of natural size, the Madonna with the. infant on her lap: the mother in quiet repose, with bent eyes, and absorbed in meditation; her simple attitude is contrasted by the lively one of the child, who seems to take refuge at her neck and breast from some external object. The picture is inscribed “Bernardinus Faxolus de Papia fecit, 1518.”

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

The ruins of his house at Castre still remaining, shew it to have been alike capacious and strong. It was moate4 round, but the moat is now for the most part filled up. The grand entrance was on the West. The house formed a rectangled parallelogram the south and north sides longer than east and west the stables in front the best rooms on the right hand of the square, under which side is a noble vault, and over it probably the hall. The embattled brick tower at the north west corner is standing, above one hundred feet high; and over one of the windows were carved his arms in the garter as above described, supported by angels, now removed; on one of the doors a saltire engrailed. To it adjoined a dining-parlour, fifty-nine feet long, and twenty-eight broad. East from the castle stood the college, forming three sides of a square larger than the former, with two round towers; the whole converted into barns and stables. The castle moat is said to have communicated with a navigable creek, and in a farm housa north west of the mansion, called the barge-house, is shewn a large arch, capable of receiving a boat of considerable burthen. Weever says he had licence from Henry VI. to build his house castle-wise as a fortification on that side of Yarmouth, to which perhaps relates the licence granted him 1443, 22 Hen. VI. to employ some of the king’s ships to carry materials for building and furnishing one of his mansion-houses. The current tradition is, that this house was erected by a French nobleman, who was taken prisoner by our famous knight, according to the model and architecture of his own castle in France, as the price of his ransom.

Sir John Fastolff had by his will appointed John Paston, esq. eldest son and heir of sir William Paston, the judge, one of his executors; and had given to them all his manors, lands, &c. in trust, to found the college of the seven priests, and seven poor men, in the manor-house at Castre, c. “For the singular trust and love,” says sir John, “that I have to my cousin John Paston before all others, being in every belief that he will execute this my last will.” Edward IV. 1464, for 300 marks, 100 in hand, and the remainder when the foundation takes place, granted John Paston, sen. esq. licence to found the college before mentioned, and his favour and protection against Yelverton, Jenney, and others; but it appears that this John Paston, esq. had entered on this manor of Castre, and was imprisoned in the Fleet of London by Nevill, bishop of Exeter, (on Nov. 3, 1464 ) then chancellor. On his death, in 1466, he left it to his eldest son sir John Paston. July 6, the king granted him a warrant under his hand and privy seal, to take possession of all the lands and inheritance of his late father, or of Agnes his grandmother, or of Margaret his mother, or of William Paston, and Clement Paston, his uncles; also the manor and place of Castre, or of any other estate which his father had, by way of gift, or purchase, of the late sir John Fastolff; which lands had been seized by the king, on evil surmises made to him, against his deceased father, himself and uncles, of all which they were sufficiently, openly, and worshipfully cleared before the king. “So that all yee now being in the said place of Caster, or in any liBihode, late the sir John Paston' s, by way of gift or purchase, of the late sir John Fastolff, that was seized into our hands, avoid the possession of the same, and suffer our truly and well beloved knight, sir John Paston, to enjoy the profits thereof, with all the goods and chattels there, and pay all the issues and profits thereof, as yee did unto his father, at any time in his life.”

February 10, 1474, 13 Edw. IV. an indenture was made between sir William Yelverton, William Jenny, serjeant at law, and William Worcester, executors of sir John on one part, and Thomas Cager and Robert Kytton on the other, whereby the said Robert was appointed surveyor of the lands and tenements in Southwark, and other places in Surrey, late sir John’s, to perform his last will, and also> receiver of the rents; who was to have six marks per annum, and to be allowed, besides all reasonable costs, that he shall do in the defence and keeping out John Paston, esq. and of all others claiming by him. Anthony lord Scales, at another time, took possession of it in the name of king Edward IV. under pretence that Paston was the king’s villan (though absolutely false), all which proved a great destruction to the goods and effects in the same; but sir John Paston, through the favour and protection of king Edward IV. had afterwards possession. Another misfortune also happened to this seat or castle about the same time, owing to the negligence of a girl, who in making a bed set fire to it by her candle, and did considerable damage. Sir John Fastolff had a house at Norwich in Pokethorp opposite St. James’s church, called Fastolff’s place; in the windows of which Mr. Blomefield saw several paintings of saints and scripture worthies, and two knights fighting, which he imagined represented sir John and his French prisoner. He likewise built a splendid seat in Yarmouth, and a palace in Southwark.

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

, a French antiquary of great fame, whose laborious researches into the earliest and most obscure parts of the history of his country, obtained him more celebrity than profit, was born at Paris in 1529. Having gone to Italy with cardinal de Tournon, his eminence often sent him with dispatches to the French court, which served to introduce him there with advantage, and procured him the place of first president of the Cour des Monnoies; and he is said by some to have obtained a pension from Henry IV. with the title of historiographer. He died in 1601, overwhelmed with debts. His works were collected in 4to at Paris, in 1610. The principal of them are, 1. His “Gaulish and French antiquities,” the first part of which treats chiefly of matters anterior to the arrival of the Franks, the second is extended to Hugh Capet. 2. “A treatise on the Liberties of the Gallican church.” 3. “On the origin of knights, armorial bearings, and heralds.” 4. “Origin of dignities and magistracies in France.” All these contain much curious matter, not to be found elsewhere, but are written in a harsh, incorrect, and tedious style. Saxius mentions an edition of his works printed at Paris in 1710, 2 vols. 4to, which we conceive to be a mistake for 1610. It is said, that the pei'usal of his French Antiquities gave Louis XIII. an invincible distaste to reading.

, a French protestant preacher of the highest estimation in his time. He preached originally at Montpellier, then at Charenton, and afterwards at Paris; where his eloquence was not less admired than in the provinces. He preached one day against duels in so persuasive and forcible a style, and with so much energy, that the marechal de la Force, who was present, declared to some brave officers who were near him, that should a challenge be sent him, he would not accept it. Le Faucheur was not less esteemed for his integrity than for his extraordinary talents as a preacher. He died at Paris in a very advanced age, April 1, 1657, leaving several volumes of sermons, 8vo; “Traité de l‘Action de l’Orateur,” Leyden, 1686, 12mo, an excellent work, which appeared first under the name of Conrart; “Recueil de Prieres et de Meditations Chrétiennes,” and a “Traite” sur l'Eucharistie," Geneva, 1635, folio, against cardinal du Perron. This work was so much admired by the protestant churches, that it was printed at their expence, by order of a national synod.

, a worthy printer of no mean celebrity, is rather recorded in this work for the goodness of his heart, than from his excellence as an author. It is, however, no small degree of praise to say of him, that he was the first man who carried his profession to a high degree of credit in Ireland. He was the confidential printer of dean Swift; and enjoyed the friendship and patronage of the earl of Chesterfield, whose ironical letters to Faulkner, comparing him to Atticus, are perhaps the finest parts of his writings. He settled at Dublin as a printer and bookseller, soon after 1726 (in which year we find him in London under the tuition of the celebrated Bowyer), &nd raised there a very comfortable fortune by his well-known 44 Journal,“and other laudable undertakings. In 1735, he was ordered into custody by the house of commons in Ireland, for having published” A proposal for the better regulation and improvement of quadrille;“an ingenious treatise by bishop Hort; which produced from Swift” The 4egion club.“Having had the misfortune to break his leg, he was satirically introduced by Foote, who spared nobody, in the character of” Peter Paragraph,“in” The Orators, 1762.“He commenced a suit against the mimic; and had the honour of lord Townshend’s interference to arbitrate the difference. He died an alderman of Dublin, Aug. 28, 1775. His style and manner were finely ridiculed in” An Epistle to Gorges Edmund Howard, esq. with notes, explanatory, critical, and historical, by George Faulkner, esq. and alderman,“reprinted in Dilly’s” Reppsitory,“vol. IV. p. 175. But a fairer specimen of his real talents at epistle-writing may be seen in the” Anecdotes of Mr. Bowyer,“or in the second volume of the” Supplement to Swift;" whence it appears that, if vanity was a prominent feature in his character, his gratitude was no less conspicuous.

, an English Jesuit, was born in 1554, at Foston in Leicestershire, and entered a student in Merton college, in 1568, under the tuition of John Potts, whom Wood calls a noted philosopher. In 1570, Potts, who was a concealed papist, being detected, conducted his young pupil, whose parents were of that persuasion, to the Jesuits’ college at Louvain. In this seminary he continued till he had taken a bachelor of arts degree, and then went to Paris. From thence he travelled to Munich in Bavaria, where duke William allowed him a handsome salary to prosecute his studies, and Ivhere he took the degree of M. A. In 1575 he proceeded to Rome, and became a member of the English Jesuits’ college, of which he was soon after appointed divinityreader. He was much distinguished and favoured by several princes, and particularly by pope Gregory XIII. who, as a token of his affection and confidence, gave him a seal which empowered him to grant a pass to any of his countrymen travelling through the catholic dominions. In 1581 he was appointed president of the Jesuits’ college at Posna in Poland, in which country he spent the remainder of his life. He died at Ulna, in the province of Lithuania, Feb. 18, 1591, much regretted by his fraternity, amongst whom he had the character of a prudent, learned, and ^pious divine. His works are: 1. “.De Christi in terris ecclesia,” Posna, 1584, 4to. 2. “Contra Antonium Sadeelem Calv:­nistam, libri III.” 3. “Theses de variis fidei eontroversiis,” Posna, 1584, 1590. 4. “Doctrina catholica de Sanctorum Invocatione, &c.” ibid. 1584, 8vo. 5. “Apologia Libri sui de Invocatione, &c. contra Danielem Tossanum,” Colon. 1589, 8vo. 6. “Coenae Lutherana? et Calvinistee oppu<rnatio,” Posna, 1586, 4to. 7. “Apologia Thesium de CcBUtt Lutherana, &o.” ibid. 1590, 4to. 8. “Oratio de causis Haeresis, &c.” 9. “Tractatus de Controversiis inter ordinem Eccles. et Secularem in Polonia,” 1592, 4to.

, lord of Pibrac, by which name he is much better known, was born at Toulouse in 1528, and distinguished himself at the bar in that city. He perfected his knowledge of jurisprudence in Italy, and then returned to be advanced to honours in his own country. In 1560 he was deputed by his native city to the states-general held at Orleans, and there presented to the king its petition of grievances, which he had himself drawn up. By Charles IX. he was sent as one of his ambassadors to the council of Trent, where he eloquently supported the interests of the crown, and the liberties of the Gallican church. In 1565 the chancellor de PHopital, appointed him advocate-general in the parliament of Paris, where he revived the influence of reason and eloquence. In 1570, he was, made a counsellor of state, and two years afterwards, probably constrained by his superiors, wrote his defence of the massacre of St. Bartholomew, published in 4to, and entitled “Ornatissimi cujusdam viri, de rebus Gallicis, epistola, et ad hanc de iisdem rebus responsio” but this barbarous measure was too repugnant to the mildness of Pibrac’s character to be approved by him. For this, after the accession of Henry III. he made the best amends in his power, by proposing and bringing to a conclusion, a treaty of peace between the court and the protestants. While that prince was duke of Anjou, and was elected king of Poland, he attended him as minister in that country; but when the succession to the crown of France, on the death of his brother, tempted Henry to quit that kingdom clandestinely, Pibrac was in danger of falling a sacrifice to the resentment of the people. He afterwards tried in vain to preserve that crown to his master. His services were rewarded by being created one of the chief presidents of the courts of law. He died in 1584, at the age of fifty-six. The story of his falling in love with Margaret wife of Henry IV. is supposed to be chiefly owing to the vanity of that lady, who wished to have the credit of such a conquest. Pibrac published, besides his letter on the massacre, which was in Latin, pleadings and speeches, “Les plaisirs de la vie rustique,” Paris, 1577, 8vo, and a discourse on the sool and the sciences. But the work by which he is best known, is his “Quatrains,” or moral stanzas of four lines, which were first published in 1574. The last edition we know of, is that of 1746. They have been extravagantly admired, and translated into almost all languages, even Greek, Turkish, Arabic, and Persian. They were rendered into English by Sylvester, the translator of du Bartas, in a manner not likely to give an advantageous notion of the original, which, though now antiquated, stiil preserves graces that recommend it to readers of taste. Pibrac was a classical scholar; and to the taste he drew from that source, his “Quatrains” owe much of their excellence. The subjects of some of them he took from the book of Proverbs, which he used to say contained all the good sense in the world.

, an English monk of the fifth century, was created abbot of a monastery in the Lerin islands about the year 433, and afterwards bishop of Riez in Provence, about the year 466. The time of his death is uncertain. He wrote a homily on the life of his predecessor in the see, Maximus; which is extant among those attributed to Eusebius Emisenus. He governed his diocese unblamcably, led a holy life, and died regretted and esteemed by the church. In the grand controversy of the fifth century, he rather favoured the Semi-Pelagians, which a recent historian attributes to his fear of the abuses of predestination, and a misunderstanding of the consequences of Augustine’s doctrine. It is certain that in a treatise which he wrote on saving grace, he shewed that grace always allures, precedes, and resists the human will, and that all the reward of our lahour is the gift of God. In a disputation, likewise, with Lucidus, a priest, who was very tenacious of the sentiments of Augustine, Faustus endeavoured to correct his ideas by suggesting, that we must not separate grace and human industry; that we must abhor Pelagius, and yet detest those who believe, that a man may be of the number of the elect, without labouring for salvation.

