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

, or familiarly in this country Stephens, and in France Estienne, the first of an illustrious family of printers, was born at Paris in 1470; and began the business of printing about 1503, in which year appeared the abridgment of the Arithmetic of Boethius, which is the first work known to have issued from his press. His printing-house was in the rue de Tecole de Droit, and his mark the old arms of the university, with the device, plus olei quam vini. His great object was correctness, and besides reading the proofs himself with the greatest care, he submitted them to the learned men who visited him. If, notwithstanding these pains, any mistakes occurred, he informed the reader, by an “errata,” an attention which he is said to have been the first who paid. He died at Paris, according to his biographers, July 24, 1520; but this has been doubted, as not agreeing with the date of the last work he printed. He left three sons, all printers, Francis, Robert, and Charles. His widow married Simon de Colines, or Colinseus, his partner. Among the works he executed^ which are in greatest request, are the “Psalterium quintuplex,” 1509 and 1513 the “Itinerarium” of Antoninus, 1512, and Mara “De Tribus fugiendis,” &c.

These favours, however honourable to the king’s taste and discernment, were ultimately of disadvantage to Robert, by exciting the jealousy of the Sorbonnists, who could not endure that his majesty should bestow his confidence on a man whom they suspected of being unsound in the faith, and therefore sought occasion to convict him of heresy. Grounds for this they thought were to be found in the new edition of the Bible which Robert published in 1545, and which had a double Latin version, and the notes of Vatablus. Leo Juda, well known to be a Zuinglian, was the translator of one of these versions; and they farther alleged that Robert had corrupted the notes of Vatablus. This was, in those days, a serious accusation, and the king had again to interpose between him and his enemies. His majesty died about this time, and Robert, as a mark of gratitude, printed with particular care, Duchatel’s funeral oration on Francis L in which that orator happened to say that the king was “translated from the present life to eternal glory.” This expression, although common in every eulogium of the kind, was now made the subject of an accusation by the Sorbonnists, who asserted that it was contrary to the doctrine of the church respecting purgatory. Robert, therefore, soon perceived that he could no longer depend on the protection he had hitherto received, and after some years struggling against the machinations of his enemies, determined to remove to Geneva with his family. He accordingly took his leave of Paris, and arrived at Geneva in the beginning of 1552. There he printed the same year, in partnership with his brother-in-law Conrad Radius, the New Testament in French. He afterwards set up a printing-house of his own, from which some valuable works issued. He was chosen a burgher of Geneva in 1556, and died there Sept. 7, 1559. Robert is said to have been a man of a firm and decided character; but it has been objected by his popish biographers, that he did not allow that liberty to other* which he had taken himself, and that he disinherited one of his children for not embracing the reformed religion. Beza, Dorat, and St. Marthe, have given him the highest character. Thuanus places him above Aldus Manutius, and Froben, and asserts that the Christian world was more indebted to him than to all the great conquerors it had produced, and that he contributed more to immortalize the reign of Francis I. than all the renowned actions of that prince. His mark was an olive with branches, and the device, Noli altum sapere, to which sometimes were added the words sed time. The works he executed as King’s printer, are marked with a lance, round which a serpent is entwined, and a branch of olive, and underneath a verse of Homer, “B<nXi raya&ia xgaltfjca r‘ai%/*>iV’” to the good king and the valiant soldier.“All the printers who afterwards were permitted to use the royal Greek types adopted the same emblems. The works which he printed at Geneva are marked only with the olive, and these words, Oliva Roberti Stephani. It was not Robert, however, as has been commonly said, who first divided the Bible into verses, which he is said to have done inter equitandum, while riding from Paris to Lyons. That mode of division had been used in the Latin Bible of Pagninus in 1527, 4to, in the” Psalterium quintuples," 1509, and in other works. Another report concerning him is untrue, namely, that when he left Paris, he carried with him the Greek types belonging to the royal printing-house. The fact seems to have been that the matrices employed in casting those types were already at Geneva, and were the property of the family of Robert, and probably given to him by Francis I.; for when the French clergy in 1619 were about to reprint the Greek fathers, they requested that the king would demand of the state of Geneva the matrices used in casting the Greek types for Francis I. The answer was, that they might be bought for the sum of 3000 livres, to be paid either to the state of Geneva, or to the heirs of Robert Stephens.

Among the finest editions from the press of Robert are, 1. His Hebrew Bibles, 4 vols. 4to, and 8 vols. 16mo. 2. The Latin Bible, 1538 — 40, fol. of which the large paper copies are principally valued. 3. The Greek New Testament, 1530, fol. one of the most beautiful books ever printed; to which may be added the small editions of 1546 and 1549, usually called the O mirifcam, the first two words of the preface. That of 1549 is the most correct. 4. “Historiae ecclesiastics scriptores, Eusebii preparatio et demonstratio evangelica,” Gr. 1544, 2 vols. fol: this is the first work published with Garamond’s new Greek types. 5. The works of Cicero, Terence, Plautus, &c. &,c. Besides the prefaces and notes with which Robert introduced or illustrated various works, he is deemed the author of the following: 1. “Thesaurus Linguae Latinae,” before mentioned, which has been often reprinted. One of the best of the modern editions is that of London, 1734 5, 4 vols. fol. and the last is Gessner’s, Leipsic, 1749, 4 vols, fol. 2. “Dictionarium Latino-Gallicum,” Paris, 1543, 2 vols. fol. He published an abridgment of this for young people. 3. “Ad censuras Theologorum Parisiensium quibus Biblia a Roberto Stephano excusa calumniose notarunr, responsio,” Geneva, 1552, 8vo. The same year a French edition of this was published; it forms a very able answer to the calumnies of his enemies the Sorbonnists. 4. “Gallicae grammatices libellus,” ibid. 1558, 8vo, and a “Grammaire Frangaise,” 1558, 8vo. He intended to have published a commentary on the Bible, and had engaged the assistance of the celebrated divine Marlorat; he also had projected a Greek Thesaurus, but the honour of that work was reserved for his son Henry, to whom he gave what materials he had collected. Robert had several sons, of whom Henry, Robert, and Francis, will be noticed hereafter, and a daughter, Catherine, who was married to Jacquelin, a royal notary of Paris.

In our account of Robert Stephens, we mentioned his intention of publishing a Greek Thesaurus: this was now accomplished by his son, after twelve years incessant labour, and is alone a sufficient monument of his erudition. The learned bestowed the highest commendation, but the great price which he was obliged to fix upon it to indemnify himself is said to have retarded the sale, and he was still a more serious sufferer by the plagiarism of Scapula (See Scapula), which indeed completed his ruin. He was not, however, without friends or resources. He went after this affair into Germany, and although he had been neglected by his countrymen, did not cease by his writings to do honour to France in foreign countries. This conduct recommended him to the favour of Henry III. who gave him a present of 3000 livres for his work on the excellence of the French language, and a pension of 300 livres to assist him in collating manuscripts. He also invited him to reside at his court, often admitted him into his councils, and gave him grants for considerable sums; but these sums were either ill-paid, or not sufficient to extricate our author from his difficulties, and he resolved therefore to leave the court. He now commenced a kind of wandering life, residing for short spaces of time at Orleans, Paris, Francfort, Geneva, and Lyons, and exhausting his poor finances. During the last journey he made to Lyons, he was seized with sickness, and carried to the hospital, where he died in the month of March, 1598, after having been for some time in a state of derangement.

Such was the melancholy end of one of the most learned men of his time, and one of the greatest benefactors to literature. The unfortunate circumstances of his life prevented him from bestowing the same attention which his father had to the typographical beauty of the works which issued from his press; but he published a great many which do not yield to Robert’s in point of correctness. To all his editions he prefixed learned prefaces, illustrated them by short and judicious notes, and they have generally formed the basis of all future reprints. Some modern critics, of Germany chiefly, have attacked his fidelity as an editor, and accused him of having introduced readings not justified by the authority of manuscripts; but he has been very ably defended against this charge by Wyttembach, in the preface to his edition of Plutarch’s morals. Henry had great facility in writing Latin poetry, which he often composed almost extempore, while walking, riding, or conversing with his friends. He had a correspondence with all the learned of Europe; but had seme little alloy in his character. He was rather impatient of contradiction, and too frequently indulged his epigrammatic turn at the expence of those who could not accede to his opinions. Among the ancient authors which he published, with notes, we may mention the “Poet. Gracci, principes heroici carminis,” 1566, fol. a magnificent collection, which is every day rising in price; “Pindari et casterorum octo Grfficorum carmina,” 1560, 1566, 1586, 24mo: to these we may add Maximus Tyrius, Diodorus, Xenophon, Thucydides, Hefodotus, Sophocles, ^schylus, Diogenes Laertius, Plutarch, Apollonius Rhotlius, Callimachus, Plato, Herodian, and Appian; Horace, Virgil, the younger Pliny, Aulus Gellius, Macrobius, and a collection of the Latin historians; but his taste most inclined to Greek literature, and from that language he has furnished us with Latin translations of Anacreon, Theocritus, Bion and Moschus, Pindar, Sextus Empiricus; Æschylus, Sophocles, &c. &e. and all his translations, extensive as they are, are allowed to be excellent.