, an ancient philosopher and orator, was born at Aries in Gaul, flourished under the emperor Adrian, in the second century, and taught both at Athens and Home with high reputation. Adrian had no kindness for him; for such was the nature and temper of this emperor, that, not content with being the first in dignity and power, he would needs be the first in every thing else. This pedantic affectation led him, as Spartian relates, to deride, to contemn, to trample upon the professors of all arts and sciences, whom he took a pleasure in contradicting upon all occasions, right or wrong. Thus one day he reproved Favorinus, with an air of great superiority, for using a certain word; which, however, was a good word, and frequently used by the best authors. Favorinus submitted patiently to the emperor, without making any reply, though he knew himself to be perfectly right: which when his friends objected to, “Shall not I easily suffer him,” says he, “to be the most learned of all men, who has thirty legions at his command” This philosopher is said to have wondered at three things first, that being a Gaul he should speak Greek so well; secondly, that being an eunuch he should be accused of adultery; and thirdly, that being envied and hated by the emperor he should be permitted to live. Many works are attributed to him; among the rest a Greek work of “Miscellaneous History,” often quoted by Diogenes Lærtius, but none of them are now extant.

, who, according to a tradition still current at Halifax, was a good divine, a good physician, and a good lawyer, was born at Southampton, and was prepared for the university, partly there and partly at Winchester-school. From this seminary he was elected probationer fellow of New-college, Oxford, in 1576, and two years afterwards was made complete fellow. On June 5, 1592, he proceeded LL. D. and, as Wood says, was made vicar of Halifax in Yorkshire, Jan. 4, 1593. In August 1608, according to Thoresby, but in March 1618, according to Wood, he was made warden or master of St. Mary Magdalen’s hospital at Ripon. In March 1616, he was collated to the prebend of Driffield, and to the chantership of the church of York. He was also chaplain to the archbishop, and residentiary. He appears to have spent much of his time in the discharge of the duties of the three learned professions. In an epistle to the reader, prefixed to a work we are about to mention, he gives as impediments to its progress, “preaching every Sabbath-day, lecturing every day in the week, exercising justice in the commonwealth, and practising physic and chirurgery.” Amidst all these engagements, however, he produced a large 4to volume, printed at London in 1619, entitled “Antiquitie triumphing over Noveltie; whereby it is proved, that Antiquitie is a true and certain note of the Christian catholicke church and veritie, against all new and upstart heresies, advancing themselves against the religious honour of Old Rome, &g.” This is dedicated to archbishop Matthews, and it appears that it was begun by the author, when he was sixty years old, at the desire, and carried on under the encouragement of the archbishop. Dr. Favour died March 10, 1623, probably at an advanced age, and was buried in Halifax church, where there is an inscription to his memory.

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

, a dissenting minister, was born at Sleaford in Lincolnshire, Aug. 16, 1715, and after a religious education at home, was placed under Dr. Doddridge at Northampton, where his conduct was exemplary, and his improvement rapid. In 1741, by Doddridge’s particular recommendation, he became a preacher at Taunton; and in 1745 removed to Kidderminster, where he officiated as the pastor of a large congregation of dissenters for thirty-five years, dying in Oct. 1780. He preached thrice every Sunday, besides weekly services, lectures, visits, &c. He also carried on an extensive correspondence with his brethren in various parts of the kingdom, and found leisure to prepare hfs various publications for the press. To enable him to accomplish all this, he was a rigid reconomist of his time, and was seldom in bed after five o'clock in the morning, to which habit, and a temperate mode of living, he used to ascribe his remarkable and almost uninterrupted health and spirits until a short time before his death, when he suffered severely from the stone. It is perhaps more remarkable, that he had no fire in his study in the depth of wiuter. His flow of spirits appears to have been rather immoderate, according to Mr. Orion’s account. “I am told that after preaching twice, and administering the Lord’s Supper, he was so lively in the evening that several of the people were in pain lest he should throw himself out of the pulpit 1” In his sentiments he was what is called a Baxterian, and drew upon himself, on spome occasions, the censures of the more orthodox part of his brethren, particularly by one of his pamphlets, “Candid reflexions on the different modes of explaining the Trinity.” His other works were small pious, tracts some funeral, and occasional sermons and abridgements of Baxter’s “Saints 1 everlasting Rest,” and of some other pieces by that divine. His personal character was so consistent and amiable, that his death was lamented by persons of all persuasions at Kidderminster.

, a brave English officer, the descendant of a very ancient family, was born in 1728 at Shipdenhall, near Halifax, in Yorkshire, which, for many centuries, had been in the possession of his ancestors, and is now the property and residence of their lineal descendant. His father dying when he was very young, his education was superintended by an uncle, a very worthy clergyman. He was brought up at a free school in Lancashire, where he was well grounded in classical learning, and became also a remarkable proficient in mathematics. He has very frequently been heard to declare, that, from his earliest youth, he always felt the strongest predilection for the army, which his mother and nearest relations constantly^ endeavoured to dissuade him from; but, finding all their arguments ineffectual, they either bought, or he had an ensigncy given him, in general Oglethorpe’s regiment, then in Georgia; but the war being then going on in Flanders, he gave up his ensigncy, and went there as a volunteer, furnished with letters from the late marquis of Rockingham and Mr. Lascelles (afterwards lord Harewood) to the commander and several others of the officers. This step was at the time frequently taken by young men of spirit of the first rank and fortune, fte entered as a volunteer, but messed with the officers, and was very soon presented with a pair of colours. Some time after, he married a lady of good fortune and family, and, at the pressing entreaties df her friends, he most reluctantly resigned his commission; which he had no sooner done, than he felt himself miserable, and his new relations finding that his propensity to a military life was invincible, agreed to his purchasing an ensigncy in the third regiment of guards. Having now obtained the object of his most anxious wishes, he determined to lose no opportunity of qualifying himself for the highest situations in his favourite profession. With this view he paid the most unremitting attention to his duty, and every hour he could command was given up to the study of the French and German languages, in which (by the assistance of his classical learning) he soon became such a proficient as not only to understand and write both, grammatically and elegantly, but to speak them fluently. When he was a lieutenant in the guards, he translated from the French, “The Reveries; Memoirs upon the Art of War, by field-marshal count Saxe,” which was published in 1757, in 4to, and dedicated “To the general officers.” He also translated from the German, “Regulations for the Prussian cavalry,” which was also published in 1757, and dedicated to major-general the earl of Albemarle, colonel of the king’s own regiment of dragoons. And he likewise translated from the German, “llegulations for the Prussian Infantry,” to which was gelded “The Prussian Tactics,” which was published in 1759, and dedicated to lieutenant-general the earl of Rothes, colonel of the third regiment of foot guards. Having attained the situation of adjutant in the guards, his abilities and unremitting attention soon became conspicuous; and, on the late general Elliot’s being ordered to, Germany in the seven years war, he offered to take him as his aid-de-camp, which he gladly accepted, as it gave him an opportunity of gaining that knowledge which actual service could alone impart. When he served in Germany, his ardour, intrepidity, and attention to all the duties of his situation, were such, that, on the death of general Elliot, he had immediately offers both from the late prince Ferdinand, the commander in chief, and the late marquis of Granby, to be appointed aid-de-camp. By the advice of a noble earl (who hinted to him that the German war would not last for ever) he accepted the offer of the latter, after making due acknowledgements for the honour intended him by the former. In this his new situation his ardour and attention were, if possible, increased, which gained him the friendship of all those attached to lord Granby, particularly of a noble lord who, being fixed upon to bring to England the account of the battle of Warburgh, gave up his appointment to captain Fawcett; an instance of generous friendship which he always spoke of with the most heartfelt gratitude. On his arrival in England, he was introduced by the then great minister to his late majesty king George the Second, who received him most graciously, and not the less so on his giving the whole account in German. Soon after he was promoted to a company in the guards, with the rank of lieutenant-colonel in the army, and became military secretary to, and the intimate and confidential friend of lord Granby. His manners were formed with equal strength and softness; and to coolness, intrepidity, and extensive military knowledge, he added all the requisite talents of a man of business; and the most persevering assiduity, without the least ostentation. Notwithstanding the most unassuming modesty, his abilities were now so generally known, that he was fixed upon as the most proper person to manage and support the interest of his country, in settling many of the concerns of the war in Germany; and by that means necessarily became known to the great Frederic of Prussia, from whom he afterwards had the most tempting offers, which he declined without hesitation, preferring the service of his king and country to every other consideration.

Soon after his obtaining a company in the guards, he acted as deputy adjutant-general under generals Harvey and William Amherst; and, in May 1772, he was promoted to the rank of colonel by brevet. At the commencement of the American war, he was sent to Germany, to negociate with Hesse, Hanover, Brunswick, &c. for a body of troops to serve in North America, Gibraltar, and the East-Indies. In August 1777, he was raised to the rank of major-general, and the following year he succeeded to the adjutant-generalship by the death of general William Amherst, and also became colonel of the fifteenth regiment of foot. In Nov. 1782, he was made a lieutenant-general, and in 1786 his majesty honoured him with the order of the Bath. On the death of general Phillipson, in August 1792, that regiment was given to sir William Favvcett. In the same year the “Rules and Regulations for the formations, field exercise, and movements of his majesty’s forces,” were printed, and directed to be followed by the British army, by an order signed by sir William. In May 1796 he obtained the rank of general, and on his resigning the office of adjutant-general, his majesty was so sensible of the value of his services, as to grant him an allowance of five pounds per diem in lieu thereof, and ordered him to be sworn in as one of his most honourable privy-council. His last promotion was to the governorship of Chelsea hospital, where he died March 22, 1804, aged seventy-six, and was interred in the burial-ground of the hospital. A monument has since been erected to his memory, and to that of his lady, wH<5 survived him about a year.

, a poetical and miscellaneous writer, was born in Yorkshire about 1721. He was educated at Leeds, under the care of the rev. Mr. Cookson, vicar of that parish, from whence he went to Jesus college, Cambridge, and took his bachelor’s degree in 1741, and his master’s in 1745. After being admitted into holy orders, he settled at Bramham in Yorkshire, near the elegant seat of that name belonging to Robert Lane, esq. the beauties of which afforded him the first subject for his muse. He published his “Bramham Park,” in 1745, but without his name. His next publications were the “Descriptions of May and Winter,” from Gawen Douglas, the former ia 1752, the latter in 1754: these brought him into considerable notice as a poetical antiquary, and it was hoped that he would have been encouraged to modernize the whole of that author’s works. About the year last mentioned, he removed to the curacy of Croydon in Surrey, where he had an opportunity of courting the notice of archbishop Herring, who resided there at that time, and to whom, among other complimentary verses, he addressed an “Ode on his Grace’s recovery,” which was printed in Dodsley’s Collection. These attentions, and his general merit as a scholar, induced the archbishop to collate him, in 1755, to the vicarage of Orpington, with St. Mary Cray in Kent. In 1757 he had occasion to lament his patron’s death in a pathetic elegy, styled Aurelius, printed with his grace’s sermons in 1763, but previously in our author’s volume of poems in 17-61. About the same time he married miss Furrier of Leeds. In April 1774, by the late Dr. Plumptre’s favour, he exchanged his vicarage for the rectory of Hayes, This, except the office of chaplain to the princess dowager of Wales, was the only ecclesiastical promotion he obtained.

In 1761 he published by subscription a volume of “Original Poems and Translations,” by which he got more profit than fame. His subscribers amounted to nearly eight hundred, but no second edition was called for. Some other pieces by him are in Mr. Nichols’s Collection, and in the “Poetical Calendar,” a periodical selection of fugitive Verses which he published in conjunction with Mr. Woty, an indifferent poet of that time. In 1767 he published an eclogue, entitled “Partridge Shooting,” very inferior to his other productions. He was the editor also of a “Family Bible,” with notes, in 4to, which is a work of very inconsiderable merit, but to which he probably contributed only his name, a common trick among the retailers of “Complete Family Bibles.”

His translations of Anacreon, Sappho, Bion, Moschus, and Musieus, appeared in 1760, and his Theocritus, encouraged by another liberal subscription, in 1767. His Apollonius Rhodius, a posthumous publication, completed by the rev. Mr. Meen, of Emanuel college, Cambridge, made its appearance in 1780, when Mr. Fawkes’s widow was enabled, by the kindness of the editor, to avail herself of the subscriptions, contributed as usual very liberally. Mr. Fawkes died August 20, 1777. These scanty materials are taken chiefly from Mr. Nichols’s Life of Bowyer, and little can now be added to them. Mr. Fawkes was a man of a social disposition, with much of the imprudence which adheres to it. Although a profound classical scholar, and accounted an excellent translator, he was unable to publish any of his works without the previous aid of a subscription; and his Bible was a paltry job which necessity only could have induced him to undertake. With all his failings, however, it appears that he was held in esteem by many distinguished contemporaries, particularly by Doctors Pearce, Jortin, Johnson, Warton, Plumptre, and Askew, who contributed critical assistance to his translation of Theocritus.

As an original poet, much cannot be said in his favour. His powers were confined to occasional slight and encomiastic verses, such as may be produced witbout great effort, and are supposed to answer every purpose when they have pleased those to whom they were addressed. The epithalamic ode may perhaps rank higher, if we could forget an obvious endeavour to imitate Dryden and Pope. In the elegy on the death of Dobbin, and one or two other pieces, there is a considerable portion of humour, which is a more legitimate proof of genius than one species of poets are disposed to allow. His principal defects are want of judgment and taste. These, however, are less discoverable in his translations, and it was probably a consciousness of limited powers which inclined him so much to translation. In this he every where displays a critical knowledge of his author, while his versification is smooth and elegant, and his expression remarkably clear. He was once esteemed the best translator since the days of Pope, a praise which, if now disallowed, it is much that it could in his own time have been bestowed with justice.

was one of the most celebrated of the Provengal poets or troubadours. He had a fine figure, abundance of wit, and a pleasing address, and was much encouraged by the princes o his time. By representing his comedies, he soon acquired considerable riches, which his vanity and his love of debauchery and expence did not suffer him to keep. From a miserable state of poverty he was relieved by the liberality of Richard Cacur de Lion, who had a strong taste for the Provencal poetry. After the death of this protector, he returned to Aix, where he married a young woman of distinguished wit and beauty; but she did not long survive her marriage with this profligate husband. He died soon after, in 1220, at what age is not exactly known, but certainly early in life. Among the many pieces which he wrote, the following are mentioned: I. A poem on the death of his benefactor, Richard I. 2. “The palace of Love,” imitated afterwards by Petrarch. 3. Several comedies, one of which, entitled “Heregia dels Prestes,” the heresy of the priests, a satirical production against the corruptions of the church, was publicly acted at the castle of Boniface, marquis of Montserrat.

Dr. Burney informs us that he found his poem on the death of Richard I. in the Vatican, among the Mss. bequeathed to that library by the queen of Sweden, with the original music by the bard himself, who was as much admired by his contemporaries for setting his poems to music, as writing them. A translation of the poem, and the music itself, may be seen in Dr. Barney’s History.

, a priest of Riom, once well known by his singular opinions, entered the congregation of the oratory in 1662, but was obliged to quit it in 1671, being a friend to Cartesianism, which was then a heresy. He preached against the conduct of Innocent XI. towards France, and published a treatise on the Trinity 1696, in which appearing to favour tritheisnr, he was confined at St. Lazare in Paris, but afterwards received orders from the king to retire to his country, where he died 1709. He left “a life of St. Amable,” 12mo; “Remarks on Homer, Virgil, and the poetical style of Scripture,” 2 vols. 12mo; a collection in Latin verse, and French prose, entitled, “Tombeau de M. de Santeuil,” 12mo; '“La Telemacomanie, ou Critique du Telemaque de M. Fenelon,” 12mo, a foolish attack on Fenelon’s celebrated performance. All his works contain singular opinions, great reading and learning, but little taste or judgment. “Le Moines emprunte*s,” 2 vols. 12mo, have been attributed to him, but they are by Haitze.

, a French lady, daughter of Aymar de la Vergne, marechal-de-camp, and governor of Havre-deGrace, bat more distinguished by her wit and literary productions than by her family, was married to the count de Fayette in 1655, and died in lt'i.93. She cultivated letters and the fine arts; and her hotel uas the rendezvous of all who were most distinguished for literary taste. The duke de la Rochefuucault, Huetius, Mennge, La Fontaine, Segrais, were those she saw most frequently. The last, when obliged to quit the house of Mad. de Montpensier, found an honourable retreat with her. The author of “The Memoirs of madame de Maintenon,” has not spoken favourably of this lady, nor represented her manners to be such as from her connections we should suppose. But madame de Sevigne, who had better opportunities of knowing her, and is more to be relied on than the author of the memoirs, has painted her very differently. This lady says, in a letter to her daughter, “Mad. la Fayette is a very amiable and a very estimable woman; and whom yon will love when you shall have time to be with her, and to enjoy the benefit of her sense and wit; the better you luiow her, the more you will like her.”

The principal works of this lady are, 1. “Zaide,” a romance, often printed, and read by persons who do not usually read romances. 2. “La princesse de Cleves,” a romance also, which Fontenelle professed to have read four times. Mad. la Fayette was so regardless of fame, that she published these works under the name of Segrais, who, however, is supposed to have been no farther concerned than in aiding a little in the design of them. 3. “La princesse de Montpensier,” another romance. Voltaire says, that the romances of Fayette were the first which exhibited the manners of people of fashion in a graceful, easy, and natural way; all before having been pompous bombast, and swelling every thing beyond nature and life. 4. “Memoires de la cour de France pour lea annles 1688 & 1689.” This work is written with address and spirit, and abounds with striking pictures and curious anecdotes. 5. “Histoire d‘Henriette d’Angleterre.” 6. “Divers portraits de quelques personnes de la cour.” All these works are still esteemed and she drew up also other memoirs of the history of her times, which were lent to every body, and lost, by her son the abbe de la Fayette. She understood Latin, which she learned in a very short time.

, the historian of Sicily, was born at Sacca, a town of Palermo, in 1498. He was entered in the order of Dominican monks, and was their provincial, but from modesty declined the honour of being elected general of the order. He was ten times chosen prior of the monastery at Palermo, and died in possession of that office in 1570. He wrote many works, but the most considerable was a “History of Sicily,” written in Latin in two decades, which first appeared in Palermo in 1558, foL and which has passed through several editions, and was translated into the Italian language.

, a barrister and law writer, was

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

Amidst Mr. Fearne’s various pursuits of knowledge, he had always a particular attachment to experimental philosophy, which, both at school and at the Temple, he practised occasionally. In this employment, he fancied that he had discdvered the art of dying Morocco leather of particular colours, and after a new process. It appears that the Maroquoniers in the Levant (who are called so from dressing the skin of this goat, named the Maroquiu) keep secret the ingredients which they put into the liquor, which gives it that fine red colour. This secret, or what would answer equally as well, Fearne thought he had discovered, and, like most projectors, saw great profits arising from the discovery. It was his misfortune, however, to form a connection in this scheme, with a needy and expensive partner, which opened his eyes to the fallacy of his hopes; and at the suggestion of his friends, he reverted to his original profession, or what his father intended for such, and sat down to the study of the law with unremitting diligence. He had not been long in chambers, when his habits of study, diligence, and sobriety, were observed by an eminent attorney in the Temple, who wanted an abstract to be made of a voluminous body of papers, so as to bring the matter clearly before counsel. The papers were so intricate, and of such various references, that they required a very clear head, and a man not much taken up with other business, to arrange them. He saw Fearne answered this last description very well; and told him, “That having a great body of papers to arrange, he should be glad to employ him.” Fearne accepted the offer, and performed his task so ably, that his employer not only rewarded him handsomely for his trouble, but from that time gave him a considerable part of his business.

He now began to be known as a young man of very considerable legal erudition, and a promising increase in business encouraged him to relinquish his chambers, and take a house in Breams-buildings, Chancery-lane, where he became very successful as, what is called, a chamber counsel. Before he left the Temple, he had published his very useful “Legigraphical Chart of Landed Property,” and he now derived additional reputation from his more important treatise, entitled “An Essay on the Learning of Contingent Remainders and Executory Devises,” which, although published without his name, was soon traced to its author. Fortune, as it is usually termed, was now before him, but he had no extraordinary ambition for her favours, and, very oddly, contracted his business within a 1 certain compass, by which it might yield him an annual sum which he thought sufficient for his wants. This, estimated by his biographer at 1500l. a year, when he could with ease have acquired 3000l. he spent on a town and country-house, a carriage, &c. with an establishment on a genteel but moderate scale; and the time he denied to increase of business, he employed in his house at Hampstead on mechanical and philosophical experiments. At this retreat he was wrapt up either in some philosophical experiment, or some mechanical invention the first of which he freely communicated to men of similar pursuits and the latter, when, completed, he as liberally gave away to poor artists, or dealers in these articles; and here also he made some op? tical glasses upon a new construction, which have been reckoned improvements he likewise constructed a machine for transposing the keys in music gave many useful hints in the dyeing of cottons, and in a variety of other articles, which equally shewed the enlarged state of his mind, and the liberality of his heart. These he called his dissipations, and with some degree of truth, as they often broke jn upon his profession, and induced him to give up more hours (to bring up for lost time) than was consistent with more beneficial pursuits, or the natural strength of his constitution.

While thus employed, an occasion presented itself, which called forth his talents in a new way. Lord Mansfield, when solicitor-general in 1747, having given an opinion in. the state of a case on the will of William Williams (afterwards the subject of the celebrated case of Perrin v. Blake), which Mr. Fearne, on the authority of his friend the late James Booth, esq. of Lincoln’s-inn, quoted in the first edition of his “Essay on the Learning of Contingent Remainders, &c.” his lordship afterwards disavowed that opinion on the bench, insinuating at the same time that Mr, Fearne was under some mistake in reporting it. Fearne, all alive to the delicacy of his character, and knowing the strong ground he proceeded upon (which was a copy of that opinion given him by Mr. Booth, from a manuscript collection of cases, taken from the originals), took this opportunity to publish a letter, entitled “Copies of Opinions ascribed to eminent counsel on the will which was the subject of the case of Perrin v. Blake, before the court of king’s bench, 1769, addressed to the right hon. William earl of Mansfield.” This appeared about 1780, and is said to have afforded lord Mansfield some uneasiness, who, however, took no notice of it.

The remainder of Mr. Fearne’s life appears to have passed in a relaxation from professional cares, and to have been embittered by the difficulties by which such imprudence is generally followed. It would be painful to enter into a, detail of this course, which terminated by his death, Jan. 21, 1794, when he had reached only his forty -fifth year, and was worn out both in mind and body. In order to contribute to the provision of his family, his friends collected his posthumous works, which were published in 1797, consisting of “Observations on the Statute of Inrollments of Bargains and Sales, 27 Hen. VIII. delivered by the author in a reading at Lyon’s-inn in 1778 Arguments in the singular case of general Stanwix and a collection of Cases and Opinions.”

, a learned controversial divine of the church of England, was born at Charlton upon Otmore, near Oxford, March 15, 1582. Fairclough was the name of his ancestors, so spelt by his grandfather, father, and eldest brother, and it appears that he was ordained by the same. Why he afterwards preferred Featley, which is a corruption of Fairclough (or, Faircliff, a place in Lancashire, where the family were originally seated), we know not, nor is it perhaps of much consequence. That the family were reduced, appears from the occupation of his father, who was cook to Dr. Laurence Humphrey, president of Magdalen, and served Corpus Christi college, Oxford, in the same capacity. He had interest enough, however, with his employers, to obtain a good education for the subject of this memoir, who was his second son, and whom we find mentioned first as a chorister of Magdalen college. After having made considerable progress in the school belonging to that college, where, even at twelve years old, his Latin and Greek exercises were noted for their excellence, he was admitted scholar of Corpus Christi college, Dec. 13, 1594, and Sept. 20, 1602, when B. A. was chosen probationer fellow. He commenced M. A. at the usual time, and was always eminent for his academical exercises, nor was he less noted as a disputant and preacher. In 1607 he delivered an oration at the death of Dr. Reinold, president of Corpus, who had been one of his earliest patrons.

In 1610, and the two following years, we find him in attendance upon sir Thomas Edmondes, the king’s minister at the court of France. Several of the sermons he preached, during this time, in the ambassador’s chapel, are collected in his “Clavis Mystica,” and those which were levelled at the errors of popery are said to have been very successful both in converting some catholics, and in confirming the opinions of those who had before embraced. the doctrines of the reformation. He had also very frequent conferences in the Cleremont with the Jesuits, and with the members of the Sorboane, but especially with fathers Sirmund and Petau, who, although they at first ridiculed his figure, for he was low of stature, yet afterwards were impressed with a regard for his controversial talents, and treated his memory with respect. His three disputations at Paris are confessed by Holden, an eminent English catholic writer, to have done more harm to the popish cause than thirtythree he had read of before. By most of the foreign universities he was held in such honour as a disputant, that in the tables of the celebrated schoolmen, whom they honoured with the epithets of resolute, subtle, angelic, &c. he was called acutissimus et acerrimus. According to Wood, he commenced B. D. in 1613, and was the preacher at the act of that year. His sermon on this occasion is said to have been No. 37. in the “Clavis Mystica;” but, according to the evidence of his nephew John Featley, he did not take that degree until 1615, and the sermon he delivered was a Latin concio ad clerum, dated March 25. In 1610 he had preached the rehearsal sermon at Oxford, and by the bishop of London’s appointment he discharged the same duty at St. Paul’s cross in 1613. By invitation from Mr. Ezekiel Ascot, who had been his pupil, he accepted the rectory of Northill in Cornwall, which he vacated on his institution to the rectory of Lambeth in 1618. a change which, if not more profitable, was certainly highly agrees ahle to him, as he became now, by the recommendation of the university, domestic chaplain to Abbot, archbishop of Canterbury.

In 1619 he preached at Lambeth church, or in the chapel of the palace, seven of the sermons in the “Clavis Mystica,” before the king’s commissioners in ecclesiastical causes^ and on other occasions, and delivered his sentiments with uncommon freedom of spirit, which appears to have been habitual to him. By the direction of archbishop Abbot, who was desirous that De Dominis, archbishop of Spalato, should be gratified with the hearing of a complete divinityact, Mr. Featley, in 1617, kept his exercise for the degree of D. D. under Dr. Prideaux, the regius professor; and many other foreigners were present, with the flower of the English nobility and gentry. The Italian primate was so highly pleased with the performance, that he not only thanked his grace for the entertainment he had procured for him; but, being soon after appointed master of the Savoy, he gave Dr. Featley a brother’s place in that hospital. In the course of this exercise Dr. Prideaux, apprehensive for his reputation before such an auditory, felt the sharpness and acuteness of Featley’s replies, almost to a degree of resentment, but the archbishop effected a reconciliation between two men whose agreement in more important points was of such consequence in those days.

In June 1623, was held a famous conference at sir Humphrey Lynde’s, between Dr.tWilson, dean of Carlisle, and Dr. Featiey, with the Jesuits Fisher and Sweet, and the result of it being published in 1624, by archbishop Abbot’s command, under the title of “The Romish Fisher caught and held in his own net,” was dedicated to the archbishop by Featley. As chaplain to his grace, he was intrusted with the invidious office of licensing books, and examining clerks, which he is said to have discharged with much prudence, and in general to the entire satisfaction of his superiors. On one occasion, however, he is said to have been censured for licensing Elton’s Commentary on the Colossians, an author we are unacquainted with, but excused himself by pleading that the sheets which had given offence were added after his imprimatur. His conduct, as licenser, with respect to Gataker’s treatise “On Lots,” will occur to be mentioned in our account of that [author?]