The most valued of his own works, original or compiled, are, 1. “Ciceronianum Lexicon Graeco-Latinum,” Paris, 1557, 8vo. 2. “In Ciceronis quamplurimos locos castigationes,” ibid. 1557, 8vo; this is usually printed with th former. 3. “Admonitio de abusu linguae Graecae in quibusdam vocibus quas Latina usurpat,” 1563, 8vo; of this there was a new edition by Koloff and Kromayer, Berlin, 1736, 8vo. 4. “Fragmenta poetarum veterum Latinorum, quorum opera non extant,” 1564, 8vo. 5. “Dictionarium medicum,” 1564, 8vo. 6. “Introduction au traite de la conformite des merveilles anciennes avec les modernes, ou Traite preparatif a l'apologie pour Herodote,” 1566, 8vo, of great rarity and value, and the only edition in which the text was not altered, as was the case in the subsequent ones, of which there were about twelve before 1607. Duchet published a new edition at the Hague in 1733, 3 vols. 8vo. We have mentioned the author’s fears respecting his being known to have written it, but in fact he never was discovered, nor is there any truth in the story of his having been obliged to fly from the city, and take refuge in the mountains of Auvergne. 7. “Traite de la conformite du langage Francois avec le Grec,” 8vo, without date. The second edition, of Paris, 1569, was cancelled in some places, which makes the other the more valuable. 8. “Artis typographicae querimonia de illiteratis quibusdam typographis,” 1569, 4to. This little poem, for such it is, has been added to those published by Almeloveen and Maittaire, and there is a recent edition by Lottin, printed at Paris in 1785, 4to, with a French translation, and the genealogy of the Stephani, from 1500. 9. “Epistola qua ad multas multorum amicorum respondet de suas typographic statu, nominatimque de suo Thesauro linguae Graecoe,” 1569, 8vo, reprinted also by Almeloveen and Maittaire. 10. “Comicoruin Graecorum sententiae,” 1569, 12mo. 11. “Epigrammata Graeca selectaex Anthologia interpretata ad verbum et carmina,” 1570, 8vo. 12. “Thesaurus Grsecae linguae,” 1572, 4 vols. fol. with which is connected the “Glossariaduo,” &C.1573, fol. Of this celebrated work it is unnecessary to say much, as it is so well known to the learned in Europe, and to others information vvoxild be unnecessary. Maittaire was of opinion that Henry published a second edition, but has not discovered the date. Niceron thinks he only printed a new title for the unsold copies, with an epigram on Scapula. But Brunet, after examining a great many copies, both with the first and second titles, inclines to the existence of a second edition. Of late a spirited invitation has been held out to public taste and liberality by Messrs. Valpy, who have undertaken a nevr edition, with improvements and every lover of literature, every scholar anxious for the honour of his country must wish them success. 13. “Virtutum encomia, sive gnomas de virtutibus,” 1575, 12mo. 14. “Francofordiense emporium, sive Francofordienses nundinse,” 1574, 8vo. This collection of prose and verse pieces, which he calls “merchandize,” is but little known. 15. “Discours merveilleux de la vie et deportments de la reine Catherine de Medecis,” 1575, 8vo. This satire, translated in 1575, by a protestant writer, into Latin, with the title of “Legenda sanctae Catharinae JMediceas,” is attributed to Henry Stephens, and has been often reprinted. 16. “De Latinitate falso suspecta expostulatio, necnon de Plauti Latinitate dissertatio,” 1576, 8vo. This is a hit at the Ciceronians, or those who undervalue all Latin that is not borrowed from Cicero. 17. “Pseudo-Cicero, dialogus in quo de multis ad Ciceronis sermonem pertinentibus, de delectu editionum ejus, et cautione in eo legendo,” 1577, 8vo. 18. “Schediasmatum variorum, id est, observationum, &c. libri tres,” 1578, 8vo. These three books of critical remarks bear the names of the first three months of the year, and three others were added in 1589, but this second part is very rare. Gruter, however, has inserted it in the supplement to vol. V. of his “Thesaurus criticus.” 19. “ Nizolio-Didascalus, sive monitor Ciceronianorum-Nizoliandrum dialogus,” 1578, 8vo. (See Nizolius). 20. “Deux dialogues du nouveau Frangois Italianize” et autrement deguise entre les courtesans de ce temps,“3vo, no date, but printed, as Brunet thinks, in 1579, by Patisson, and reprinted at Antwerp the same year in 12mo. 21.” Projet de livre intitule de la precellence du langage Frangois,“1579, 8vo, a curious and very rare work, for which, as we have noticed, the king rewarded him. 22.” Paralipojnena grammaticarum GrEecae linguae institutionum,“1581, 8vo. 23.” Hypomneses de Gallica lingua,“1582, 8vo, and inserted also in his father’s French grammar. 24.” De criticis veteribus Grsecis et Latinis, eorumque variis apud poetas potissimurn reprehensionibus dissertatio,“1587, 4to. 25.” Les premices, ou le premier livre des proverbes epigrammatises, ou des epigrammes proverbiales rangees ea lieux communs,“1593, 8vo. 26.” De Lipsii Latinitate palestra," Francfort, 1595, 8vo.

Anthony is said to have been the last branch of the illustrious family of the Stephani, who were at once the ornament and the reproach of the age in which they lived. They were all men of great learning, all extensive benefactors to literature, and all persecuted or unfortunate.

, an English poet and statesman, was descended from a family at Pendigrast in Pembrokeshire, but born at London in 1663. It has been conjectured that he was either son or grandson of Charles third son of sir John Stepney, the first baronet of that family: Mr. Cole says his father was a grocer. He received his education at Westminster-school, and was removed thence to Trinity-college, Cambridge, in 1682; where he took his degree of A.B. in 1685, and that of M.A. in 1689. Being of the same standing with Charles Montague, esq. afterwards earl of Halifax, a strict friendship grew up between them, and they came to London together, and are said to have been introduced into public life by the duke of Dorset. To this fortunate incident was owing all the preferment Stepney afterwards enjoyed, who is supposed not to have had parts sufficient to have risen to any distinction, without such patronage. When Stepney first set out in life, he seems to have been attached to the tory interest; for one of the first poems he wrote was an address to James II. upon his accession to the throne. Soon after, when Monmouth’s rebellion broke out, the Cambridge men, to shew their zeal for the king, thought proper to burn the picture of that prince, who had formerly been chancellor of the university, and on this occasion Stepney wrote some good verses in his praise. Upon the Revolution, he embraced another interest, and procured himself to be nominated to several foreign embassies. In 1692 he went to the elector of Brandenburg’s court, in quality of envoy; in 1693, to the Imperial court, in the same character; in 1694, to the elector of Saxony; and, two years after, to the electors of Mentz, Cologn, and the congress at Francfort; in 1698, a second time to Brandenburg; in 1699, to the king of Poland; in 1701, again to the emperor; and in 1706, to the States General; and in all his negotiations, is said to have been successful. In 1697 he was made one of the commissioners of trade. He died at Chelsea in 1707, and was buried in Westminster-abbey; where a fine monument was erected over him, with a pompous inscription. At his leisure hours he composed poetical pieces, which are republished in the general collection of English poets. He likewise wrote some political pieces in prose, particularly, “An Essay on the present interest of England, in 1701: to which are added, the proceedings of the House of Commons in 1677, upon the French king’s progress in Flanders.” This is reprinted in the collection of tracts, called “Lord Somers’s collection.”

“He apparently professed himself a poet, and added his name to those of the other wits in the version of Juvenal but he is a very licentious translator, and does not recompense his neglect of the author by beauties of” his own. lu his original poems, now and then, a happy line may perhaps be found, and now and then a short composition nun give pleasure. But there is in the whole little either of the grace of wit, or the vigour of nature."

The works of few men, however, attracted more notice than those of Sterne during their publication from 1759 to the time of his death. He appeared an humourist of great originality, and became the founder of a school of sentimental writers which may be said still to rlouiish. Certainly no man ever delineated the feelings of a tender heart, the sweetness of compassion, and the duties of humanity, in more elegant or striking colours, although he was grossly deficient in that practice which is above all language and all expression.

The complete version was first printed in 1562, by John Day, entitled “The whole book of Psalms, Collected into English metre by T. Sternhold, J. Hopkins, and others, conferred with the Ebrue; with apt notes to sing them withall:” Heylin, who seems to have a singular aversion to psalmody, says that “this was a device first taken up in France by one Clement Marot,” but this is a mistake. Luther, and before his time, John Huss, ajid the Bohemian brethren, had metrical psalms and hymns in the German language, which they sung to what Dr. Burncy calls unisonous and syllabic tunes, that were either adopted or imitated by all posterior reformers. In ibe edition of 1562 the tunes are chiefly German, and still used on the continent by Lutherans and Calvinists, as appears by c-iiaiion, particularly the melodies set to the Uth, 14th, 113th, 121-th, U7th, and l.vuii Psalms.

Whether these letters were translated from the French, as the title-page imports, or were the xvork of Mr. Stevens himself, “it is not,” says his learned biographer, “material to inquire. The object of this publication was to offer some observations on the doctor’s proposals, and to point out the supposed evil tendency of the plan.” In this, as we have noticed in our account of Dr. Kennicott, Mr. Stevens was not singular, and if he erred, he did not err alone in his judgment upon the points at issue. Although Mr. Stevens would never announce himself as the author of any of the preceding works, he collected them at the earnest solicitation of his friends, into a volume, which, with his characteristic humility, he entitled “OvSevo; efya,” “The Works of Nobody,” and gave copies in presents to his friends.

In 1800, he was again induced to enter the fields of controversy, in defence of the opinions partly of his relation bishop Home, and partly of his friend Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones, in his life of bishop Home, had adverted to that prelate’s acquaintance with the writings of Htitchinson; but before a second edition was wanted, some writers had attacked the character of Dr. Home, as an Hutthinsonian and Mr. Jones therefore, in the new edition of the life, published in 1799, introduced a long preface^ vindicating the bishop, and shewing that the Hutchinsonian plan was consistent with the Holy Scriptures. This preface being reviewed in the British Critic in a manner by no means satisfactory to the supporters of Hutchinsonian opinions, or the friends of Mr. Jones (who died about this time), Mr. Stevens, with all the ardour of friendship, and with all the ability and spirit which had distinguished him in his earlier years, published under the name of Ain, the Hebrew word for Nobody, “A Review of the Review of a new Preface to the second edition of Mr. Jones’s Life of bishop Home.”

The transit of Venus took place; the astronomers returned, who had viewed the curious phenomenon, from the most distant stations: and no very satisfactory result was obtained from a comparison of their observations. Dr. Stewart then resolved to apply the principles he had already laid down and in 1763 pnblisned his essay on the “Sun’s Distance,” where the computation being actually made, the parallax of the sun was found to be no more than 6“9, and consequently his distance almost 29,875 semidiameters of the earth, or nearly 119 millions of miles. A determination of the sun’s distance, that so far exceeded all former estimations of it, was received with surprise, and the reasoning on which it was founded was likely to undergo a severe examination. But, even among astronomers, it was not every one who could judge in a matter of such difficult discussion. Accordingly, it was not till about five years after the publication of the sun’s distance, that there appeared a pamphlet, under the title of” Four Propositions," intended to point out certain errors in Dr. Stewart’s investigation, which had given a result much greater than the truth. From his desire of simplifying, and of employing only the geometrical method of reasoning, he was reduced to the necessity of rejecting quantities, which were considerable enough to have a great effect on the last result. An error was thus introduced, which, had it not been for certain compensations, would have become immediately obvious, by giving the sun’s distance near three times as great as that which has been mentioned.

The habits of study, in a man of original genius, are objects of curiosity, and deserve to he remembered. Concerning those of Dr. Stewart, his writings have made it unnecessary to remark, that from his youth he had been accustomed to the most intense and continued application. In consequence of this application, added to the natural Vigour of his mind, he retained the memory of his discoveries in a manner that will hardly be believed. He seldom wrote down any of his investigations, till it became necessary to do so for the purpose of publication. When he discovered any proposition, he would set down the enunciation with great accuracy, and on the same piece of paper would construct very neatly the figure to which it referred. To these he trusted for recalling to his mind, at any future period, the demonstration, or the analysis, however complicated it might be. Experience had taught him that he might place this confidence in himself without any danger of disappointment; and for this singular power he was probably more indebted to the activity of his invention, than to the mere tenaciousness of his memory. Though Dr. Stewart was extremely studious, he read but few hooks, and thus verified the observation of D'Alembert, that, of all the men of letters, mathematicians read least of the writings of one another. Our author’s own investigations occupied him sufficiently; and indeed the world would have had reason to regret the misapplication of his talents, had he employed, in the mere acquisition of knowledge, that time which he could dedicate to works of invention.

, a protestant minister, and very skilful mathematician, was born at Eslingen, a town in Germany; and died at Jena in Thuringia, in I 567, at fifty-eight years of age, according to Vossius, but some others say eighty. Stitels was one of the best mathematicians ol his time. He published, in the German language, a treatise on algebra, and another on the Calendar or ecclesiastical computation. But his chief work is the “Arithmetica Integra,” a complete and exct llent treatise, in Latin, on Arithmetic and Algebra, printed in 4to, at Norimberg, 1544. In this work there are a number of ingenious inventions, both in common arithmetic, and in algebra, and many curious things, some of which have been ascribed to a much later date, such as the triangular table for constructing progressional and figurate numbers, logarithms, &c. Stifels was a zealous, but weak uisciple of Luther, and took it into his head to become a prophet. He predicted that the end of the world would happen on a certain day in 1553, by which he terrified many people, but lived to see its fallacy, and to experience the resentment of those whom he had deluded.

About 1654 he left the university to accept the invitation of sir Roger Burgoyne, who wished him to reside with him at his seat at Wroxhall, in Warwickshire He had been recommended by Dr. Hainan, one of the fellows 01 his college, but in what capacity, whether as chaplain or companion, does not appear. Sir Roger was a man of piety and learning, and became afterwards a very kind friend and patron to Mr. Stillingfleet, yet parted with him very readily next year, when he was invited to Nottingham to be tutor to the hon. Francis Pierrepoint, esq. brother to the marquis of Dorchester. In 1656 he completed his master’s degree, and the following year left Nottingham, and went again to Wroxfoail, where his patron, sir Roger Burgoyne, presented him to the living of Sutton, in Bedfordshire. Before institution he received orders at the hands of Dr. Brownrig, the ejected bishop of Exeter.

While at Nottingham, as tutor to Mr. Pierrepoint, he composed his first publication, and printed it in 1659, under the title of “Irenicum, a weapon-salve for the church’s wounds, or the divine right of particular forms of churchgovernment discussed and examined according to the principles of the law of nature; the positive laws of God; the practice of the apostles; and the primitive church; and the judgment of reformed divines, whereby a foundation is laid for the church’s peace, and the accommodation of our present differences.” As this was an attempt to promote the return of the non-conformists to the church, and consequently implied some concessions which were irreconcilable with the divine right of episcopacy, for which the adherents of the church contended, and yet not enough to please either presbyterians or independents, the author had not the satisfaction of meeting with full credit even for his intentions; and upon more mature consideration, he himself thought his labour in vain, and did not scruple afterwards to say of his work, that “there are many things in it, which, if he were to write again, he would not say; some, which shew his youth, and want of due consideration; others, which he yielded too far, in hopes of gaining the dissenting parties to the church of England.” In 1662 he reprinted this work; with the addition of a discourse “concerning the power of Excommunication in a Christian Church” in which he attempts to prove, that “the church is a distinct society from the state, and has divers rights and privileges of its own, particularly that it has a power of censuring offenders, resulting from its constitution as a Christian society; and that these rights of the church cannot be alienated to the state, after their being united, in a Christian country.”

At Sutton, while he performed all the duties of a diligent and faithful pastor, he adhered closely to his studies, and in 1662, produced his “Origines Sacræ; or a rational account of the Christian Faith, as to the truth and divine authority of the Scriptures, and the matters therein contained,” 4to. The highest compliment paid him in consequence of this very learned work, was at a visitation, when bishop Sanderson, his diocesan, hearing his name called over, asked him if he was any relation to the great Stillingfleet, author of the Origines Sacræ? When modestly informed that he was the very man, the bishop welcomed him with great cordiality, and said, that “he expected rather to have seen one as considerable for his years as he had already shewn himself for his learning.” This work has indeed been always justly esteemed one of the ablest defences of revealed religion that had then appeared in any language. It was republished by Dr. Bentley in 1709, with “Part of another book upon the same subject, written in 1697, from the author’s own manuscript,” folio. Bishop Sanderson, as a special mark of his respect, granted the author a licence to preach throughout his diocese; and Henchman, bishop of London, conceived so high an opinion of his talents, that he employed him to write a vindication of archbishop Laud’s conference with Fisher, the Jesuit. Laud’s conference had been attacked in a publication entitled “Labyrinthus Cantuariensis, or, Dr. Laud’s Labyrinth, by T. C.” said to have been printed at Paris, in 1658, but which did not appear till 1663. Stillingfleet’s answer was entitled “A rational account of the grounds of the Protestant Religion; being a vindication of the lord archbishop of Canterbury’s relation of a conference,” &c. Lond. 1664, fol. Such was his readiness in composition, that he is reported to have sent to the press six or seven sheets a week of this volume, which Dr. Tillotson said he “found in every part answerable to its title, a rational account.”

In 1685, he published his “Origines Britannicæ,” or the antiquities of British Churches, a work of great learning, and in which he displayed a knowledge of antiquities, both civil and ecclesiastical, which would almost induce the reader to think they had been the study of his whole life. Just before the revolution, he was summoned to appear before king James’s ecclesiastical commission, but had the courage, in that critical time, to draw up a discourse on the illegality of that commission, which was published in 1689.

His writings were all collected, and reprinted in 1710, in 6 vols. folio. The first contains, 1. “Fifty Sermons, preached on several occasions,” with the author’s life. The second, 2. “Origines Sacræ” 3 “Letter to a Deist,” written, as he tells us in the preface, for the satisfaction of a particular person, who owned the Being and Providence of God, but expressed a mean esteem of the scriptures and the Christian religion. 4. “Irenicum: the Unreasonableness of Separation, or an impartial account of the history, nature, and pleas of the present Separation from the Communion of the Church of England.” The third volume contains, 5. “Origines Britannicæ, or the Antiquities of the British Churches;” 6. “Two Discourses concerning the Doctrine of Christ’s Satisfaction, against the Socinians.” 7. “Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity,” in which he animadverts upon some passages in Mr. Locke’s Essay. 8. “Answers to two Letters,” published by Mr. Locke. 9. “Ecclesiastical cases relating to the duties and rights of the Parochial Clergy,” a charge. 10. “Concerning Bonds of resignation of Benefices.” 11. “The Foundation of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and as it regards the legal supremacy.” 12. “The grand question concerning the Bishops’ right to vote in Parliament in cases capital.” 13. “Two speeches in Parliament.” 14. “Of the true Antiquity of London.” 15. “Concerning the Unreasonableness of a new Separation, on account of the oaths to King William and Queen Mary.” 16. “A Vindication of their Majesties authorities to fill the sees of deprived Bishops.” 17. “An Answer to the Paper delivered by Mr. Ashton, at his execution, to sir Francis Child, Sheriff of London, with the Paper itself.” The fourth, fifth, and sixth volumes contain, 18. Pieces written against the Church of Rome, in controversy with Cressy, Sargeant, and other Popish advocates.

After this failure, he attached himself wholly to his patron Mr. Wind ham, and at the mansion of Felbrig passed the next fourteen years of his life, “beloved and respected by all who visited or were connected with the family.” While he was “employed in the grateful task of instructing a youth of superior talents and amiable disposition,” he was insensibly Jed into a tender attachment, in which he was not successful. The lady was a Miss Anne B; nes who, with the inexperience of youth, and the thoughtless gaiety of a volatile temper, encouraged his addresses; and he passed several years in her society, in the ardent hope that a favourable change in his circumstances at no distant period would unite him with the object of his first and lasting passion. But after ten years, the prudence or the lady outweighed her affection. As she was herself without fortune, and Mr. Stillingfleet without any means of establishing himself in life, she listened to an advantageous offer, and soon afterwards espoused a richer and more fortunate rival.

Soon after this disappointment, in 1737, he accompanied his pupil, Mr. Windham, to the Continent. The events of this tour, and the connexions to which it gave rise, fixed the future course, and formed the happiness of his life. Mr. Coxe’s account of it is highly amusing, and introduces us to the acquaintance of many persons, now, or lately, distinguished in the political or literary world. One of the results of this tour was, “A Letter from an English Gentleman to Mr. Arlaud, a celebrated painter at Geneva, giving an account of the Glacieres, or Ice Alps of Savoy, written in the year 1741.” This was written chiefly by Mr. Windham and Mr. Price (of Foxley in Herefordshire), with the assistance of Mr. Siillingfieet, and illustrated with the drawings of Mr. Price. They are said to have been the first travellers who penetrated into these Alpine recesses. In 1743 Mr. Stillingfleet returned with his pupil to England. His pupil’s father gave Mr. Stillingfleet an annuity of 100l. which for some time was his principal support. He now resided partly in London and partly with some friends in the country; and his leisure hours were dedicated to literary pursuits, some of which Mr. Coxe has specified, particularly an edition of Milton, illustrated by notes, in which he had made considerable progress when the appearance of Dr. Newton’s proposals induced him to relinquish his design. His M8S. however, which were in the possession of the late bishop Dampier, were obligingly lent to Mr. Todd, for his excellent edition of our great epic poet. About this time Mr. Stillingfleet composed some of his poems, particularly those on “Conversation,” and “Earthquakes.”

In 1746 Mr. Stillingfleet took up his residence at Foxley, the seat of the above-mentioned Mr. Price, or rather in a neighbouring cottage, where he was master of his time and pursuits; and passed his leisure hours with the family. An indifferent state of health first led him to the pursuit of Natural History, which forms his principal distinction as an author; and he soon became one of the first defenders and earliest propagators of the Linnsean system in England. This zeal produced, in 1759, his “Miscellaneous Tracts in Natural History,” with a Preface, which contains a spirited eulogium of the study of nature, and a just tribute of applause to the talents and discoveries of the great Swede. The publication of this miscellany may be considered as the sera of the establishment of Linnaean Botany in England. His biographer has also published the Journal of Mr. Stillirigfleet’s excursion into part of North Wales, which is illustrative of his character and observations, and is curious as one of the first of those local tours which are since become so fashionable. In 1760, Mr. Stillingfleet received an addition to his income by obtaining the place of barrack -master at Kensington, through the interest of his friend Mr. Price, brotherin-law to lord Harrington, then secretary at war. But in 1761 he had the misfortune to lose, by death, his friend Mr. Price, and also his pupil Mr. Windham. The latter left him guardian to his only son, the late much lamented statesman William Windham, esq. His feelings were not u little tried also, about this time, by the death of his sisters and their husbands, whose history, as well as that of Messrs. Price, Windham, and Williamson, form a very interesting part of Mr. Coxe’s memoirs. That of his nephew, capt. Locker, is particularly so, as he was one of those who contributed to form the wonderful mind of our gallant hero, lord Nelson.

Among other pursuits Mr. Stillingfleet cultivated and understood music, both practically and theoretically; and this produced his “Treatise on the Principles and Power of Harmony,” on which, says his biographer, he seems to have bestowed unusual labour. It is, in fact, an analysis or abridgment of Tartini’s “Trattato di Musica,” with such an addition of new matter, that it may justly be deemed the joint production of Tartini and Stillingfleet; and, in executing this, Mr. Stillingfleet seems to have accomplished the wish of D'Alembert, namely, “that Tartini would engage some man of letters equally practised in music and skilled in writing, to develope those ideas which he himself has not unfolded with sufficient perspicuity.”

This was the last of Mr. Stillingfleet' s publications; for he died, at his lodgings in Piccadilly opposite Burlingtonhouse, Dec. 15, 1771 (the year this last-me.itioned work was published), aged sixty-nine. He was interred in St. James’s church, where his great nephew Edward Hawke Locker, esq. third son of captain Locker, has recently erected a monument to his memory. The merit most generally attributed to Mr. Stillingfleet is the service which he has rendered to our Natural History and Agriculture. In the present age it may not be deemed a merit in a gentleman, who is at the same time a man of letters, to encourage such pursuits by precept and example; as we have numerous instances of men of the first rank and abilities, who have dedicated their time and labours to the promotion of this branch of useful knowledge. But, in the time of Mr. Stillingfleet, the case was far different; for few men of respectable rank in society were farmers; and still fewer, if any, gave the result of their experience and observations to the public. On the contrary, there seems to have existed among the higher classes a strong prejudice against agricultural pursuits; which Mr. Stillingfleet took some pains to combat, and which, indeed, his example, as well as his precepts, greatly contributed to overcome. As a poet, Mr. Stillingfleet is less known, because few of his compositions were ever given to the public, and those were short, and confined to local or temporary subjects. The “Essay on Conversation” the “Poem on Earthquakes” the dramas and sonnets; will certainly entitle him to a place on the British Parnassus but, when we consider his refined and classical taste, his command of language, his rich and varied knowledge, and the flights of imagination which frequently escape from his rapid pen, we can have no hesitation in asserting, that if, instead of the haste in which he apparently prided himself, he had employed more patience and more assiduous correction, he would have attained no inconsiderable rank among our native poets. Independently of his merits as a naturalist and a poet, he possessed great versatility of genius and multifarious knowledge. His intimate acquaintance with the higher branches of the mathematics, and his skill in applying them to practice, are evident from his treatise on the principles and powers of harmony: and all his works, both printed and manuscript, display various and undoubted proofs of an extensive knowledge of modern languages, both ancient and modern, and a just and refined taste, formed on the best models of classic literature.