Hitherto the archbishop had bestowed no preferment on. his chaplain; but in 1627, as we are told, “urged by hearing the discontents of the court and city, because his chaplain was kept behind the hangings,” he bestowed on him the rectory of Allhallows, Bread-street, and afterwards the rectory of Acton. Much about the same time, but the year not known, he was appointed provost of Chelsea college, an institution which did not last long. In 1622 he had married Mrs. Joyce Holloway, who was his parishioner, and resided in Kennington-lane. This lady appears to have been considerably older than Dr. Featley, but was a woman of great piety and accomplishments. He concealed his marriage for some time, lest it should interfere with his residence at Lambeth palace; but in 1625 he ceased to be chaplain to the archbishop, and concealment was no longer necessary. The cause of his quitting the archbishop’s service has been represented as “the unfeeling treatment” of that prelate. But of this, his biographers have made too much. The story, in short, is, that Dr. Featley fell sick at Oxford, supposed of the plague, and was obliged to leave the place and go to Lambeth; and when he found that the archbishop had removed to Croydon for fear of the plague, he followed him thither, and the archbishop refused him entrance, and was surely justifiable in every endeavour to prevent the disorder from extending to the place he had chosen as a refuge. The story is told with some confusion of circumstances, but the above is probably the truth. Dr. Featley, however, on recovering from his disorder, which, after all, happened not to be the plague, quitted the archbishop’s service, and removed his books from the palace. It was during the raging of the plague in 1625, or 1626, when the churches were deserted, that he wrote his “Ancilla Pietatis, or Hand-maid to private devotion,” which became very popular; and before 1676, had passed through eight editions. Wood appears to be mistaken in saying, that in this work Dr. Featley makes the story of St. George, the tutelar saint of England, a "mere fiction, and that archbishop Laud obliged him to apologize for this on his knees. Dr. Featley’s words bear no such meaning, but it is probable enough that there was a misunderstanding between Featley and the archbishop, as the former refused to obey the latter in turning the communion-table of Lambeth church altar-wise; and we know that Featley was afterwards a witness against the archbishop, upon the charge of his having made superstitious innovations in Lambeth church.

While the ecclesiastical constitution stood, Dr. Featley was member of several of the convocations; and upon account, as is supposed, of his being a Calvinist, he was in 1642 appointed by the parliament one of the Assembly of Divines. He is said to have continued longer with them than any other member of the episcopal persuasion; but this was no longer than he discovered the drift of their proceedings. That he was not acceptable to the ruling party, appears from his becoming in the same year, a victim to their revenge. In November, the soldiers sacked his church at Acton, and at Lambeth would have murdered him, had he not made his escape. These outrages were followed Sept. 30, 1643, by his imprisonment in Peter-house, in Aldersgate-street, the seizure of his library and goods, and the sequestration of his estate. Charges were preferred against him of the most absurd and contradictory kind, which it was to little purpose to answer. He was voted out of his living. Among his pretended offences were, that he refused to assent to every clause in the solemn league and covenant, and that he corresponded with archbishop Usher, who was with the king at Oxford. During his imprisonment, he amused himself by writing his celebrated treatise, entitled “The Dippers dipt, or the Anabaptists ducked and plunged over head and ears, at a disputation in Southwark.” It is, however, a striking proof of that anarchy of sentiment which disgraced the nation at this period, that he not only dedicates this book to the parliament which had imprisoned him, but exhorts them to employ the sword of justice against “heretics and schismatics,” although himself was n'ow suffering under the latter description by that very parliament. He was better employed soon after in an able vindication of the church of England against the innovators who now bore rule; but his long confinement of eighteen months impaired his health and shortened his days. His situation appears to have been represented to his persecutors, but it was not until six weeks before his death that he obtained leave from the parliament to remove to Chelsea for the benefit of the air. Here he died April 17, 1645, on the very day that he was bound to have returned to his confinement at Peter-house. It was reported that a few hours before his deaih, he prayed for destruction to the enemies of the church and state, in expressions which have been called “irascible and resentful.” How far they were used by him seems doubtful but had he prayed only for the restoration of the constitution in church and state, it might have still, in those times, been imputed to him that the destruction of their enemies was a necessary preliminary and a fair innuendo. He was buried in the chancel of Lambeth church, where his funeral sermon was preached by Dr. Leo or Loe, who had been in habits of intimacy with him for thirty-seven years. Dr. Leo represents him as being “in his nature, meek, gracious, affable, and merciful:” as a writer he was esteemed in his time one of the ablest defenders of the doctrines of the reformation against the papists, and one of the ablest opponents of the anabaptists.

, nephew to the preceding, son of John Fairclough, was a native of Northamptonshire, and educated at All Souls’ college, Oxford, which he is said to have left after taking his first degree in arts, probably to become his uncle’s assistant at Lambeth or Acton. During the rebellion he went to St. Christopher’s in the West Indies, where he arrived in 1643, and had the honour of being the first preacher of the gospel in the infancy of that colony. It appears that he returned about the time of the restoration, and was appointed chaplain to the king, who also in August 1660 presented him to the precentorship of Lincoln, and in September following to the prebend of Milton Ross, in that cathedral. In 1662, he was created D. D. and had from the dean and chapter of Lincoln the vicarage of Edwinton in Nottinghamshire, worth about sixty pounds a year. He died at Lincoln in 1666, and was interred in a chapel in the cathedral. He published one or two of his uncle’s tracts, particularly “Dr. Featley revived, &c.” in which, as already noticed, there is a life of his uncle. Of his own were only published two occasional sermons, and “A divine antidote against the Plague, contained in Soliloquies and Prayers,” London, 1660.

, of Brisgaw, a celebrated Lutheran divine and historian, author of several learned works in Latin and in German, who was settled first at Dourlach, and afterwards at Rostock, was born in 1636, and died in 1716. Among his works are a “History of Cain and Abel,” with notes critical, philological, historical, and theological, published at Rostock, in 8vo a “Treatise on the Religion of the modern Greeks” another against the “Superstitions of the Mass,” &c.

, so called, because he was born of poor parents in a cottage, near the forest of Feckenham in Worcestershire, his right name being Howmau, was the last abbot of Westminster. Discovering in his youth very good parts, and a strong propensity to learning, the priest of the parish took him under his care, instructed him some years, and then procured him admission into Evesham monastery. At eighteen, he was sent by his abbot to Gloucester-hall, Oxford; from whence, when he had sufficiently improved himself in academical learning, he was recalled to his abbey; which being dissolved Nov. 17, 1536, he had a yearly pension of an hundred florins allowed him for his life. Upon this he returned to Gloucester-hall, where he pursued his studies some years; and in 1539, took the degree of bachelor of divinity, being then chaplain to Bell bishop of Worcester. That prelate resigning his see in 1543, he became chaplain to Bonner bishop of London but Bonner being deprived of his bishopric, in 1549, by the reformers, Feckenham was committed to the Tower of London, because, as some say, he refused to administer the sacraments after the protestant manner. Soon after, he was taken from thence, to dispute on the chief points controverted between the protestants and papists, and disputed several times in public before and with some great personages.

He was afterwards remanded to the Tower, where he continued till queen Mary’s accession to the crown in 1553; but was then released, and made chaplain to the queen. He became also again chaplain to Bonner, prebendary of St. Paul’s, dean of St. Paul’s, rector of Finchley in Middlesex, which he held only a few months; and then rector of Greenford in the same county. In 1554, he was one of the disputants at Oxford against Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer, before they suffered martyrdom, but said very little against them; and during Mary’s reign, he was constantly employed in doing good offices to the afflicted protestants from the highest to the lowest. Francis Russel earl of Bedford, Ambrose and Robert Dudley, afterwards earls of Warwick and-Leicester, were benefited by his kindness; as was also sir John Cheke, whose life he and sir Thomas Pope, the founder of Trinity college, Oxford, are said to have saved, by a joint application to queen Mary. Feckenham was very intimate with sir Thomas, and often visited him at Tyttenhanger-house. Feckenham also interceded with queen Mary for the lady Elizabeth’s enlargement out of prison, and that so earnestly, that the queen was actually displeased with him for some time. In May 1556, he was complimented by the university of Oxford with the degree of doctor in divinity; being then in universal esteem for his learning, piety, charity, moderation, humility, and other virtues. The September following, he was made abbot of Westminster, which was then restored by queen Mary; and fourteen Benedictine monks placed there under his government, with episcopal power.

Upon the death of Mary, in 1558, her successor Elizabeth, not unmindful of her obligations to Feckenham, sent for him before her coronation, to consult and reward him; and, as it is said, offered him the archbishopric of Canterbury, provided he would conform to the laws; but this he refused. He appeared, however, in her first parliament, taking the lowest place on the bishop’s form; and was the last mitred abbot that sat in the house of peers. During his attendance there he spoke and protested against every thing tending towards the reformation; and the strong opposition which he could not be restrained from making, occasioned his commitment to the tower in 1560. After nearly three years confinement there, he was committed to the custody of Home bishop of Winchester: but having been old antagonists on the subject of the oath of supremacy, their present connection was mutually irksome, and Feckenham was remanded to the Tower in 1564. Afterwards he was removed to the Marshalsea, and then to a private house in Holborn. In 1571, he attended Dr. John Storie before his execution. In 1578 we find him in free custody with Cox bishop of Ely, whom the queen had requested to use his endeavours to induce Feckenham to acknowledge her supremacy, and come over to the church: and he was at length prevailed on to allow her supremacy, but could never be brought to a thorough conformity. Soon after, the restless spirit of some Roman catholics, and their frequent attempts upon the queen’s life, obliged her to imprison the most considerable among them: upon which Feckenham was sent to Wisbich-castle in the Isle of Ely, where he continued a prisoner to the time of his death, which happened in 1585. As to his character, Camden calls him “a learned and good man, that lived long, did a great-deal of good to the poor, and always solicited the minds of his adversaries to benevolence.” Fuller styles him, “a man cruel to none; courteous and charitable to all who needed his help or liberality.” Burnet says, “he was a charitable and generous man, who lived in great esteem in England.” And Dart concludes his account of him in these words: “though I cannot go so far as Reyner, to call him a martyr; yet I cannot gather but that he was a good, mild, modest, charitable man, and a devout Christian.”

, a learned German, was born at Elburg in Guelderland, in the sixteenth century. He studied philosophy for some time, and afterwards applied himself entirely to polite literature, in which he made a considerable progress. He was a master of the Greek tongue, and even of the Hebrew; of which the professors of the protestant university of Bern gave him an ample testimonial. Being returned to his own country, from which he had been long absent, he was under great consternation, on account of the expedition of the Spaniards commanded by Spinola. This determined him to leave his native country; and he went to settle in France, where he taught the Greek language, and was honoured with the friendship of Casaubon, of M. Du Puy, and of the president Thuanus. When he was walking one day at Rochelle, attended by a servant, he was desired to enter into the house of a citizen: and after that day it could never be discovered what became of him, notwithstanding all thf strictest inquiries of the magistrates. He was but young at the time of this most mysterious disappearing, “which,” says Bayle, “is to be lamented; for if he had lived to grow old, he would have wonderfully explained most of the subjects relating to polite letters.” This judgement is grounded upon his manuscript works, one of which was published at Leyden in 1677, by Henry Brunaan, principal of the college at Swol, and the author’s grand nephew, entitled “Antiqnitatum Homericarum libri quatuor,” 12mo. It is very learned, and abounds with curious and instructive observations. An edition of it was published in 1743, with notes, by Elias Stoeber, 8vo, at Strasburgh. There are other works of his in being, as, “De Atheniensium republica, De antiquitatibus Atticis,” &c. which the editor promised to collect and publish; but we do not know that it was done.

, Sieur des Avaux et de Javerci, counsellor and historiographer to the king of France, was born at Chartres in 1619. He finished his first studies there at the age of fourteen, and then was sent to Paris to improve himself in the sciences, and in the management of affairs: but his inclination soon made him devote himself entirely to the muses, and he gained a great reputation by his knowledge in the fine arts. The marquis de Fontenay-Mareuil, being chosen for the second time ambassador extraordinary to the court of Rome in 1647, Felibien was made secretary to the embassy, and perfectly answered the hopes which that minister had conceived of him. During his stay at Rome, his fondness for the liberal arts made him spend all the time he could spare in visiting those who excelled in them; and especially the celebrated Poussin, from whose conversation he learned to understand all that is most beautiful in statues and pictures: and it was according to the exalted notions he then formed to himself of the excellence and perfection of painting, that he wrote those valuable works which established his reputation. On his return from Italy he went to Chartres; and, as he designed to settle himself, he married a lady of considerable family. His friends introduced him afterwards to Fouquet, who would have done something for him had he not soon after lost the king’s favour: but Colbert, who loved the arts and sciences, did not suffer him to be useless. After he had desired him to make some draughts for his majesty, in order to engage him to complete the works he had begun, he procured him a commission of historiographer of the king’s buildings, superintendant of them, and of the arts and manufactures in France: this commission was delivered to him March 10, 1666. The royal academy of architecture having been established in 1671, he was made secretary to it. The king made him afterwards keeper of his cabinet of antiques, in 1673, and gave him an apartment in the palace of Brion. He was also one of the first members of the academy of inscriptions and medals, and became afterwards deputy comptroller general of the bridges and dykes of the kingdom. He died June 11, 1695, aged seventy-six; and left five children.

In all that he has written there appears sound judgment and good taste, but his “Dialogues upon the Lives of the Painters’ 7 is the work which has done him the greatest honour. His only fault is, that he is sometimes prolix and immethodical. Voltaire informs us, that he was the first who gave Lewis XIV. the surname of Great, in the inscriptions in the hotel-de-ville. Felibien had many good qualities, and, free from ambition, was moderate in his desires, and of a contented disposition. He was a man of probity, of honour, of piety, Though he was naturally grave and serious, and of a hasty and somewhat severe temper, yet his conversation was generally chearful and lively. He was a steady advocate for truth; and he used to encourage himself in it by this motto, which he caused to be engraved on his seal,” Bene facere, et vera dicere,“that is,” To do good, and speak the truth." His biographers seem agreed that he lived in a constant practice of these two duties.

, son of the preceding, succeeded his father in all his places, and seemed to inherit his taste in the fine arts. He died in 1733. Some works written by him must not be confounded with those of his father: namely, 1. “An historical Collection of the Lives and Works of the most celebrated Architects,” Paris, 1687, 4to, frequently subjoined to his father’s account of the painters. 2. “Description of Versailles, ancient and modern,” 12mo. 3. “Description of the Church of the Invalids,” 1706, fol. reprinted in 1756. There were also two more Felibiens, who were authors: James, brother of Andrew, a canon and archdeacon of Chartres, who died in 1716, and had published, among other works, one entitled “Pentateuchus Historicus,” 1704, 4to, part of which he was obliged afterwards to suppress, and consequently the uncastrated copies are most valued; and Michael, another of his sons, a Benedictine of the congregation of St. Maur, who was born in 1666, and died in 1719. The latter wrote a history of the abbey of St. Denys, in folio, published in 1706; and began the history of Paris, which was afterwards continued and published by Lobineau.

a learned divine, was born in the parish of St. Clement Danes, London, 1594; elected student of Christ Church from Westminster school in 1601; took a master of arts degree in 1608, served the office of proctor in 1614, and the year following was admitted bachelor of divinity; and about that time became minister of Freshwater in the Isle of Wight. In May 1619, he was installed canon of Christ Church, and the same year proceeded doctor in divinity, being about that time domestic chaplain to James I. In 1626, he was made Margaret professor of divinity, and consequently had a prebend of Worcester, which was about that time annexed to the professorship. He was then a Calvinist, but at length, renouncing the opinions so called, he was, through Laud’s interest, made dean of Lichfield in 1637; and the year following, dean of Christ Church. In 1645, he was appointed vice-chancellor, which office he served also in 1647, in contempt of the parliamentary visitors, who at length ejected him from that and his deanery, and their minions were so exasperated at him for his loyalty to the king, and zeal for the church, that they actually sought his life: and being threatened to be murdered, he was forced to abscond. He died broken-hearted, Feb. 1, 1648-9; that being the very day he was made acquainted with the murder of his royal master king Charles. He was buried in the chancel of Sunning-well church, near Abingdon, in Berkshire (where he had been rector, and built the front of the parsonage-house) with only this short memorial, on a small lozenge of marble laid over his grave, “Depositum S. F. February 1648.” He was a public-spirited man, and had the character of a scholar. Wood, though he supposes there were more, only mentions these two Small productions of his; viz. “Primitiae; sive Oratio habita Oxoniae in Schola TheologiiE, 9 Nov. 1626,” and, “Concio Latina ad Baccalaureos die cinerum in Coloss. ii. 8.” They were both printed at Oxford in 1627. He contributed very largely to Christ Church college, completing most of the improvements begun by his predecessor, Dr. Duppa, and would have done more had not the rebellion prevented him.

, an eminently learned divine, was the son of the preceding, by Margaret his wife, daughter of Thomas Wyld, of Worcester, esq. and was born at Longworth in Berkshire, June 23, 1625. He was educated mostly at the free-school of Thame in Oxfordshire; and in 1636, when he was only eleven years of age, was admitted student of Christ Church in Oxford. In Oct. 1640 he took the degree of B. A. and that of M. A. in June 1643j about which time he was in arms for Charles I. within the garrison of Oxford, and afterwards became an ensign. In 1648 he was turned out of his place by the parliamentarian visitors, being then in holy orders; and from that time till the restoration of Charles II. lived in a retired and studious manner, partly in the lodgings, at Christ Church, of the famous physician Willis, who was his brother-in-law, and partly in his own house opposite Merton college, wherein he and others kept up the devotions and discipline of the church of England.

A.fter the restoration he was made prebendary of Chichester, and canon of Christ Church, in which last place he was installed July 27, 1660; and in Nov. following was made dean, being then D. D. and chaplain in ordinary to the king. As soon as he was fixed, he earnestly applied himself to purge the college of all remains of hypocrisy and nonsense, so prevalent in the late times of confusion, and to improve it in all sorts of learning as well as true religion. Nor was he more diligent in restoring its discipline, than in adorning it with magnificent buildings, towards which he contributed very great sums. By his own benefactions, and what he procured from others, he completed the north side of the great quadrangle, which had remained unfinished from Wolsey’s time, and in which his father had made some progress when interrupted by the rebellion. He rebuilt also part of the lodgings of the canon of the second stall, the east side of the chaplain’s quadrangle, the buildings adjoining fronting the meadows, the lodgings belonging to the canon of the third stall, and the handsome tower over the principal gate of the college; into which, in 1683, he caused to be removed out of the steeple in the cathedral, the bell called “Great Tom of Christ Church,” feaid to have been brought thither with the other bells from Oseney-abbey, which he had re-cast with additional metal, so that it is now one of the largest bells in England. Round it is this inscription: “Magnus Thomas Clusius Oxoniensis, renatus April viii. MDCLXXX. regnante Carolo Secundo, Decano Johanne Oxon. Episcopo, Subdecano Gulielmo Jane S. S. Theol. Professore, Thesaurario Henrico Smith S. S. Theol. Professore, cura et arte Christopher! Hodson.” Sixteen men are required to ring it; and it was first rung out on May 29, 1684. From that time to this it has been tolled every night, as a signal to all scholars to repair to their respective colleges and halls; and so it used to be before its removal.

In 1666, 1667, 1668, and part of 1669, Dr. Fell was vice-chancellor of the university: during which time he used all possible means to restore the discipline and credit of the place; and such was his indefatigable spirit, that he succeeded beyond all expectation. Among his other injunctions was, that persons of all degrees should appear in their proper habits; he likewise looked narrowly to the due performance of the public exercises in the schools, and reformed several abuses that had crept in during a long period of relaxation. He frequently attended in person the disputations in the schools, the examinations for degrees, and the public lectures, and gave additional weight and stimulus to the due performance of these duties. In his own college he kept up the exercises with great strictness, and, aware of the importance of the best education to those who were destined for public life, it was his practice, several mornings in the week, to visit the chambers of the noblemen and gentlemen commoners, and examine their progress in study. No one in his time was more zealous in promoting learning in the university, or in raising its reputation by the noblest foundations. The Sheldonian theatre was built chiefly by his solicitation; and he likewise advanced the press and improving printing in Oxford, according to the public-spirited design of archbishop Laud. He was likewise an eager defender of the privileges of the university, especially while vice-chancellor. In 1675-6 he was advanced to the bishopric of Oxford, with leave to hold his deanery of Christ Church in commendarn, that he might continue his services to his college and the university: and he was no sooner settled in his see, than he began to rebuild the episcopal palace of Cuddesden in Oxfordshire. Holding also the mastership of St. Oswald’s hospital, at Worcester, he re-built that in a sumptuous manner, bestowing all the profits of his income there in augmenting and recovering its estates: and, part of the revenues of his bishopric arising from the impropriation of the dissolved prebend of Banbury, he liberally gave 500l. to repair that church. He likewise established daily prayers at St. Martin’s, or Carfax church, in Oxford, both morning and evening. In a word, he devoted almost his whole substance to works of piety and charity. Among his other benefactions to his college, it must not be forgot, that the best rectories belonging to it were bought with his money: and as he had been so bountiful a patron to it while he lived, and, in a manner, a second founder, so he left to it at his death an estate, for ten or more exhibitions for ever. It is said that he brought his body to an ill habit, and wasted his spirits, by too much zeal for the public, and by forming too many noble designs; and that all these things, together with the unhappy turn of religion which he dreaded under James II. contributed to shorten his life. He.died July 10, 1686, to the great loss of learning, of the whole university, and of the church of England: for he was, as Wood has observed of him, “the most zealous man of his time for the church of England; a great encourager and promoter of learning in the university, and of all public works belonging thereunto of great resolution and exemplary charity; of strict integrity; a learned divine; and excellently skilled in the Latin and Greek languages.” Wood relates one singularity of him, which is unquestionably a great and unaccountable failing, that he was not at all well-atfected to the royal society, and that the noted Stubbes attacked that body under his sanction and encouragement. He was buried in Christ Church cathedral; and over his tomb, which is a plain marble, is an elegant inscription, composed by Aldrich, his successor. He was never married.

It may easily be imagined, that so active and zealous a man as Fell had not much time to write books: yet we find him the author and editor of the following works: 1. “The Life of the most reverend, learned, and pious Dr. Henry Hammond, who died April 25, 1660,” 1660, reprinted afterwards with additions at the head of Hammond’s works. 2. “Alcinoi in Platonicam Philosophiam Introductio, 1667.” 3. “In lauclem Musices Carmen Sapphicum.” Designed probably for some of the public exercises in the university, as it was set to music. 4. “Historia et -Antiquitates Universitatis Oxoniensis,” &c. 1674, 2 vols. fol. This history and antiquities of the university of Oxford was written in English by Antony Wood, and translated into Latin, at the charge of Fell, by Mr. Christopher Wase and Mr. Richard Peers, except what he did himself. He was also at the expence of printing it, with a good character, on a good paper; but “taking to himself,” says Wood, “the liberty of putting in and out several things according to his own judgment, and those that he employed being not careful enough to carry the whole design in their head, it is desired that the author may not be accountable for any thing which was inserted by him, or be censured for any useless repetitions or omissions of his agents under him.” At the end of it, there is a Latin advertisement to the reader, containing an answer to a letter of Hobbes; in which that author had complained of Fell’s having caused several things to be omitted or altered, which Wood had written in that book in his praise. More of this, however, will occur to be noticed in our life of Wood. 5. “The Vanity of Scoffing: in a letter to a gentleman,” 1674, 4to. 6. “St. Clement’s two epistles to the Corinthians in Greek and Latin, with notes at the end,” 1677. 7. “Account of Dr. Richard Allestree’s life:” being the preface to the doctor’s sermons, published by our author. 8. “Of the Unity of the Church:” translated from the original of St. Cyprian, 1681. 9. “A beautiful edition of St. Cyprian’s Works, revised and illustrated with notes,” 1682. 10. “Several Sermons,” on public occasions, 11. The following pieces written by the author of the “Whole Duty of Man,” with prefaces, contents, and marginal abbreviations, by him, viz. “The Lady’s Calling; the Government of the Tongue; the Art of Contentment; the Lively Oracles,” &c. He also wrote the general preface before the folio edition of that unknown author’s works. 12. “Artis. Logicae Compendium.” 13. “The Paraphrase of St. Paul’s Epistles.” There is another piece, which was ascribed to him, with this title; *“The Interest of England stated or, a faithful and just account of the aims of all parties nowprevailing; distinctly treating of the designments of the Roman Catholic, Royalist, Presbyterian, Anabaptist,” &c. 1659, 4to, but it not being certainly known whether he was the author or not, we do not place it among his works. One thing in the mean time Wood mentions, relating to his literary character, which must not be omitted that “from 1661, to the time of his death, viz. while he was dean of Christ-church, he published or reprinted every year a bookjf commonly a classical author, against newyear’s tide, to distribute among the students of his house; to which books he either put an epistle, or running notes, or corrections. These,” says Wood, “I have endeavoured to recover, that the titles might be known and set down, but in vain.” But one of Dr. Fell’s publications, unaccountably omitted in former editions of this work, still remains to be noticed; his edition of the Greek Testament, of which Michaelis has given a particular account. Dr. Fell was the next after Walton, who published a critical edition of the New Testament, which, although eclipsed since by that of Mill, has at least the merit of giving birth to Mill’s edition. It was published in small octavo, at the Sheldon theatre, 1675. It appears from the preface, that the great number of various readings which are printed in the sixth volume of the London Polyglot, apart from the text, had given alarm to many persons, who were ignorant of criticism, and had induced them to suspect, that the New Testament was attended with so much uncertainty, as to be a very imperfect standard of faith. In order to convince such persons of their error, and to shew how little the sense of the New Testament was altered by them, Fell printed them under the text, that the reader might the more easily compare them. This edition was twice reprinted at Leipsic, in 1697 and 1702, and at Oxford in a splendid folio, by John Gregory, in 1703, but without any additions, which might have easily been procured from t'he bishop’s papers; nor are even those which Fell had been obliged to print in an appendix, transferred to their proper places, an instance of very gross neglect. We learn also from Fabricius in his Bibl. Graeca that the excellent edition of Aratus, Oxford, 1672, 8vo, was published by Dr. Fell.