, a celebrated Greek philosopher of Megara, who flourished about 306 B. C. was so eloquent, and insinuated himself so easily into the favour of his auditors, that all the young philosophers quitted their masters to hear him. It is said, that Stilpo, having reproached the courtezan Glycera with corrupting youth, she replied, “What does it signify whether they are corrupted by a courtezan or by a sophist!” which answer induced Stilpo to reform the school of Megara, banishing from it all sophisms, useless subtilties, general propositions, captious arguments, and that parade of senseless words, which had so long debased the schools. When Demetrius, son of Antigonus, took Megara, he forbade any one to touch our philosopher’s house, and if any thing was taken from him in the hurry of plunder, to restore it. When Demetrius asked him if he lost any thing by the capture of the city, “No,” replied Stilpo, “for war can neither rob us of virtue, learning, nor eloqaence.” He at the same time gave that prince some instructions in writing, calculated to inspire him with humanity, and a noble zeal for doing good to mankind, with which Demetrius was so affected that he ever after followed his advice. Stilpo is said to have entertained very equivocal notions respecting the deity; but he was nevertheless considered as one of the chiefs of the Stoic sect. Several Grecian republics had recourse to his wisdom, and submitted to his decisions. Cicero observes, that this philosopher was naturally inclined to drunkenness and debauchery, but had so entirely conquered those propensities by reason and philosophy, that no one ever saw him intoxicated, nor perceived in him the least vestige of intemperance.

In the summer of 1780, sir Adam Gordon, who had the living of Hincworth in Hertfordshire, offered Mr. Stockdale the curacy of that place. He accepted it with gratitude, and there wrote fifteen sermons. At this period at the distance of twenty-three years from his first ordination, he took priest’s orders. In 1782, he wrote his “Treatise on Education;” and in the autumn of the succeeding year, lord Thurlow (the then lord Chancellor), in consequence, as we are gravely told, “of having read a volume of Mr. Stockdale’s sermons, and without any other recommendation,” presented him with the living of Lesbury, in Northumberland. To this the duke of Northumberland added that of Long-Houghton, in the same county. Here he wrote a tragedy called “Ximenes,” which was never acted or printed; but still, in a restless pursuit of some imaginary happu.ess, he fancied that the bleakness of the climate injured his health; and accepted an invitation in 1787, from his friend Mr. Matra, British Consul at Tangier, to pass some time with him, under its more genial sky.

, an eminent, though self-taught mathematician, was a native of Scotland, and son of a gardener in the service of the duke of Argyle. Neither the time nor place of his birth is exactly known, but from a ms memorandum in our possession it appears that he died in March or April 1768. The chief account of him that is extant is contained in a letter written by the celebrated chevalier Ramsay to father Castel, a Jesuit at Paris, and published in the Journal de Trevoux, p. 109. From this it appears, that when he was about eighteen years of age, his singular talents were discovered accidentally by the duke of Argyle, who found that he had been reading Newton’s Principia. The duke was surprised, entered into conversation with him, and was astonished at the force, accuracy, and candour of his answers. The instructions he had received amounted to no more than having been taught to read by a servant of the duke’s, about ten years before. “I first learned to read,” said Stone; “the masons were then at work upon your house: I went near them one day, and I saw that the architect used a rule and compasses, and that he made calculations. I inquired what might be the use of these things; and I was informed, that there was a science called arithmetic: I purchased a book of arithmetic, and I learned it. I was told there was another science called geometry: I bought the books, and I learned geometry. By reading I found that there were good books in these two sciences in Latin: I bought a dictionary, and 1 learnt Latin. I understood that there were good books of the same kind in French: I bought a dictionary, and I learned French. And this, my lord, is what I have done. It seems to me that we may learn every thing, when we know the twenty-four letters of the aipiuibet.” Delighted with this account, the duke drew him from obscurity, and placed him in a situation which enabled him to pursue his favourite objects. Stone was author and translator of several useful works 1 “A new Mathematical Dictionary, 1726, 8vo. 2.” Fluxions,“1730, 8vo. The direct method is a translation of L' Hospital’s Analyse des infiniment petits, from the French; and the inverse method was supplied by Stone himself. 3.” The Elements of Euclid," 1731, 2 vols. 8vo. This is a neat and useful edition of the Elements of Euclid, with an account of the life and writings of that mathematician, and a defence of his elements against modern objectors. 4. ' A paper in the Philosophical Transactions, vol. xli. p. 218, containing an account of two species of lines of the third order, not mentioned by sir Isaac Newton, or Mr. Sterling; and some other small productions.

To this account, as given in the last edition of this work, we may add that when Stone had obtained the duke of Argyle’s patronage, he probably was enabled to come to London, as we find he was chosen a fellow of the Royal Society in 1725, a year before the publication of his “Mathematical Dictionary,” and his subsequent works were all published in London: but in what capacity he lived or how supported, we know not. Io 1742 or 1743 his name was withdrawn from the list of the Royal Society. In 1758 he published “The Construction and Principal Uses of Mathematical Instruments, translated from the French of M. Bion, chief instrument -maker to the French king. To which are added, the construction and uses of such instruments as are omitted by M. Bion, particularly of those invented or improved by the English. By Edmund Stone,” folio. Here he omits the title of F. R S. which appeared to his former publications. From the introductory part of an account of this work in the Critical Review, it would appear that he was known to the writer of that article, and that he was now old and neglected. “Since the commencement of our periodical labours,” says the critic, “none of Mr. Stone’s works have passed through our hands. It is with pleasure we now behold this ingenious gentleman breaking a silence, for the service of the publick, which we were ready to attribute to his sense of its ingratitude. There is hardly a person the least tinctured with letters in the British dominions, who is unacquainted with the extraordinary merit of our author. Untutored, and self-taught, he ascended from the grossest ignorance, by mere dint of genius, to the sublimest paths of geometry. His abilities are universally acknowledged, his reputation unblemished, his services to the public uncontested, and yet he lives to an advanced age unrewarded, except by a mean employment that reflects dishonour on the donors.” What this employment was, we know not, but the work itself is said to be a second edition, and that the first had a rapid sale. In 1767, was published a pamphlet entitled “Some reflections on the the uncertainty of many astronomical and geographical positions, with regard to the figure and magnitude of the earth, &c. &c. By Edmund Stone,” 8vo. We have not seen this production, but from the account given of it in the Monthly Review, it must have been written either by a Mr. Edmund Stone of far inferior abilities and good sense to our author, or by our author in his dotage.

Among other ways of doing good, sir James Stonhouse was convinced that the dispersion of plain and familiar tracts on important subjects, was one of the most important, and accordingly wrote several of these, the greater part of which have been adopted by the Society for promoting Christian knowledge. The others are, 1. “Considerations on some particular sins, and on the means of doing good bodily and spiritually.” 2. “St. Paul’s Exhortation and motive to support the weak or sick poor, a sermon.” 3. “A short explanation of the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, &c.” 4. “Hints to a curate fo i- tue management of a parish.” 5. “A serious address to the parishioners of Great Cheverel,” &c.

, a Dutch painter of sea-pieces, and sea-ports, died in 1708, but the time of his birth, and the master under whom he studied, have not been recorded. He was a native of Amsterdam, where he might naturally imbibe a taste for that kind of scenery which he usually represented; consisting of boats, barges, and ships, with many persons engaged in different employments, lading or unlading the vessels. He studied assiduously after nature, and usually sketched from the real objects, so that a strong character of truth is the great recommendation of his seas, rocks, and harbours. His figures are small, but usually designed with great exactness, and so numerous in most of his pieces, as to afford a great fund of entertainment. He had a brother who was a painter of landscapes, and chiefly represented views of the Rhine, but was not equal to him. A capital picture of Abraham Stork is, the reception of the duke of Marlborougb, in the river Amstel.

At what time, or on what occasion he removed from Cornhill, is uncertain, but in 1549, we find him dwelling within Aldgate, where the pump now stands, between Leadenhall-street and Fenchurch-street. While he lived here, he was the spectator of an execution which affected him not a little. The bailiff of Rumford, coming up to town during an insurrection which prevailed in Norfolk and Suffolk, and spread to some parts of Essex, happened to fall in company with the curate of Cree church, who asking him what news, the bailiff said that many were up in Essex, but that, “thanks be to God, things were in good quiet about them.” The curate, from some misconception of these words, immediately informed against the poor bailiff, as one of the rebels, or a favourer of their cause. On this he was next morning brought before a court-martial, and sentenced to be hanged in the parish where he uttered the aforesaid words, upon a gibbet erected before Mr. Stow’s door. Stow was of course a witness, and heard the poor man’s dying declaration, respecting the above words which he made use of, and which were the only pretence for this unjust execution. Some time after, Stow removed into Lime-street ward, in the parish of St. Andrew Unclershaft, where he continued until his death*.

He began early to apply himself to the study of the history and antiquities of England with so much enthusiasm, that he bestowed little attention on business, or the concerns of domestic life; and this improvidence greatly impaired his circumstances, and at length reduced him to considerable difficulties. His first appearance, as an antiquary, was in the service of the ward of which he was now become an inhabitant. That of Bishopsgate had encroached on the bounds of it, and had taken in three houses, and a piece of land near London-wall, which belonged to it. These Mr. Stow plainly proved to be the property of his ward, by certain old leases and grants, and other authentic registers; an 1 they were accordingly at that time yielded to it; though, afterwards, when sir Richard Pype, al-'erman of Bishopsgate ward, became lord mayor of London, and reclaimed them, it receded from its un.l >ubted right, and tamely surrendered them to his jurisdiction.

Mr. Stow’s success, however, in the Affair probably ani­* This curate, called Sir Stephen, one c<>mii>- n I e/\p bumr them. Mr. became so contemptible by his furious Slow heat <J 'his sermon, an I saw the zeal, that he was forced to leave the effec’s of it. Another rmrk of the city, and retire tosome unknown place curate’s imprudent zeal w.< his takin the country. “Mr. Stow has re- ing; /ccasion from that church’s name corded some things of him, which Un ^rshaft., as superstitions^ ^iv>n it, though not attended with such fata! to i!<-r are his judgment that thr titles consequences as that already men- of cnurches should be altered, and that tioned, were evidences of his exclusive even the names of the days of the week big‘ try. In a sermon, which he ought to be changed from those ht;apreached before a areat auditory at St. then ones which had been given them; Paul’s Cross, he inveighed bitterly nud that Fridays and Saturdays should against a long may-pole, called -haft, be no more fish-days, but others subin the next parish to his own, which stituted for such in thei>- place from thence was named *r. Andrew that Lent should he kept ai>nv Undershaft. This he insisted upon time than between Shrove-ti e and being an idol; and so warmly did he Raster. Another t.’id ).ia<-tice of this declare against it, that the zeal of many cut ate was, to go out of the pulpi> into of his hearers being excited thereby, the church- yard, and II.Oum' nu h gh they wt-nt in the afternoon of the same elm that grew there and p ea; h from day, and pulled the may-pole do MI tbttnce to his audience, and then return from the place where it hung upon to the church, and say or-ire the hooks, and then sawed it ii to divers English service, not at th,- a^tar. as pieces, each housekeeper taking as w. is usual, but upon a tomb, whit much of it as hung over his door or placed northward of it.” Strype’s Life stall, and then casting the pieces into of Stow. mated him in his antiquarian researches, as he had now demonstrated the practical benefit arising from them. It was about 1560, that he turned his thoughts to the compiling an English chronicle, and he spent the greater part of his future life in collecting such materials relating to the kingdom at large, as he esteemed worthy to be handed down to posterity. But after he had been eagerly employed for a while in these studies, perceiving how little profit he was likely to reap from them, he was on the point of diverting his industry into the channel of the occupation he had been bred to; and the expensiveness of purchasing manuscripts was an additional motive to this resolution. Archbishop Parker, however, himself an excellent antiquary, and a bountiful patron of all who had the same turn, persuaded him to goon, and liberally contributed to lessen his expences, while his grace lived.

In order to qualify himself effectually for what he had in view, he procured as many of the ancient English writers, both printed and in manuscript, as he could obtain by money or favour. These he studied so attentively as to gain an exact and critical knowledge of them, and he at the same time embraced every opportunity of cultivating the intimacy of those persons who were most capable of assisting him; such as archbishop Parker, already mentioned; Lambard, author of the Perambulation of Kent, and other works; Bowyer, keeper of the records of the Tower, and the first methodizer of them; with the celebrated Camden, and others of lesser note. For more particular information respecting the antiquities of London, he collected all the old books, parchments, instruments, -charters, and journals relating to it, that he could meet with; and he had, besides, procured access to the archives in the chamber of the city, where he perused, and transcribed such original papers as were of service to him in the prosecution of his grand design of writing the “Survey” of it.

In 1600, he published his “Flores Historiarum,” or Annals of this kingdom from the time of the ancient Britons to his own.“This work was nothing else but his” Summary" greatly enlarged, which he dedicated to archbishop Whitgift. It was reprinted five years after with additions; but even in this improved state it was no more than an abridgment of a much larger history of this nation, which he had been above forty years collecting out of a multitude of ancient authors, registers, chronicles, lives, and records of cities and towns; and which he intended now to have published, if the printer, probably fearing the success of it, after the late appearance of so large a chronicle as that of Holinshed, had not chosen rather to undertake this lesser abstract of it.

In 1598 appeared the first edition in 4to, of that valuable work which he entitled “A Survey of London.” What induced him hrst to compile this work, was a passage he met with in William Lambard’s “Perambulation,” in which he calls upon all who had ability and opportunity, to do the like service for the shires and counties wherein they were born or dwelt, as he had done for that of Kent. Such an invitation was not lost upon a writer of Stow’s zeal and disposition, and he immediately resolved upon the description of the metropolis, the place both of his habitation and birth. It was dedicated by him to the lord mayor, commonalty, and citizens; and at the end of it were the names of the mayors and sheriffs, as far as 1598. He was sensible something ought to have been added concerning the political government of the city; but he declined touching upon it, as he at first intended, because he was informed that Mr. James Dalton, a learned gentleman and citizen, purposed to treat of it.

In 1603, five years after the first, a second edition of this useful work was published, with considerable improvements made by the author, out of his old stores of “many rare notes of antiquity” as he styles them. Part of these related to the city government, which he now had no scruple to introduce, as Mr. Dalton’s death had put an end to all expectation from that gentleman’s pen. Stow therefore endeavoured to supply the defect, and would have done it more copiously, had he not been interrupted by a fit of sickness. The notes which he added related to the aldermen and sheriffs of London; the names of the officers belonging to the mayor’s house, and to the sheriffs: of the liveries of the mayors and sheriffs, and various other particulars which are very curious when contrasted with the manners and modes of our times*. He must have verylittle curiosity who is not amused by comparisons of this kind, and must have very little reflection, if he does not draw useful conclusions from observing the pertinacity with which every age supports its own fashions. These additions, Stow confessed, were far short of what he desired or purposed to do: but as they were all he could accomplish at present, he promised hereafter to augment them, a promise which his increasing weakness and death prevented him from fulfilling.

must be indulged to his education so of his endeavours." Fuller’s Worthies. hard is it for a citizen to write an hisIn 1618, after his decease, a third edition, still in quarto, was published by A. M. or Anthony Muuday (See Munday), a citizen also, and a man of some fame. He had been the pope’s scholar in the seminary at Rome; afterward, returning home, and renouncing the pope and popery, he wrote two books relative to the English priests and papists abroad. This editor made several additions, as he pretended, to the Survey; much of which, he hinted, he had formerly from Stow himself, who, in his lite-time, delivered into his han.ls some of his best collections, and importunately persuaded him to correct what he found amiss, and to proceed in perfecting so worthy a design. He talks of being employed about twelve years revising and enlarging it; and that he had the encouragement of the court of aldermen in the council-chamber, being brought before them by sir Henry Montague, the recorder, afterward lord chief justice of the King’s-bench. But after all, the additions he made were chiefly some inscriptions and epitaphs from the monuments in the parish churches; a continuation of the names of the mayors and sheriffs; and little more, except some transcripts out of Stow’s Summary and Annals, and here and there venturing to correct some errors, as he calls them, in the original, in place of which he has rather substituted his own; for Mr. Stow was too exact and precise to be corrected by one so much inferior to him in literature, and in antiquities, as Munday appears to be.

Having thus gone through the history of the work, from its first appearance in a small quarto, to its enlargement into two folio volumes of near 800 pages each, we shall resume our memoirs of the author. \ seen, \>y the fruits of it, his strong propensity to the study of history and antiquities; and have observed that so much or his time was consumed by employments of this kind, as was inconsistent with his attention to his trade. Accordingly, what by this neglect, and the expence of purchasing books and manuscripts, he greatly impaired and diminished his fortune; and instead of enjoying that affluence and ease, which his labours for the honour of his country, and the service of posterity, justly merited: he was not even refunded what he expended in the advancement of them, but left in the decline of life to encounter with poverty and distress.

After twenty-five years labour in this way, and publishing his large “Summary,” as a specimen of his capacity, he addressed the lord-mayor and aldermen to grant him two freedoms, which perhaps he received, although we find no record of the fact. Some years after, he again petitioned the lord-mayor and aldermen, stating, “That he was of the age of threescore and four, and that he had for the space of almost thirty years last past, besides his Chronicles dedicated to the earl of Leicester, set forth divers” Summaries“dedicated to them, &c. He therefore prayeth them to bestow on him some yearly pension, or otherwise, whereby he might reap somewhat toward his great charges.” Whether this application had any success, is not known. There is no instance of his reaping any reward from the city, adequate to the extraordinary pains he underwent in the establishment of the reputation of it, unless his being promoted to the office of its Fee'd Chronicler; a post of no great consequence, and to which probably a very small salary was annexed. Whatever it might he, it was so far from retrieving his ruined circumstances, that it did not even afford him the means of subsistence; so that he was forced to beg a brief from king James I. to collect the charitable benevolence of well-disposed people. To the liberal feelings of the present age, it must appear very strange that such a man should have been reduced to such a situation; that neither the opulent city of London, whose service and credit he had so greatly advanced, by writing such an elaborate and accurate survey of it; nor the wealthy company of Merchant Taylors, of which he was a member; nor the state itself; should have thought it their duty to save a person from want, to whom they were all so highly indebted. The licence or brief which his majesty granted him to beg, was a libel upon his own bounty; and the produce of it, so far as we know, fixes an indelible reproach on the charity of the Londoners of that day. We may judge of the sum total collected on this occasion by what was gathered from the parishioners of St. Mary Wolnoth, which amounted to no more than seven shillings and sixpence.

For the character of Stow, we must necessarily be indebted to his contemporaries, and it would be injustice not to give it in their simple style. His person and temper are thus described by Edmund Hows, who well knew him “He was tall of stature, lean of body and face his eyes small and chrystalline; of a pleasant and cheerful countenance y his sight and memory very good, and Ijg recained the use of all his senses unto the day of his Ueath. He had an excellent memory was very sober, mild, and courteous to any that required his instructions. He always protected never to have written any thing either for envy, fear, or favour, nor to seek his own private gain or vain glory, and that his only pains and care was, to write truth.”

But in order to form a judgment of him, it is necessary to consider the disposition of his mind, as well as lus visible works and actions. The first thing that naturally occurs to our view is, that he was an earnest student and lover of the antiquities of his own country, and this to such a degree as to sacrifice the trade to which he was brought up. He was an unwearied reader of all English history, whether printed or in manuscript; and a searcher into records, registers, journals, charters, &c. Nor was he content with barely perusing these things, but desirous also of possessing himself of them, as of a great treasure. By the time he was forty years of age, he h?id furnished a considerable library of such, as appears from the report of Mr. Watts, archdeacon of London, who was sent to search it, viz. ‘That he had a great collection of old books anJ Mss. of all sorts, but especially relating to chronicles and history, both in parchment and paper, &c.’ And his library contained not only ancient authors, but original charters, registers’, and chronicles of particular places, which he had the greater opportunity of procuring, as he lived shortlyafter the dissolution of the monasteries, when such things were dispersed and scattered abroad among various hands.

It was his custom to transcribe all such old and useful books, as he could not obtain or buy, and were of service to his purpose. Thus, as we are assured by Ralph Brooksmouth, he copied Le'and’s six volumes of collections for his own use, which he sold afterward to the celebrated Camden, who gave him for them an annuity of H/. during his life. As he was thus well provided with books, he acquired a critical and nice taste in judging of them, and was enabled to detect many frauds and vulgar errors in our history, which had long passed unquestioned. One whimsical instance we shall mention from Strype. Grafion relates in his chronicle, that in 1502, one Bartholomew Read, a goldsmith and mayor, entertained in Goldsmiths’­hall more than a hundred persons of great estate; messes and dishes served in a vast number; nay, that there was a park paled in the same hall, furnished with fruitful trees and beasts of venery (hunting) and other like circumstances. Stow had litltle difficulty in refuting this story, by measuring the hail, and it would appear to require very little ability to refute it, yet in these days of credulity it ion '4 passed current.

Much has been said of his religion. He was first, in all probability, a favourer of popery: this appears from the jealousy the state had of him in 1568, which occasioned an order of council to Grindal, bishop of London, to have his library searched f;>r superstitious books’; of which sort several were found there. And it is very likely that his notorious bias this way, might be the ground of the troubles he underwent either in the ecclesiastical commission court, or star-chamber; for it is certain that about 1570, he was accused before the ecclesiastical commissioners of no less than a hundred and forty articles, preferred against him by one that had been his servant. This miscreant had before defrauded him of his goods, and now sought to deprive him of his life also. A far less number would hate been sufficient to despatch a man out of the world in those mistrustful times, hut the witnesses against him weie of such exceptionable characters, that his judges were too upright to condemn him upon their testimony. Some of them had been detected of perjury, and others burnt in the hand for felony. The perfidious servant, who was at the head of them as the informer, was no other than his younger brother Thomas, a man of great profligacy, as was evident both by this unprincipled prosecution of his nearest relation, and by his subsequent behaviour to him. For instead of manifesting any shame or repentance for his crime, he swore that he never committed it, and persisted in defaming his reputation, and threatening his life.

Whether Mr. Stow was a hearty protestant is rather dubious; there is one expression of his somewhere in the reign of queen Elizabeth, which is an indication of the affirmative, viz. “That doctrine is more pure now than it was in the monkish world.” But it is not certain whether he wrote this in earnest or ironically, nor is it matter of much consequence. Although he was not able to surmount the religious prejudices of his time, his moral practice was unblamable. He hated vice in all orders, and exposed it no less in the elergy than in laymen. He abhorred injustice, and spared not to rebuke all who were guilty of it. He was a lover of hospitality, and a great friend to public benefactions, while he had any thing to bestow. He was of an honest and generous disposition, and unspotted in his life.