, a dissenting minister of considerable learning, was born, Aug. 22, 1735, at Cockermouth in Cumberland, of poor parents, and was at first brought up to the business of a taylor. He was pursuing this employment in London, when some discerning friends perceived in him a taste for literature, and an avidity of knowledge, which they thought worthy of encouragement; and finding that his principal wish was directed to the means of procuring such education as might qualify him for the ministry among the dissenters, they stepped forward to his assistance, and placed him at the dissenting academy at Mileend, then superintended by Dr. Conder, Dr. Gibbons, and Dr. Walker. Mr. Fell was at this time in the nineteenth year of his age; but, by abridging the hours usually allotted to rest and amusement, and praportionably extending those of application to his studies, and by the assiduous exercise of a quick, vigorous, and comprehensive mind, he made rapid advances in learning, gave his tutors and patrons the utmost satisfaction; and in due time, was appointed to preach to a congregation at Beccles, near Yarmouth. He was afterwards invited to take upon himself the pastoral office in a congregation of Protestant dissenters, at Thaxted, in Essex, where he was greatly beloved by his congregation, and his amiable deportment, and diligence in all the duties of his station, attracted the regard even of his neighbours of the established church. At Thaxted, Mr. Fell boarded and educated a few young gentlemen, and it was also during his residence there, that he distinguished himself by the rapid production of some wellwritten publications, which conduced to establish his character as a scholar. After he had thus happily resided several years at Thaxted, he was unfortunately prevailed upon 'to be the resident tutor at the academy, formerly at Mile-end, when he was educated there, but now removed to Homerton, near London. The trustees and supporters of this academy appear to have been at first very happy that they had procured a tutor peculiarly calculated for the situation; but he had not been there long before differences arose between him and the students, of what nature his biographers have not informed us; but they represent that he was dismissed from his situation without a fair trial and complain that this severity was exerted in the case of “a character of no common excellence a genius of no ordinary size a Christian minister, well furnished with gifts and graces for that office a tutor, who for biblical knowledge, general history, and classic taste, had no superior, perhaps no equal, among any class of dissenters.” This affair happened in 1796, and Mr. Fell’s friends lost no time in testifying their unaltered regard for his character. An annuity of 100l. was almost immediately procured for him, and he was invited to deliver a course of lectures on the evidences of Christianity, for which he was to be remunerated by a very liberal subscription. But these testimonies of affection came too late for his enjoyment of them. Four of his lectures had been delivered to crowded congregations at the Scotch church at Londonwall, when sickness interrupted him, and on Wednesday Sept. 6, 1797, death put a period to his labours. The four lectures he delivered were published in 1798, with eight by Dr. Henry Hunter, who concluded the course, but who does not appear well qualified to fill up Mr. FelPs outline. Mr. Fell’s previous publications, which show that the character given of him by his friends is not overcharged, were 1. “Genuine Protestantism, or the unalienable Rights of Conscience defended: in opposition to the late and new mode of Subscription proposed by some dissenting ministers, in three Letters to Mr. Pickard,” 1773, 8vo. 2. “A Fourth Letter to Mr. Pickard on genuine Protestantism; being a full Reply to the rev. Mr. Toulmin’s Defence of the Dissenters’ new mode of Subscription,” 1774, 8vo. 3. “The justice and utility of Penal Laws for the Direction of Conscience examined; in reference to the Dissenters’ late application to parliament. Addressed to a member of the house of commons,” 1774, 8vo. 4. “Daemoniacs. An enquiry into the Heathen and the Scripture doctrine of Daemons, in which the hypothesis of the rev. Mr. Farmer and others on the subject are particularly considered,” 1779, 8vo. (See Farmer). 5. “Remarks on the Appendix of the Editor of Rowley’s Poems, printed at the end of Observations on the Poem attributed to Rowley by Rayner Hickford, esq.” 8vo, no date (1783). 6. An Essay towards an English Grammar, with a dissertation on the nature and peculiar use of certain hypothetical verbs in the English language,“1784, 12mo. 7.” The Idolatry of Greece and Rome distinguished from that of other Heathen Nations, in a Letter to the rev. Hugh Farmer," 1785, 8vo. Mr. Fell ranks among the orthodox, or calvinistic dissenters; but how far, or whether this had any share in the animosity exerted against him, we are unable to discover, from the obscure manner in which his biographers advert to the disputes in the Homerton academy.

, a licentiate in theology, and professor of poetry at Leipsic, was born at Zwickau in 1638, and distinguished from his infancy for uncommon talents. In his thirteenth year he wrote a poem on “The Passion,” which was much applauded. He was educated under the celebrated Daumius, who prided himself on the great proficiency of his pupil, and when Feller went to Leipsic, recommended him to the principal literati of that city, who found him deserving of every encouragement. Thomasius, one of them, engaged him as tutor to his children, and enhanced the favour by giving him free access to his curious and valuable library. In 1660 Feller took his master’s degree, and with such display of talents, that he was soon after made professor of poetry, and in 1676 was appointed librarian to the university. On this last preferment, he employed much of his time in arranging the library, published a catalogue of the Mss. in 1686, 12mo, and procured that the library should be open one day in every week for the use of the public. His Latin poetry, which he wrote with great facility, recommended him to the notice and esteem of the emperor, of the electors of Saxony and Brandenburgh, the duke of Florence, and other princes. He also wrote many papers in the “Acta Lipsiensia,” and the freedom of some of his criticisms in one or two instances involved him in a controversy with James Gronovius, Eggelingen, Patin, and others. He was unfortunately killed by a fall from a window, which he had approached in his sleep, being as this would imply, a somnambulist. This happened April 4, 1691. Besides the works already mentioned, he published, 1. “Cygni quasimodo geniti, sanctae vitae virorum celebrium Cygnese (Zwickau) natorum.” 2. “Supplementum ad Rappolti commentarium in Horatium.” 3. “Flores philosophici ex Virgilio collecti,” Leipsic, 1681, 8vo. 4. “Notae in Lotichicii eclogatn de origine domus Saxonicae et Palatinae.”

, the son of the preceding, was born at Leipsic, Dec. 26, 1673, and imbibed a similar taste with his father for the belles lettres, bibliography, and general literature. In 1688 he received his degree of doctor in philosophy, and two years after set out on what may be called his literary travels. He remained some time with Kirchmaier at Wittemberg, and with Bayer at Fribourg, whose library he carefully inspected. Going thence to Zwickau, the senate of that city appointed him to make a catalogue of the library of Daumius, which had come into their possession by the death of that scholar. Feller was very agreeably employed on this task, when the news of the death of his father obliged him to pay a visit to Leipsic, but as soon as he had settled his family affairs, he returned to Zwickau, and completed the catalogue. He then went again to Leipsic, and studied law, but in 1696 set out a second time on his travels, and at Wolfenbuttel, became acquainted with Leibnitz, who conceiving a friendship for him, detained him here for three years, and assisted him in all his literary undertakings, especially his history of the house of Brunswick, for which Feller was enabled to collect a number of very curious documents of the middle ages. At Francfort, we find him assisting Ludolf in his historical works, but Ludolf is thought to have availed himself too little of this assistance. After extending his acquaintance among learned men in various parts, in 1706 the duke of Weimar appointed him his secretary, and he appears to have died in his service Feb. 15, 1726. His principal works were, 1. “Monumenta varia inedita, variisque linguis conscripta, nunc singulis trimestribus prodeuntia; e museo Joach. F. Felleri secretarii Wimariensis,” Jena, 1714, 1715, 4to. This literary journal, for such it is, is divided into twelve parts. 2. A Genealogical history of the house of Brunswick and Lunenburgh, in German, Leipsic, 1717, 8vo. 3. c< Otium Hanoveranum, sive Miscellanea ex ore et schedis G. G. Leibnitii quondam notata et descripta," ibid. 1718, 8vo. He also enlarged and corrected, in 1713, an edition of Birken’s History of the Saxon heroes.

, an ex-jesuit, was born at Brussels Aug. 18, 1735, and became professor of rhetoric at Liege, Luxemburgh, and Turnau in Hungary, after which he travelled in Italy, Poland, Austria, and Bohemia. After the suppression of the society of the Jesuits in 1773, he took the name of Flexierue Reval, which he exchanged afterwards for that of Feller, under which he published at Luxemburgh, from 1774 to 1794, a political and literary journal, entitled “Clef des cabinets,” in which he is said to display considerable knowledge, riot unmixed with bigotry. The profits of this work not being adequate to his wants, he endeavoured to derive emolument from the less reputable employment of literary piracy. In this way he republished Vosgien’s Geographical Dictionary and the “Dictionnare Historique,” of which last he published three editions, with his name, the third a little before his death, in 8 vols. When he wished to steal the contents of a book, and make them pass for his own, he generally began by an attack upon it in his journal, as a work good for nothing. He usually resided at Liege, but when the French revolution broke out, he went to Maestricht, and afterwards to other places of safety; in 1797 he went to Ratisbon, where he died May 23, 1802. Whatever trutti there may be in this character of Feller as a compiler, his original works are creditable to his talents. Among these are: K “Jugement d'un ecrivain protestant touchant le livre de Justinus Fabronius,” Leipsic, 1771,' 8vo. 2. “Lettre, sur le diner du comte de Boulainvilliers.” 3. “Examen critique de THistoire Naturelle de M. de Buffon,” 1773. This is chiefly an attack on Buffon’s theory of the earth. 4. A translation of Soame Jenyns’s “Internal evidence of the Christian religion, with notes and observations, which he published in 1779, under his assumed name of Flexier de Reval. 5.” Observations philosophiques sur le systeme de Newton, le mouvement de la terre, et la pluralite des mondes,“1771 and 1788, in which he attempts to prove that the motion of the earth has not been demonstrated, and that a plurality of worlds is impossible. La Lande answered this work. 6.” Examen impartial des epoques de la nature de M. de Buffon,“Luxemburgh, 1780, 12mo, and reprinted a fourth time at Maestricht in 1792. 7.” Catechisme philosophique,“a collection of remarks in favour of the Christian religion,” Paris, 1777, 8vo. 8. “Discours sur divers sujets de religion, et de morale,” 1778, 12mo. 9. “Observations sur les rapports physiques de Phuile avec les flots de la mer,” 1778, 8vo. He left also a great many Mss. and upon the whole appears to have been a man of extensive knowledge, and, as his biographer allows, of prodigious memory, but had the misfortune to make many enemies by the severity of his criticisms, and the warmth of his temper.

, a learned divine, was born Feb. 3, 1679, in the parish of St. Martin’s-in-the-fields, Westminster, and was educated first at Cheneys in Buckinghamshire, then at Westminster school under Dr. Busby, and lastly at the Charter-house under Dr. Walker, to whom he was a private pupil. At a proper age he was admitted of Edmund hall, Oxford, of which Dr. Mill, the celebrated critic, was at that time principal, and his tutor was Mr. Thomas Mills, afterwards bishop of Waterford in Ireland. In June 1702, he took his master’s degree, and in December following was ordained deacon, in the royal chapel at Whitehall, by Dr. Lloyd, bishop of Worcester. In June 1704 he was admitted to priest’s orders by Dr. Compton, bishop of London. In 1705-6, he first appeared as an author, in a piece entitled “Remarks on the Colebrook Letter/' a subject the nature of which we have not been able to discover. In 1708 he had the care of the English church at Amsterdam, but did not long continue in that situation, returning to England in 1709. Soon after his return he was appointed domestic chaplain to the duke of Rutland, at Belvoir castle, and sustained that relation to three successive dukes, for which noble house he always preserved the warmest gratitude and affection. In the same year (July 11, 1709) Mr. Felton was admitted to the degree of B. D. being then a member of Queen’s college. Having been employed as tutor to John lord Roos, afterwards third duke of Rutland, he wrote for that young nobleman’s use, his” Dissertation on reading the Classics, and forming a just style," 1711, 12mo. A fourth edition of this was published in 1730, but the best is that of 1757. It was the most popular, and best known of all Dr. Felton’s works, although in the present improved state of criticism, it may appear with less advantage.

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

, an English prelate, was born at Yarmouth in Norfolk, and admitted of Pembroke-hall, Cambridge, of which college he was chosen fellow Nov. 27, 15H3 Archbishop Whitgift collated him to the rectory of St. Mary le Bow, Jan. 17, 1595-6, being then B. D. and he was some time also rector of St. Antholin’s, London. He was elected master of Pembroke-hall, June 29, 1616; admitted rector of Easton-Magna in Essex, Oct. 23, the same year; and collated to a prebend in St. Paul’s, being then D. D. March 4 following. In 1617, he was promoted to the see of Bristol, to which he was consecrated, Dec. 14. The next year he resigned his mastership, and was nominated to the bishopric of Coventry and Lichfield, but was translated to Ely, March 11, 1618-19. He died Oct. 5, 1626, in the sixty-third year of his age, and was buried under the communion-table in St. Antholin’s church, London; but without any memorial or inscription. He was a very pious, learned, and judicious man, and deserves some notice in this work, as one of those who was employed by king James I. in the new translation of the Bible. There is an excellent picture of him in the gallery of the palace at Ely, which was presented for that purpose to the late bishop Gooch, by Mr. Cole of Milton.

, archbishop of Cambray, and author of Telemachus, was of an ancient and illustrious family, and born at the castle of Fenelon, in the province of Perigord, August 6, 1651. At twelve years of age, he was sent to the university of Cabors; and afterwards went to finish his studies at Paris, under the care of his uncle Anthony marquis of Fenelon, lieutenant-general of the king’s armies. He soon made himself known at Paris, and at nineteen preached there with general applause: but the marquis, who was a very wise and good man, fearing that the good disposition of his nephew might be corrupted by this early applause, persuaded him to be silent for some years. At twenty-four be entered into holy orders, and commenced the functions of his ministry in the parish of St. Sulpice, under the abbe Tron^on, the superior of that district, to whose care he had been committed by his uncle. Three years after, he was chosen by the archbishop of Paris, to be superior to the newly-converted women in that city. In 1686, which was the year after the edict of Nantes was revoked, the king named him to be at the head of those missionaries, who were sent along the coast of Saintonge, and the Pais de Aunis, to convert the protestants. These conversions had been hitherto carried on by the terrors of the sword, but Fenelon declared against this mode, but said, that if allowed to proceed by more rational and gentle means, he would cheerfully become a missionary; and after some hesitation, his request was granted, but his success was not remarkable.