Strabo’s work was published with a Latin version by Xylander, and notes by Isaac Casaubon, at Paris, 1620, in folio; and again at Amsterdam in 1707, in two volumes folio, by the learned Theodore Janson of Almelooveen, with the entire notes of Xylander, Casaubon, Meursius, Cluver, Holsten, Salmasius, Bochart, Ez. Spanheim, Cellar, and others. To this edition is subjoined the “Chrestomathise;” or Epitome of Strabo; which, according to Mr. Dodwell, who has written a very elaborate and learned dissertation about it, was made by some unknown person, between the years of Christ 676 and 996. It has been found of some use, not only in helping to correct the original, but in supplying in some measure the defect in the seventh book. Mr. Dodwell’s dissertation is prefixed to this edition. The last and most valuable edition of Strabo, is that by Falconer, (See Falconer.) splendidly printed at Oxford in two volumes folio.

Although his “Prolusiones” is by far his best work, he is yet perhaps better known as a historian. His “Historia de Bello Belgico” was published at Rome in two parts or decades, 1640—1647, 2 vols. fol. It is written in what some have termed elegant Latin, and which character, “in a certain degree, it deserves; but the style is florid and fuse, and too obviously an affected imitation of that of Livy. His partiality to the Spanish cause is another objection, of which his readers must be warned. This history appeared at the same time wit!) that o(' Beniivoglio, who says that Strada’s work is fitter for a college than a court, and that he did not understand war and politics. It was also attacked by Scioppius in a very rude manner, in a book entitled” Infamia Faimani." Strada, or Stradanus (John), a Flemish painter, born at Bruges in 1536, was famous in several branches of his art. He painted history, battles, chaces, and animals, all with great success. His family was illustrious, but his inclinations led him to the study of painting; and to complete his knowledge of the art he went to Italy. The exquisite remains of antiquity, with the works of Raphael, and other great painters, were the models which enabled him to attain considerable eminence in his profession. Florence was the place where he chose to fix his residence, though invited to several others; and there the best of his works remain. He died there in 1604, at the age of sixtyeight. His taste is esteemed good, though not entirely divested of the Flemish style, after all his diligent study in Italy. The tone of his colouring, however, is pleasing, and his works maintain an honourable place with those of Salviati, Volterra, and others.

Endued with much natural sagacity, and an attentive observation of life, he owed his rise to that station of opulence, and respect which he attained, rather to his own talents and exertion, than to any concurrence of favourable circumstances. His mind, though not deeply tinctured with learning, was not uninformed by letters. From a habit of attention to style, he had acquired a considerable portion of critical acuteness in the discernment of its beauties and defects. In the epistolary branch of writing, he not only shewed a precision and clearness of business, but possessed a neatness, as well as fluency of expression, which fe'.v letter-writers have surpassed. Letter-writing was one of his favourite amusements; and among his correspondents were men of such eminence and talents as well repaid his endeavours to entertain them. To Dr. Franklin, already mentioned, may be added the names of most of the great authors who had adorned the republic of letters for almost forty years before Mr. Strahan’s death; and many specimens of his letters have been given in their posthumous works, or lives. We may add, among his anonymous essays, a paper in “The Mirror,” No. 94.

, an English engraver of the first eminence, was born in the Island of Pomona in Orkney, July 14, 1721. He was lineally descended from sir David Strange, or Strang, a younger son of the family of Stranges, or Strangs, of Balcasky in the county of Fife, who settled in Orkney at the time of the Reformation. He received his classical education at Kirkwall in Orkney, under the care of a learned, worthy, and much-respected gentleman, Mr. Murdoch M'Kenzie, who rendered great service to his country by the accurate surveys and charts he gave of the island of Orkney, and of the British and Irish coasts.

In the year 1751, he finally removed his family to London; and at this period, when historical engraving had made but little progress in Britain, he began to devote himself to this higher and more difficult species of his art; of which, therefore, in this country, he is justly entitled to be considered as the father. It was about this time that by refusing to engrave a portrait of his present majesty, he incurred the strong displeasure of lord Bute; whose conduct towards him is detailed, with many other interesting circumstances, in a letter to that nobleman, which Mr. Strange published in 1775. It is not easy, or perhaps possible, in this country, for power to depress merit; and so it proved in the case of this artist, who rose in spite of all opposition. With respect to the painting which he thus refused to engrave, it is said that a personage, apparently more concerned in the question than lord Bute, has since commended the spirit of the artist, who scorned to perpetuate so wretched a performance. In 1760 Mr. Strange set out for Italy, which, as the seat of the fine arts, he had long been anxious to visit. The drawings made by him in the course of this tour, several of which he afterwards engraved, are now in the possession of lord Dundas. Every where throughout Italy singular marks of attention and respect accompanied him, not only from illustrious personages, but from the principal academies of the fine arts which he visited in his route. He was made a member of the academies of Rome, Florence, and Bologna, and professor of the royal academy at Parma. Nothing indeed shews more strongly the high estimation in which his talents were held at Rome, than the compliment which was paid him by signer Roifanelli, in painting the ceiling of that room in the Vatican library, where the collection of engravings is preserved. The painting represents the progress of the art of engraving, and, among the portraits of those who were most eminent in it, that of Strange is introduced. He is represented holding under his arm a volume on which his name is inscribed; an honour paid to no British artist but himself. Similar marks of high respect were also bestowed on his talents in France. In particular, he was made a member of the royal academy of painting at Paris, the highest honour ever conferred on any foreigner.

Sir Robert enjoyed his honours but for a short period. On the 5th of July, 1792, he fell a victim to a complaint of an asthmatic nature, with which he had been long severely afflicted. It is for those who were best acquainted with his character while living, to conceive with what sentiments of regret this melancholy event, though neither untimely nor unexpected, was felt by his family and friends. Of aM Uk-;-! whom the writer of this narrative ever knew, sir Hubert ossessed the mildest and most ingenuous manne! s, i.uned to dispositions of mind the most liberal and benign. There was in his temper an endearing gentleness which invited affection; and in his heart a warm sincerity, immediately perceptible, which infallibly secured it. To know him and be his enemy was impossible. Unassuming even to a fault, and with a diffidence which anxiously shunned pretension, his opinions both of thinking and of expressing himself, even on the most unimportant occasions, laid an irresistible, though unconscious claim, to taste, to sentiment, and to genius. These, indeed, a skilful physiognomist, if such a person exists, might have read distinctly in the features of his countenance; though Lavater, to support a theory, or misled by an imperfect likeness, has asserted the contrary. The head engraved from Greuse, and prefixed to sir Robert’s posthumous volume, bears a strong, though scarcely a striking resemblance, to the original, and will probably be thought to justify what is here advanced. It may certainly with equal truth be added, that in the whole of his deportment and general demeanour, there was a remarkable degree of grace and modest dignity.

He left behind him, besides his lady, a daughter and three sons all of whom his honourable exertions would have sufficed to place in a state of independence, even though honest ambition had not impelled the whole of them to increase, by their own efforts, the inheritance descending from their father. The extreme assiduity with which he laboured for this purpose is the only circumstance in sir Robert’s history which yet remains unnoticed. In the coldest seasons, when health permitted him, he went to work with the dawn, and the longest day was too short to fatigue his hand. Even the most mechanical parts of his labours he would generally perform himself; choosing rather to undergo a drudgery so unsuitable to his talents than trust to others, or be the means of engaging them in a profession, which, notwithstanding his own deserved success, he never thought deserving of recommendation. In this conviction, he was always extremely solicitous to keep the pencil out of his children’s hands, lest taste should have influenced any of them to prosecute the same pursuits, to which he had devoted a life of unwearied diligence and application.

, of Lampsacus, the successor of Theophrastus in the charge of the Peripatetic school, flourished in the third century B. C. and presided eighteen years over that school with a hi;;h degree of reputation for learning and eloquence. Ptolemy Philadelphus made him his preceptor, and repaid his services with a royal present of eighty talents. He died about the end of the 127th Olympiad. His opinions have been suspected of atheism. Brucker collects from them that “there is inherent in nature a principle of motion, or force, without intelligence, which is the only cause of the production and dissolution of bodies: that the world has neither been formed by the agency of a deity, distinct from matter, nor by an intelligent animating principle, but has arisen from a force innate to matter, originally excited by accident, and since continuing to act, according to the peculiar qualities of natural bodies.” It does not appear, adds Brucker, that Strato expressly either denied or asserted the existence of a divine nature; but, in excluding all idea of deity from the formation of the world, it cannot be doubted, that he indirectly excluded from his system the doctrine of the existence of the Supreme Being. Strato also taught, that the seat of the soul is in the middle of the brain; and that it only acts by means of the senses. Brucker has a more laboured defence of Strato in a dissertation inserted in Schelhorn’s “Amputates Litterarije.”

, a learned divine and promoter of the reformation, was born at Kaufbeir, Dec. 26th 1524. He lost his father in the year 1527, and was sent to Fribourg in Brisgaw in 1538; where he went through a course of philosophy under John Zinckius, and removed from thence in 1542 to the university of Wittemberg, and attended the lectures of Luther and Melancthon. Having taken the degree of master of philosophy in 1544, he applied himself to the reading of private lectures, which gained him great reputation, and he continued them until the war obliged him to leave Witteuoberg, and go to Magdeburg, and afterwards to Erfurt. The war being concluded, he went to Jena in 1548. In 1556, he was present at the conference of Eisenach, and disputed amicably with Menius upon a question relating to the necessity of good works. He reduced this controversy to seven propositions, on which the whole dispute turned, and which Menius owned to be agreeable to the word of God. Strigelius afterwards drew up, by order of the elector of Saxony, a form of confession, to which all the divines subscribed. The year following he was attacked by Flacciuslllyricus, and disputed with him viva voce at Weimar. The acts of that conference were published, but not faithfully, and he complained that something was retrenched. In 1559, he was imprisoned with two others, owing to certain theological disputes with the divines of Weimar, but by the influence of the emperor Maximilian recovered his liberty at the end of three years, and resumed the usual course of his lectures. As, however, he found that he was not in a safe situation, he retired from Jena, and paid no regard to the remonstrances that university wrote to him to engage him to return. Removing to Leipsic, he published there notes on the psalter. He obtained of the elector the liberty of teaching, either in the university of Wittemberg, or in that of Leipsic, which last he preferred, and beginning his lectures there in March 1563, explained not only divinity, but likewise logic and ethics. He had carried his commonplaces as far as the article of the eucharist, and was to enter upon that in February 1567; but a fresh opposition being raised against him, in which the elector would not interfere, he retired into the Palatinate, and soon after was invited to Heidelberg to be professor of ethics, which office he discharged with great reputation till his death, June 26th, 1569. He had the reputation of an able philosopher and divine, and had an incomparable talent in instructing youth. His principal works are, 1 “Epitome doctrinse de primo motu,” Wittem. 1565, 8vo. 2. “Argumenta et scholia in Nov. Test.” 3 “Tres partes locorum communium.” 4. “Enchiridion locorum Theologicorum.” 5. Scholiæ Historicæ, a condito mundo ad natum Christum, &c."