Having finished his mission, he returned to Paris, and was presented to the king: but lived two years afterwards without going to court, being again entirely occupied in the instruction of the new female converts. That he might forward this good work by writings as well as lectures, he published, in 1688, a little treatise, entitled “Education de Filles;” which the author of the Bibliotheque Universelle, calls the best and most useful book written upon the subject, in the French language. In 1688, he published a work “Concerning the functions of the Pastors of the Church;” writtenchiefly against the protestants, with a view of shewing, that the first promoters of the reformation had no lawful call, and therefore were not true pastors. In 1689, he was made tutor to the dukes of Burgundy, Anjou, and Berri; and in 1693, was chosen member of the French academy, in the room of Pelisson deceased. In this situation, he was in favour with all. His pupils, particularly the duke of Burgundy, improved rapidly under his care. The divines admired the sublimity of his talents; the courtiers the brilliancy of his wit. The duke, to the end of his life, felt the warmest regard for his illustrious preceptor. At the same time, Fenelon preserved the disinterestedness of an hermit, and never received or asked any thing either for himself or friends. At last the king gave him the abbey of St. Valery, and, some months after, the archbishopric of Cambray, to which he was consecrated by Bossuet bishop of Meaux, in 1695.

But a storm now arose against him, which obliged him to leave the court for ever; and was occasioned by his book, entitled “An Explication of the Maxims of the Saints concerning the interior life.” This book was published in 1697, and was occasioned by the writings of madam Guyon, who pretended to a very high and exalted devotion. She explained this devotion in some books which she published, and wrote particularly a mystical exposition of Solomon’s Song. Fenelon, whose gentle disposition is said to have been strongly actuated by the lov of God, became a friend of madam Guyon, in whom he fancied he saw only a pure soul animated with feelings similar to his own. This occasioned several conferences between the bishop of Meaux, the bishop of Chalons, afterwards cardinal de Noailles, and Mr. Tronon, superior-general to the congregation of St. Sulpicius. Into these conferences, in which madam Guyon’s books were examined, Fenelon was admitted; but in the mean time began to write very secretly upon the subject under examination, and his writings tended to maintain or excuse madam Guyon’s books without naming her. This examination lasted seven or eight months, during which he wrote several letters to the examiners, which abounded with so many testimonies of submission, that they said they could not think God would deliver him over to a spirit of error. While the conferences lasted, the secret was inviolably kept with regard to Fenelon; the two bishops being as tender of his reputation, as they were zealous to reclaim him. He was soon after named archbishop of Cam bray, and yet continued with the same humility to press the two prelates to give a final sentence. They drew up thirty-four articles at Issi, and presented them to the new archbishop, who offered to sign them immediately; but they thought it more proper to leave them with him for a time, that he might examine them leisurely. He did so, and added to every one of the articles such limitations as enervated them entirely: however, he yielded at last, and signed the articles March 10, 1695. Bossuet wrote soon after an instruction designed to explain the articles of Issi, and desired Fenelon to approve it; but he refused, and let Bossuet know by a friend, that he could not approve a book which condemned madam Guyon, because he himself did not condemn her. It was in order to explain the system of the mystics that he wrote his book already mentioned. There was a sudden and general outcry against it, and the clamours coming to the king’s ear, his majesty expostulated with the prelates for having kept secret from him what they alone knew. The controversy was for some time carried on between the archbishop of Cambray and the bishop of Meaux. But as the latter insisted upon a positive recantation, Fenelon applied to the king, and represented to his majesty, that there were no other means to remove the offence which this controversy occasioned, than by appealing to the pope, Innocent XII. and therefore he begged leave to go himself to Rome. But the king sent him word, that it was sufficient to carry his cause thither, without going himself, and sent him to his diocese in August, 1697. When the question was brought before the consultators of the inquisition to be examined, they were divided in their opinions: but at last the pope condemned the book, with twenty-three propositions extracted from it, by a brief dated March 12, 1699. Yet, notwithstanding this censure, Innocent seems to have disapproved the violent proceedings against the author. He wrote thus to the prelates who distinguished themselves as adversaries to Fenelon: “Peccavit excessu amoris divini, sed vos peceastis defectu amoris proximi.” Some of Fenelon’s friends have pretended, that there was in this affair more courtpolicy than zeal for religion. They have observed, that this storm was raised against him at a time when the king thought of choosing an almoner for the duchess of Burgundy; and that there was no way of preventing him, who had been tutor to the duke her husband, and who had acquitted himself perfectly well in the functions of that post, from being made her almoner, but by raising suspicions of heresy against him. They think themselves sufficiently justified in this opinion, by Bossuet’s being made almoner after Fenelon was disgraced and removed. Be this as it will, he submitted patiently to the pope’s determination, and read his sentence, with his own recantation, publicly in his diocese of Cambray, where he led a most exemplary life, acquitting himself punctually in all the duties of his station. Yet he was not so much taken up with them, nor so deeply engaged in his contemplative devotion, but he found time to enter into the controversy with the Jansenists. He laboured not only to confute them by his writings, but also to oppress them, by procuring a bull from Rome against a book which the cardinal de Noailles, their chief support, had approved: namely, father Quesnel’s “Reflections upon the New Testament.” The Jesuits, who were resolved to humble that prelate, had formed a great party against him, and prevailed with the archbishop of Cambray to assist them in the affair. He accordingly engaged himself: wrote many pieces against the Jansenists, the chief of which is the “Four Pastoral Letters,” printed in 1704, at Valenciennes; and spared no pains to get the cardinal disgraced, and the book condemned, both which were at length effected.

But the work that has gained him the greatest reputation, and will render his name immortal, is his “Telemachus,” written, according to some, at court; according to others, in his retreat at Cambray. A servant whom Fenelon employed to transcribe it, took a copy for himself, and had proceeded in having it printed, to about 200 pages, when the king, Louis XIV. who was prejudiced against the author, ordered the work to be stopped, nor was it allowed to be printed in France while he lived. It was published, however, by Moetjons, a bookseller, in 1699, though prohibited at Paris; but the first correct edition appeared at the Hague in 1701. This elegant work completely ruined the credit of Fenelon at the court of France. The king considered it as a satire against his government; the malignant found in it allusions which the author probably had never intended. Calypso, they said, was madam de Montespan Eucharis, mademoiselle de Fontanges Antiope, the duchess of Burgundy Protesilaus, Louvois; Idomeneus, king James II. Sesostris, Louis XIV. The world, however, admired the flowing elegance of the style, the sublimity of the moral, and the happy adoption and embellishments of ancient stories; and critics were long divided, whether it might not be allowed the title of an epic poem, though written in prose. It is certain that few works have ever had a greater reputation. Editions have been multiplied in every country of Europe; but the most esteemed for correctness is that published from his papers by his family in 1717, 2 vols. 12mo. Splendid editions have been published in various places, and translations in all modern languages of Europe, modern Greek not excepted.

Fenelon passed the last years of his life in his diocese, in a manner worthy of a good archbishop, a man of letters, and a Christian philosopher. The amiableness of his manners and character obtained for him a respect, which was paid even by the enemies of his country; for in the last war with Louis XIV. the duke of Marlborough expressly ordered the lands of Fenelon to be spared. He died in January 1715, at the age of sixty-three.

He was a man of great learning, great genius, fine taste, and exemplary manners: yet many have suspected that he was not entirely sincere in his recantation of his “Maxims of the Saints;” a work composed by him with great care, and consisting, in great part, of extracts from the fathers. Yet, if we consider the profound veneration of a pious catholic bishop for the decisions of the church, the modesty and candour of his character, and even his precepts to the mystics, we shall be inclined to acquit him of the charge. He had said to these persons in that very book, “that those who had erred in fundamental doctrines, should not be contented to condemn their error, but should confess it, and give glory to Gocl; that they should have no shame at having erred, which is the common lot of humanity, but should humbly acknowledge their errors, which would be no longer such when they had been humbly confessed.” He has also been accused of ambition for his conduct in. the controversy, with the Jansenists, but the charge rests only on presumptive evidence, and is equally refuted by his general character. In his theology, he seems to give greater scope to feeling than to reason; but if he inclined to mysticism, and thus seemed to deviate from the established system of his church, he does not appear to have made the least approach to protestantism. On the contrary, no one has more forcibly inculcated the danger of putting the scriptures into the hands of the people (a fundamental tenet of popery), than Fenelon has done in his “Letter to the archbishop of Arras.” Submission to the decisions of the holy see is likewise exemplified in his whole conduct as well as in his writings. Indeed, Fenelon seems to have been one of those, who, either from early prepossessions, or from false reasonings upon human nature, or from an observation of the powerful impressions made by authority on the credulity, and a pompous ritual on the senses of the multitude, imagine, that Christianity, in its native form, is too pure and elevated for vulgar souls, and, therefore, countenance and maintain the absurdities of popery, from a notion of their utility.

Fenelon published several works besides his “'Telemachus,” and the “Explanation of the Maxims of the Saints,” already mentioned, which first appeared in 1697. These were, 1. “Dialogues of the Dead,” in two volumes, 12mo, composed for the use of the duke of Burgundy, and intended in general to cure him of some fault, or teach him some virtue. They were produced as the occasions arose, and not laboured, 2. “Dialogues on Eloquence in general, and that of the. Pulpit in particular,” 12mo, published in 1718, after his death. He there discusses the question, whether it is better to preach by memory, or extemporaneously with more or less preparation. The rules of eloquence are also delivered in a neat and easy manner. 3. “Abridgment of the Lives of the ancient Philosophers,” 12 mo, written for the duke of Burgundy, of which an excellent translation, with notes, was lately published by the rev. John Cormack, 1808, 2 vols. 12mo. 4. “A Treatise on the Education of Daughters,” 12mo, an excellent work. 5. “Philosophical Works, or a demonstration of the Existence of God, by proofs drawn from Nature,” 12mo; the best edition is of Paris, 1726. 5. “Letters on different subjects of Religion and Metaphysics,” 1718, 12mo. 6. “Spiritual Works,” 4 vols. 12mo. 7. “Sermons,” printed in 1744, 12mo the character of these discourses is rather pathetic writing than strong reasoning; the excellent disposition of Fenelon appears throughout; but they are unequal and negligent. He preached extemporaneously with facility, and his printed sermons are in the same style. 8. Several works in favour of the bull 41 Unigenitus,“against Jansenism. 9.” Direction for the Conscience of a king,“composed for the duke of Burgundy; a small tract, but much esteemed, published in 1748, and re-published in 1774. There is a splendid French edition of his works in 9 vols. 4to, Paris, 1787 1792; and one of his” OEuvres choices,“1799, 6 vols. 12mo. In 1&07 appeared at Paris a new volume of his” Sermons choisies," 12mo, which is said to do credit to his established reputation.

, a Roman historian, who died in the year 20, at the age of seventy, is mentioned by Pliny, Gellius, and many other ancient authors. He wrote annals in many books, the twenty-second book being cited by Nonius; also Archaics, and other works. A book on the magistrates of Rome, falsely attributed to him, is now known to be the production of Dominic Floccus, a Florentine, in the fifteenth century. It was published about 1480, 4to. FenestelJa’s “Fragmenta,” with notes, were published with Wasse’s Sallust, Cambridge, 1710.

, an eminent scholar and translator, was born at Montacute, in Somersetshire in his youth he was for some time a chorister, which gave him an opportunity of being instructed in Latin as well as music. Being afterwards sent to Winchester school for academical education, he was admitted of New college, Oxford, and chosen fellow in 1552, studying chiefly the civil law. In queen Mary’s reign he was made chief master of a noted free-school at St. Edmundsbury, in Suffolk, where he acquired great reputation as a teacher. This station he retained for some part of queen Elizabeth’s reign, but an information having been laid against him, as unqualified by the laws of the reformation, he was obliged to quit it. Some time after he went to Flanders, and afterwards to Rome, where he was admitted into the English college, studied theology for four years, and took orders. Returning afterwards to Flanders, he became confessor to the English nuns at Louvain, where he lived forty years, employing his leisure hours in translating several books favourable to the Roman catholic religion. He died at an advanced age, Dec. 27, 1615, with an excellent character from those of his persuasion, for learning and piety. His publications are, 1. “Vitae quorundam martyrum in Anglia,” which is inserted in Bridgwater’s “Concertatio Ecclesise Catholicae in Anglia.” 2. Several of bishop Fisher’s English works, translated into Latin. 3. “Catechismus Tridentinus,” translated into English. 4. Osorius’s treatise against Walter Haddon, translated into English, Louvain, 1568, 8vo. 5. “The Life of St. Catherine of Sienna,” from the Italian, 1609, 8vo. 6. “A Treatise on Tribulation,” from the Italian of Caccia Guerra. 7. “Mysteries of the Rosary,” from Caspar Loartes. Fuller says that he proceeded Bachelor of Laws at New college, till (in 1562) for his popish activity, he was ejected by the queen’s commissioners. Wood, who mentions this in his Annals, although not in his “Athens,” leaves it doubtful whether he did not resign it of his own accord.

, knt. an English antiquary, was born at Norwich, Nov. 26, 1739, and educated partly at Scarning, in Norfolk, and partly at Boresdale, in Suffolk, after which he was admitted of Gonville and Caius college, Cambridge, where he proceeded B. A. 1761, M. A. 1764, and was an honorary fellow till Jan. 1, 1766, when he married Ellenor, daughter of Sheppard Frere, esq. of Roydon, in Suffolk, by whom he had no issue. He was afterwards in the commission of the peace, and a deputy-­lieutenant, and served the office of sheriff for the county of Norfolk in 1791, with that propriety and decorum that distinguished all his actions; and he left a history of the duties of the office of sheriff, which might be serviceable to his successors. Among other things, he revived the painful duty of attending in person the execution of criminals, as adding to the solemnity and impressive awe of the scene; and he was the first to admit Roman catholics on juries, under the new statute for that purpose enacted. He died at East Dereham, Norfolk, Feb. 14, 1794.