, an ingenious artist, and the author of some valuable works on subjects of antiquity, was bora at Springfield, in Essex, Oct. 27, 1749, where his father, a man of some property, was a miller, but died when this son was only a year and a half old. His mother, however, took a tender care of his education, and placed him at Chelmsford school. At the age of fourteen he was apprenticed to the unfortunate William Wynne Ryland (See Ryland), and in 1770 became a student at the royal academy, where he had the gold and silver medals adjudged to him, the former for a painting in oil, his first effort, and the latter for the best academy-figure. The subject of his oil-painting was from the Æneid and it was no small triumph that his competitor was the celebrated Hamilton. After his apprenticeship had expired, he took up his residence in the family of his friend Mr. Thane; and in 1771 was first introduced to the British Museum, where he was employed to make some drawings. The rich stores of science and of art in that valuable repository, gave a new bias to his pursuits, and he now conceived some of those literary labours connected with his profession, which he afterwards executed; and such was his industry, that two years afterwards (1773) he published his first work, “The regal and ecclesiastical Antiquities of England,” 4to, and in June 1774, the first volume of what he then called “Jjopba TCngel-Cynnan -” or, complete views of the manners, customs, arms, habits, &.c. of the inhabitants of England, from the arrival of the Saxons to the time of Henry VIII.“A second volume appeared in 1775, and both were reprinted in 1797. This was a work of great research and labour, both in the preparation of the letter- press, and of the engravings, and he justly derived considerable reputation, on the score of accuracy and judgment. In 1777 and 1778 he published his” Chronicle of England,“in 2 vols. 4to, which he meant to have extended to six, but want of encouragement compelled him to relinquish his design. The work, however, is complete as far as it goes, and contains much valuable information, but is rather heavy, and not what is called a very readable book. In 1785 Mr. Strutt published the first volume of his” Dictionary of Engravers," and the second in 1786. In this he received considerable assistance from the late eminent sculptor, John Bacon, esq. As the first work of the kind executed in this country, it is deserving of high praise, and although far from being free of defects, still remains the only work of the kind on which reliance can be placed. The introductory history of engraving is particularly creditable to his judgment and industry.

In 1790, a severe asthmatic complaint rendered a country residence necessary, and he therefore settled for five years at Bacon’s-farm in Hertfordshire, where he employed some part of his time in engraving a series of plates for the “Pilgrim’s Progress,” which are said to be as fair a specimen of his talents as an artist, as any that can be produced but it is not mentioned for what edition they were engraved, or whether sold separately. Here likewise his benevolent regard for the welfare of the young induced him, at his own expence, to establish a Sunday school at Tewin, not far from his residence, which he superintended with great care, and had the satisfaction to find it attended with the most beneficial consequences to the morals of the villagers. In 1795, he returned to London, and began to collect materials for his work entitled “A complete view of the Dresses and Habits of the People of England, from the establishment of the Saxons in Britain to the present time.” The first volume of this appeared in 1796, and the second in 1799, 4to, illustrated by 143 plates. It was about the same time published in French. In 1801, he published the last work he lived to complete, namely, EligEamena XnjelTpeob; or, The Sports and Pastimes of the People of England,“a performance which, from the novelty of the subject, attracted the notice and admiration of readers of almost every class. In the beginning of October 1802, Mr. Strutt, then residing in Charles-street, Hatton-garden, was confined to his chamber with his last illness, of which he died on the 16th of that month, in the fifty-third year of his age. His biographer sums up his character in these words:” The calamities incident to man were indeed his portion on this earth; and these greatly augmented by unkindnesses where he least deserved to have met with them. He was charitable without ostentation a sincere friend, without intentional guile; a dutiful son a faithful and affectionate husband a good father: a worthy man and, above all, it is humbly hoped, a sincere Christian. His natural talents were great, but little cultivated by early education. The numerous works which he gave to the world as an author, and as an artist, prove that he employed his time to the best advantage.“Mr. Strutt engraved many plates, in dots, in imitation of chalk, a manner which he learned from his master Ryland, and in which softness and harmony are blended. He also left some Mss. in the possession of his son, from which have since been published, 1.” Queen Hoo Hall, a Romance and Ancient Times, a Drama,“4 vols. 12mo. both which have many characteristics of a lively and well-regulated imagination; and, 2.” The Test of Guilt; or Traits of Ancient Superstition, a dramatic tale, &c." in poetry, but not much calculated to raise our ideas of his merit in that branch.

, the most valuable contributor to ecclesiastical history and biography that ever appeared in this country, is said to have been of German extraction. His father John Strype, or Van Stryp, was a native of Brabant, and fled to England for the sake of religion. He was a merchant and silk-throwster. His son is said to have been born at Stepney, Nov. 1, 1643, but he calls himself a native of London, and his baptism does not occur in the register of Stepney, though the names of some of his brothers and sisters are there entered, and his father lies buried in the church-yard. The reason why he calls himself a Londoner probably was, that he was born in Strype’s yard, formerly in Stepney, but afterwards in the parish of Christ-church, Spitalfields. After being educated in St. Paul’s school for six years, he was matriculated of Jesuscollege, Cambridge, July 5, 1662, whence he removed to Catherine-hall, where he took his degree of A. B. in 1665, and that of M. A. in 1669, His first preferment was the donative, or perpetual curacy of Theydon-Boys in the county of Essex, conferred upon him July 14, 1669; but he quitted it a few months after, on being appointed minister of Low-Leyton in the same county, which he retained all his life. The circumstances attending this preferment were rather singular, Although he enjoyed it above sixtyeight years, and administered the sacrament on Christmasday, for sixty-six years successively, yet he was never instituted nor inducted. The reason assigned for this irregularity is, that the living being small, the patrons allowed the parish to choose a minister. Accordingly Mr. Strype having, on the vacancy which occurred in 1669, preached before them, he was duly elected to be their curate and lecturer, and they entered into a subscription-bond for his maintenance, promising to pay the sums annexed to their names, “provided he continues the usual custom of his predecessor in preaching twice every Sunday.” The subscriptions in all amounted to 69l. Many years after this, viz in 1674, he was licensed by Dr. Henchman, then bishop of London, to preach and expound the word of God in the parish church of Low-Leyton, and to perform the full office of priest and curate there, during the vacancy of the vicarage, which license, and no other instrument, he used to exhibit at the visitations, as late as 1720. In 1677, as he seemed secure of his possession, he rebuilt the vicarage, with 140l. of his own money, aided by contributions from his parishioners, and expended considerable sums also in the repairs of the chancel. After his death, his executors derived some advantage from the manner in which he held this living; for, being sued by his successor for dilapidations, only 40l. could be recovered, as the plea was, that he had never been instituted nor inducted, and that the parsonage- house was built and ought to be repaired by the parish. It is probable that the quiet possession he so long enjoyed was owing to the high esteem in which he was held by the heads of the church, for his eminent services as a historian. Soon after he came to reside at Low-Leyton, he got access to the valuable manuscripts of sir Michael Hickes, knt. once of Ruckholt’s in this parish, and secretary to William lord Burleigh, and began from them some of those collections which he afterwards published. It appears, however, that he extended his inquiries much farther, and procured access to every repository where records of any kind were kept; made numerous and indeed voluminous transcripts, and employed many years in comparing, collating, and verifying facts, before he published any thing. At the same time he carried on an extensive correspondence with archbishop Wake, and the bishops Atterbury, Burnet, Nicolson, and other eminent clergymen or laymen, who had a taste for the same researches as himself. Towards his latter days, he had the sinecure of Terring, in Sussex, given him by archbishop Tenison, and was lecturer of Hackney till 1724, when he resigned that lecture. When he became old and infirm, he resided at Hackney with Mr. Harris an apothecary, who had married his granddaughter, and there he died Dec. 11, 1737, at the very advanced age of ninety-four , one instance at least, that the most indefatigable literary labour is not inconsistent with health.

, a Scottish historian, was born at Edinburgh, in 1742. His father, Mr. George Stuart, who died in 17>3, was professor of humanity in that university, and a man of considerable eminence for classical taste and literature. Gilbert Stuart, having made the usual prepa' rations in the grammar-school and the university, applied himself to the study of jurisprudence. For thr-.t profession, however, he is said to have been disqualified by indolence: and he early began to indulge his passion for general literature, and boundless dissipation. Yt t his youth was not wasted altogether in idleness, for before he had completed his twenty-second year, he published “An Historical Dissertation concerning the Antiquity of the British Constitution,” which had so much merit as to obtain for him the degree of doctor of laws, from the university of Edinburgh. After an interval of some years, in which he could not have neglected his studies, he produced, 2. “A View of Society in Europe, in its progress from rudeness to refinement; or inquiries concerning the history of laws, government, and manners.” This is a valuable work, and proves that he had meditated with much attention on the most important monuments of the middle ages. About the time when the first edition of this book appeared, Dr. Stuart applied for the professorship of public law in the university of Edinburgh; but being disappointed, removed soon after to London. He there became from 1768 to 1773, one of the writers of the Monthly Review. He then returned to Edinburgh, where he began a magazine and review, called from the name of that city, the first number of which appeared in October 1773. In this he was assisted by William Smellie (See Smellie); but owing to the virulent spirit displayed by the writers, it was obliged to be discontinued in 1776. In 1778 his View of Society' was republished. In 1782 he again visited London, and engaged in the Political Herald, and the English Review; but being attacked by two formidable disorders, the jaundice and the dropsy, he returned by sea to his native country, where he died, in his father’s house, August 13, 1786.

In whatever new project he engaged, he pursued it with such avidity, that he seldom quitted it while there was any thing further to be learned or understood from it. Thus he rendered himself skilful in the art of engraving, and of sculpture; and his enthusiastic love for antique elegance made him also an adept in all the remote researches of an antiquary. But in this display of his talents, a just tribute to his memory as a man must not be forgotten. Those who knew him intimately, and had opportunities of remarking the nobleness of his soul, will join in claiming for him the title of Citizen of the World; and, if he could be charged with possessing any partiality, it was to merit, in, whomsoever he found it.

Mr. Stuart was twice married; first in 1760, to his housekeeper, a very worthy woman, by whom he had a son, who died an infant; his second wife, who survived him, was the daughter of Mr. Blackstone, a farmer in Kent; and to this lady, who was very young, he was united at the age of sixty-seven. By her he had four children; one of whom— a boy—was the very image and transcript of himself, both in body and mind. He exhibited an astonishing genius for drawing, even before he was three years old, and would imitate with pen, or pencil, any thing that he saw lying on his father’s table. This child (the darling of his father) died of the small-pox toward the end of 1787. Mr. Stuart’s health was observed to decline very rapidly from that time. He expired, at his house, in Leicester-square, on the 2d of February, 1788, in the seventy-sixth year of his age, and and was buried in a vault of the church of St. Martin’s in the Fields. Two volumes of his great work, “The Antiquities of Athens,” have been published since his death; the 2d in 1790, the 3d in 1794: the former by Mr. Newton, the latter by Mr. Revely. A fourth volume, containing a great many plates, has just been published under the superintendance of Mr. Taylor, of the architectural library, Holborn.

In 1649, he was elected student of Christ-church in Oxford; where, shewing himself too forward, saucy, and conceited, he was, as Mr. Wood relates, often kicked and beaten. However, through the interest of his patron, he was certainly of no small consequence; for the oath, called the Engagement, being framed by the parliament that same year, was some time after sent down to the university by him; and he procured some to be turned out, and others to be spared, according as he was influenced by affection or dislike. While he continued an under-graduate, it was usual with him to discourse in the public schools very fluently in Greek, which conveys no small idea of his learning. After he had taken a bachelor of arts degree, he went into Scotland, and served in the parliament army there from 1653 to 1655: then he returned to Oxford, and took a master’s degree in 1656; and, at the motion of Dr. Owen, was in 1657 made second-keeper of the Bodleian library, under Dr. Barlow. He made great use and advantage of this post for the assistance of his studies, and held it till 1659; when he was removed from it, as well as from his place of student of Christ church; for he published the same year, “A Vindication” of his patron sir Henry Vane; “An Essay on the good Old Cause;” and a piece, entitled “Light shining out of Darkness, with an Apology for the Quakers,” in which he reflected upon the clergy and the universities.