Sir John Fenn distinguished himself early by his application to the study of our national history and antiquities, for which he had formed great collections, particularly that of Peter Le Neve, for the contiguous counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, from the wreck of that of Thomas Martin, to erect a monument to whose memory in the church where he was buried, he left a large sum of money. Among the rest was a large collection of original letters, written during the reigns of Henry VI. Edward IV. Richard III. and Henry VII. by such of the Paston family and others, who were personally present in court and camp, and were, in those times, persons of great consequence in the county of Norfolk. These letters contain many curious and authentic state anecdotes, relating not only to Norfolk, but to the kingdom in general. Two volumes of them were published in 1787, 4to, and dedicated by permission to his majesty, who rewarded the merit of the editor with the honour of knighthood. Two more volumes appeared in 1789, with notes and illustrations by sir John and a fifth was left nearly ready for the press, which, however, if we mistake not, has not yet been published. Though he contributed nothing to the “Archaeologia” of the Society of Antiquaries, of which he was a fellow, he was a benefactor to them, by drawing up “Three Chronological Tables” of their members, which were printed in a 4to pamphlet, 1734, for the use of the society. His biographer concludes his character with observing, that “if the inquisitive antiquary, the clear, faithful, and accurate writer, be justly valued by literary characters; the intelligent and upright magistrate, by the inhabitants of the county in which he resided; the informing and pleasing companion, the warm and steady friend, the honest and worthy man, the good and exemplary Christian, by those with whom he was cpnnected; the death of few individuals will be more sensibly felt, more generally regretted, or more sincerely lamented.”

, an eminent puritan divine, was born in 1660, and educated at Pembroke-hall, Cambridge, where he took his degree of M. A. and in 1622 was admitted to the same at Oxford. He afterwards took his degree of B. D. and became a preacher at Sedgeley, in Staffordshire. Here he continued for four years, and theu for some time appears to have officiated from place to place, without any promotion, until the earl of Warwick, who was his great friend and patron, presented him to the rectory of Rochford, in Essex, in 1629, which he held until his death, about 1640. Besides his popularity as a preacher, and as a casuist, which was very great, he derived no small posthumous reputation from the sermons and pious tracts which he wrote, none of which appear to have been published in his life-time. They were collected in 1658, in 1 vol. fol.

, an English navigator in the reign of Elizabeth, was descended from an ancient family in Nottinghamshire, where he had some property. This he sold, as did also his brother Geoffrey, being, it is said, more inclined to trust to their abilities, than the slender patrimony descended to them from their ancestors; and they were among the very few of those who take such daring resolutions in their youth, without living to repent of them in their old age. The inclination of Edward leading him to the choice of a military life, he served some time with reputation in Ireland; but upon sir Martin Frobisher’s report of the probability of discovering a northwest passage into the South seas, he resolved to embark with him in his second voyage, and was accordingly appointed captain of the Gabriel, a bark of twenty-five tons, in which he accompanied sir Martin in the summer of 1577, to the straits that now bear his name, but in their return he was separated from him in a storm, and arrived safely at Bristol, in a third expedition, which proved unsuccessful, he commanded the Judith, one of fifteen sail, and had the title of rear-admiral. The miscarriage of this voyage had not convinced Fenton of the impracticability of the project; he solicited another trial, and it was, after much application, granted him, though the particular object of this voyage is not easily discovered; his instructions from the privy-council, which are still preserved, say, that he should endeavour the discovery of a north-west passage, and yet he is told to go by the Cape of Good Hope to the East Indies, thence to the South seas, and to attempt his return by the supposed north-west passage, and not by any means to think of passing the Straits of Magellan, except in case of absolute necessity. The truth appears to be, he had interest enough to be allowed to try his fortune in the South-seas. He sailed in the spring 1582, with four vessels, and was making to Africa; thence he intended to sail to Brazil, in his course to the straits of Magellan, but having learnt that there was already a strong Spanish fleet there, he put into a Portuguese settlement, where he met with three of the Spanish squadron, gave them battle, and after a severe engagement, sunk their vice-admiral, and returned home in May 1583. Here he was well received, and appointed to the command of a ship sent out against the famous armada in 1588. In some accounts of this action he is said to have commanded the Antelope, in others, the Mary Rose; but his talents and bravery in the action are universally acknowledged, and it is certain he had a very distinguished share in those actions, the fame of which can never be forgotten. Little more is recorded of him, than that he spent the remainder of his days at or near Deptford, where he died in 1603. A monument was erected to his memory in the parish church of Deptford, at the expence of Richard earl of Cork, who had married his niece. According to Fuller, he died within a few days oi' his mistress, queen Elizabeth, and he remarks, “Observe how God set up a generation of military men both by sea and land, which began and expired with the reign of queen Elizabeth, like a suit of clothes made for her, and worn out with her; for providence designing a peaceable prince to succeed her, in whose time martial men would be rendered useless, so ordered the matter, that they all, almost, attended their mistress, before or after, within some short distance, unto her grave.” This, however, was not strictly true, for the celebrated earl of Nottingham, sir Charles Blount, sir George Carew, sir Walter Raleigh, sir William Monson, sir Robert Mansel, and other great officers by sea and land, survived queen Elizabeth.

, an eminent writer and statesman during the reigns of Elizabeth and James I. was brother to the preceding, but the time of his birth does not appear. He was certainly educated liberally, though we cannot tell where; since, while a young man, he gave many proofs of his acquaintance with ancient and modern learning, and of his being perfectly versed in the French, Spanish, and Italian languages. He is well known for a translation from the Italian of “The History of the Wars of Italy, by Guicciardini,” the dedication of which to queen Elizabeth bears date Jan. 7, 1579. This was, however, his last work. He had published before, 1. “Certaine Tragical Discourses written oute of French and Latin,” 1567, 4to, reprinted 1579. Neither Ames nor Tanner appear to have seen the first edition. The work is, says Warton, in point of selection and size, perhaps the most capital miscellany of the kind, a. e. of tragical novels. Among the recommendatory poems prefixed is one from Turberville. Most of the stories are on Italian subjects, and many from Bandello. 2. “An Account of a Dispute at Paris, between two Doctors of the Sorbonne, and two Ministers of God’s Word,”1571, a translation. 3. “An Epistle, or Godly Admonition, sent to the Pastors of the Flemish Church in Antwerp, exhorting them to concord with other Ministers: written by Antony de Carro, 1578,” a translation. 4. “Golden Epistles; containing variety of discourses, both moral, philosophical, and divine, gathered as well out of the remainder of Guevara’s works, as other authors, Latin, French, and Italian. Newly corrected and amended. Mon heur viendra, 1577.” The familiar epistles of Guevara had been published in English, by one Edward Hellowes, in 1574; but this collection of Fenton’s consists of such pieces as were not contained in that work. The epistle dedicatory is to the right honourable and vertuous lady Anne, countess of Oxen ford; and is dated from the author’s chamber in the Blackfriars, London, Feb. 4, 1575. This lady was the daughter of William Cecil lord Burleigh; and it appears from the dedication, that her noble father was our author’s best patron. Perhaps his chief purpose in translating and publishing this work, was to testify his warm zeal and absolute attachment to that great minister.

"What the inducements were, which engaged him to leave his own country, in order to serve the queen in Irelaud, cannot easily be discovered; it is, however, certain that he went thither well recommended, and that being in particular favour with Arthur lord Grey, then lord deputy in that kingdom, he was sworn of the privy-council about 1581. It is more than probable that his interest might be considerably strengthened by his marriage with Alice, the daughter of Dr. Robert Weston, some time lord chancellor of Ireland, and dean of the arches in England, a man of great parts, and who had no small credit with the earl of Leicester, and other statesmen in the court of Elizabeth; and when he was once fixed in the office of secretary, his own great abilities and superior understanding made him so useful to succeeding governors, that none of the changes to which that government was too much subject in those days, wrought any alteration in his fortune. One thing, indeed, might greatly contribute to this, which was the stron<r interest he found means to raise, and never was at a loss to maintain, in England; so that whoever was lord lieutenant in Ireland, sir Geoffrey Fenton continued the queen’s counsellor there, as a man upon whom she depended, from whom she took her notions of state affairs in that island, and whose credit with her was not to be shaken by the artifices of any faction whatever. He took every opportunity of persuading the queen that the Irish were to be governed only by the rules of strict justice, and that the safety and glory of her government in that island depended on her subjects enjoying equal laws and protection of their property. The queen frequently sent for her secretary Fenton, to consult with him on her Irish affairs, which shews the high opinion she entertained of his understanding, though it often happened that when he was returned to his duty, the advisers of Elizabeth persuaded her to adopt measures the reverse of what Fenton had recommended. He was the means of extinguishing more than one rebellion, and of totally reducing the kingdom to submit to English government.

In 1603, sir Geoffrey married his only daughter Katherine to Mr. Boyle, afterwards the great earl of Corke; and died at his house in Dublin, Oct. 19, 1608. He was interred with much funeral solemnity at the cathedral church of St. Patrick, in the same tomb with his wife’s father, the lord chancellor Weston; leaving behind him the character of a polite writer, an accomplished courtier, an able statesman, and a true friend to the English nation, and protestant interest in Ireland. His translation of Guicciardini, and his Guevara’s Epistles, have lately risen in price, since the language of the Elizabethan period has been more studied; and the style of Fenton, like that of most of his contemporaries, is far superior to that of the authors of the succeeding reign, if we except Raleigh and Knowlles.

, an ingenious English poet, was born at Shelton, near Newcastle-under-Line, in Staffordshire, May 20, 1683. His father, who was possessed of a competent estate, was of an ancient family in that county, an attorney at. law, and one of the coroners for the county of Stafford. He died in 1691, aged fifty-six. His mother is said to have descended in a direct line from one Mare, an officer irv the army of William the Conqueror. Being the youngest of twelve children, he was necessarily destined to some lucrative employment, and the church was fixed upon for his future profession. Accordingly, after going through a proper course of grammatical education, he was, July 1, 1700, admitted a pensioner of Jesus college, Cambridge, where he prosecuted his studies with remarkable diligence and assiduity; but after taking his bachelor’s degree, in 1704, he inclined to the sentiments of the nonjurors of that time, and consequently refusing to take the oaths to government, was obliged to quit the university, which, however, he is said to have done without separating from the church.

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

His next engagement was with Pope himself, who after the great success of his translation of the Iliad, undertook that of the Odyssey, and determined to engage auxiliaries. Twelve books he took to himself, and twelve he distributed between Broome and Fenton. According to Johnson and Warton, Fenton translated the first, fourth, nineteenth and twentieth. But John, earl of Orrery, in a letter to Mr. Duncombe, asserts that Fenton translated double the number of books in the Odyssey that Pope has owned. “His reward,” adds the noble writer, “was a trifle, an arrant trifle. He has even told me, that he thought Pope feared him more than he loved him. He had no opinion of Pope’s heart, and declared him, in the words of bishop Atterbury, Mens curia in corpore curvo.” It is, however, no small praise to both Fen tun and Broome, that the readers of poetry have never been able to distinguish their books from those of Pope. In 1723, Fenton’s tragedy of “Mariamne” was brought on the stage in Lincoln’s-inn-fields, and was performed with such success, that the profits of the author are said to have amounted to nearly a thousand pounds, with which he very honourably discharged the debts contracted by his fruitless attendance on Mr. St. John. The poetical merit of this tragedy is confessedly great, but the diction is too figurative and ornamental. Colley Cibber has been termed insolent for advising Fenton to relinquish poetry, by which we presume he meant dramatic poetry; but Cibber, if insolent, was not injudicious, for Mariamne has not held its place on the stage, In 1 1727, Fenton revised a new edition of Milton’s Poems, and prefixed to it a short but elegant and impartial life of the author. In 1729 he published a very splendid edition of Waller, with notes, which is still a book of considerable value.

The latter part of Mr. Fenton' s life was passed in a manner agreeable to his wishes. By the recommendation of Pope to the widow of sir William Trumbull, that lady invited him to be tutor to her son, first at home, and afterwards at Cambridge; and when disengaged from this attendance on her son, lady Trumbull retained Fenton in her family, as auditor of her accounts, an office which was probably easy, as he had leisure to make frequent excursions to visit his literary friends in London. He died July 13, 1730, at East-Hampstead, in Berkshire, lady Trumbull’s seat, and was interred in the parish-church, and his tomb was honoured with an epitaph by Pope. In person, Fenton was tall and bulky, inclined to corpulence, which he did not lessen by much exercise, as he was sluggish and sedentary, rose late, and when he had risen, sat down to his book or papers. By a woman who once waited on him in a lodging, he was told, that he would “lie a-bed, and be fed with a spoon.” Pope says in one of his letters, that he died of indolence and inactivity; others attribute his death to the gout; to which lord Orrery adds, “a great chair, and two bottles of port in a day.” Dr. Johnson observes, that “Of his morals and his conversation, the account is uniform. He was never named but with praise and fondness, as a man in the highest degree amiable and excellent. Such was the character given him by the earl of Orrery, his pupil such is the testimony of Pope; and such were the suffrages of all who could boast of his acquaintance.” There is a story relating to him, which reflects too much honour upon his memory to be omitted. It was his custom in the latter part of his life, to pay a yearly visit to his relations in the country. An entertainment being made for the family by Jiis elder brother, he observed that one of his sisters, who had been unfortunate in her marriage, was absent; and, upon inquiry, he found that distress had made her thought unworthy of an invitation; but he refused to sit at the table until she was sent for and, when she had taken her place, he was careful to shew her particular attention.