After his ejection, he retired to Stratford upon Avon in Warwickshire, in order to practise physic, which he had studied some years; and upon the Restoration applied to Dr. Morley, soon after bishop of Winchester, for protection in his retirement. He assured him of an inviolable passive obedience, which was all he could or would pay, till the covenant was renounced; and, upon the re-establishment of episcopacy, received confirmation from the hands of his diocesan. In 1661, he went to Jamaica, being honoured with the title of his majesty’s physician for that island; but the climate not agreeing with him, he returned and settled at Stratford. Afterwards he removed to Warwick, where he gained very considerable practice, as likewise at Bath, which he frequented in the summer season. He did not, however, apply so closely to the business of his profession, as to neglect every thing else: on the contrary, he was ever attentive to the transactions of the literary world, and was often a principal party concerned. Before the Restoration, he had joined Mr. Hobbes, with whom he was intimately acquainted, against Dr. Wallis, and other mathematicians; and had published a very smart tract or two in that controversy, in which he was regarded as second to Hobbes. After the. Restoration, he was engaged in a controversy with some members of the Royal Society, or rather with the Royal Society itself; in which, far from being a second, he was now a principal, and indeed alone.

The Royal Society had from its first institution alarmed the zealous admirers of the ok! philosophy, who affected to represent the views of many of its members to be the destruction, not only of true learning, but even of religion itself. This gave occasion to Dr. Sprat’s “History of the Royal Society” in 1667, and to a discourse by Mr. Glanvill in 1668, under the title of “Plus ultra, or, the progress and advancement of Knowledge since the days of Aristotle, in an account of some of the most remarkable late improvements of practical useful learning, to encourage philosophical endeavours.” Mr. Stubbe attacked both these works with great warmth and severity, yet with prodigious acuteness and learning, in a 4tu volume, entitled, “Legends no history, or a specimen of some animadversions upon the History of the Royal Society; together with the Plus ultra of Mr. Glanvill, reduced to a Non plus, 1670.” In this book he charges the members of the Royal Society with intentions to bring contempt upon ancient and solid learning, especially the Aristotelian philosophy, to undermine the universities, to destroy the established religion, and even to introduce popery. This laid the foundation of a controversy, which was carried on with asperity for some time; and Stubbe wrote several pieces to support his allegations. He w;is encouraged in this affair by Dr. Fell, who was no admirer of the Royal Society; and he made himself so obnoxious to that body, that, as he himself informs us, “they threatened to write his life.”

The writings of Mr. Stubbe, though his life was no long one, were extremely numerous, and upon various subjects. Those which he published before the Restoration were against monarchy, ministers, universities, churches, and every thing which was dear to the royalists; yet he did this more to please and serve his friend and patron sir Henry Vane, than out of principle, or attachment to a. party: and when his antagonists insulted him for changing his tone afterwards, he made no scruple at all to confess it: “My youth,” says he, “and other circumstances, incapacitated me from rendering him any great services but all that I did, and all that I wrote, had no other aim nor do I care how much any man can inodiate my former writings, so long- as they were suhservient to him.” “The truth is, and all,” says Wood, “who knew him in Oxford, knew this of him for certain, that he was no frequenter of conventicles, no taker of the covenant or engagement, no contractor of acquaintance with notorious sectaries; that he neither enriched nor otherwise advanced himself during the late troubles, nor shared the common odium, and dangers, or prosperity of his benefactor.” On this account he easily made his peace with the royalists, after the Restoration: yet not, as it should seem, without some overt acts on his part, for, besides conforming entirely to the church of England, he wrote a small piece against Harrington’s “Oceana,” in 1660 which, in the preface to “The good old Cause,” printed in 1659, he had extolled, “as if,” says Wood, “it were the pattern in the mount.” By these means he made amends for all the offence he had given: “I have at length,” says he, “removed all the umbrages I ever lay under; I have joined myself to the church of England, not only on account of its being publicly imposed (which in things indifferent is no small consideration, as I learned from the Scottish transactions at Perth;) but because it is the least defining, and consequently the most comprehensive and fitting to be national.”

After a life of almost perpetual war and conflict in various ways, this extraordinary man came to an untimely end: yet not from any contrivance or designs of his enemies, although his impetuous and furious zeal hurried him to say that they often put him in fear of his life. Being at Bath in the summer season, he had a call from thence to a patient at Bristol; and whether because it was desired, or from the excessive heat of the weather, he set out in the evening, and went a by-way. Mr. Wood says that “his head was then intoxicated with bibbing, but more with talking and snuffing of powder:” be that as it may, he was drowned in passing a river about two miles from Bath, on the 12th of July, 1676. His body was taken up the next morning, and the day after buried in the great church at Bath; when his old antagonist Glanvill, who was the rector, preached his funeral sermon; but, as it is natural to imagine, without saying much in his favour. Soon after, a physician of that place made the following epitaph, which, though never put over him, deserves to be recorded: “Memorise sacrum. Post varies casus, et magna rerum discrimina, tandem hie quiescunt mortalitatis exuviae Henrici Stubbe, medici Wanvicensis, quondam ex cede Christi Oxoniensis, rei medicae, historicse, ac mathematics peritissimi, judkii vivi, & librorum heliuonis qui, quum multa scripserat, & plures sanaverat, aliorum saluti sedulo prospiciens, propriam neglexit. Obiit aquis frigidissuffocatus, 12 die Julii, A.D. 1679.”

Wood was contemporary with Stubbe at Oxford, and has given him this character: that, “he was a person of most admirable parts, and had a most prodigious memory; was the most noted Latinist and Grecian of his age; was a singular mathematician, and thoroughly read in all political matters, councils, ecclesiastical and profane histories; had a voluble tongue, and seldom hesitated either in public disputes or common discourse; had a voice big and magisterial, and a mind equal to it; was of an high generous nature, scorned money and riches, and the adorers of them; was accounted a very good physician, and excellent in the things belonging to that profession, as botany, anatomy, and chemistry. Yet, with all these noble accomplishments, he was extremely rash and imprudent, and even wanted common discretion. He was a very bold man, uttered any thing that came into his mind, not only among his companions, but in public coffee-houses, of which he was a great frequenter: and would often speak freely of persons then present, for which he used to be threatened with kicking and beating. He had a hot and restless head, his hair being carrot-coloured, and was ever ready to undergo any enterprise, which was the chief reason that macerated his body almost to a skeleton. He was also a person of no fixed principles; and whether he believed those things which every good Christian doth, is not for me to resolve. Had he been endowed with common sobriety and discretion, and not have made himself and his learning: mercenary and cheap to every ordinary and ignorant fellow, he would have been admired by all, and might have picked and chused his preferment; but all these things being wanting, he became a ridicule, and undervalued by sober and knowing scholars, and others too.”

, a learned lawyer in queen Elizabeth’s reign, was born about 1541, and is said by Mr. Strype to have been a member of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge. He removed thence to Lincoln’s-inn for the study of the law, and contracted an acquaintance with the most learned and ingenious men of that society. He became a puritan in consequence, as some suppose, of his connection with the celebrated Thomas Cartu right, who had married his sister. About 1579, when the report of the queen’s intended marriage with the duke of Anjou, brother to the king of France, had created an extraordinary alarm, lest such a match should eventually be injurious to the Protestant establishment, Mr. Stubbs published a satirical work against it, entitled “The Discovery of a gaping gulph wherein England is like to be swallowed up by another French marriage,” &c. This highly incensed the queen, whose passions ha -I always much -way over her actions, and too much over htr ministers, and she immediately issued out a proclamation against it; and the autuor and printer, or bookseller, being discovered, they were soon apprehended, and sentence given against them, that their right hands should be cut off, according to an act of Philip and Mary, “against the authors and publishers of seditious writings.” When Stubbs came to receive his punishment, which was inflicted with great barbarity, with a butcher’s knife and mallet, he immediately took off his hat with his left hand, and cried “God save the queen!”

In this suffering Stubbs had the sympathy of the people, and did not lose the regard of thuse who had previously known his learning and talents, and who probably thought little of an offence that proceeded from his zeal for the reformation, and evidently from no principle of disloyalty. A very few years afterwards he was employed by the lord treasurer, to answer cardinal Allan’s “Defence of the English Catholics;” a task which he executed with acknowledged ability. Several letters of Stubbs, addressed to the lord treasurer and his secretary Hickes, are preserved in the Burghley -papers, now in the British Museum; and most of them having been written with his left-hand, he usually, in allusion to the loss of his right, signed himself Scæva. Whether his answer to Allen was ever published is uncertain; but he translated Beza’s meditations on the first Psalm, and the seven penitential Psalrns, from the French, which he dedicated to lady Anne Bacon, wife of sir Nicholas Bacon. The dedication is dated from v Thelveton in Norfolk, where he appears to have taken up his residence, May 31, 1582, and it is signed “John Stubbe, Sceva.” It is said that Stubbs was afterwards a commander in the army in Ireland, but we have no farther accouu- of him, or any notice of his death. Wood is of opinion, that he was either father or brother to Philip Stubbs, author of “The Anatomy of Abuses,” and other works against the vices and abuses of his time. This man, who was not m orders, although all his publications are such as might have been expected from a divine, lived about the same time with John Stubbs; but Wood’s account of him is imperfect.

, an antiquary of much celebrity, descended from an antient family in Lincolnshire, was born at Holbech in that county, November 7, 1687. After having had the first part of his education at the free-school of that place, under the care of Mr. Edward Kelsal, he was admitted into Bene't-college in Cambridge, Nov. 7, 1703, under the tuition of Mr. Thomas Favvcett, and chosen a scholar there in April following. While an under-graduate, he often indulged a strong propensity for drawing and designing; and began to form a collection of antiquarian books. He made physic, however, his principal study, and with that view took frequent perambulations through the neighbouring country, with the famous Dr. Hales, Dr. John Gray of Canterbury, and others, in search of plants; and made great additions to Ray’s “Catalogus Plantarum circa Cantabrigiam;” which, with a map of the county, he was solicited to print; but his father’s death, and various domestic avocations, prevented it. He studied anatomy under Mr. Rolfe the surgeon attended the chemical lectures of signor Vigani and taking the degree of M. B. in 1709, made himself acquainted with the practical part of medicine under the great Dr. Mead at St. Thomas’s hospital. He first began to practise at Boston in his native county, where he strongly recommended the chalybeate waters of Stanfield near Folkingham. In 1717 he removed to London, where, on the recommendation of his friend Dr. Mead, he was soon after elected F. R. S. and was one of the first who revived that of the Antiquaries in 1718, to which last he was secretary for many years during his residence in town. He was also one of the earliest members of the Spalding society. He took the degree of M. D. at Cambridge in 1719, and was admitted a fellow of the College of Physicians in the year following, about which time (1720) he published an account of “Arthur’s Oon” in Scotland, and of “Graham’s dyke,” with plates, 4to. In the year 1722, he was appointed to read the Gulstonian Lecture, in which he gave a description and history of the spleen, and printed it in folio, 1723, together with some anatomical observations on the dissection of an elephant, and many plates coloured in imitation of nature. Conceiving that there were some remains of the Eleusinian mysteries in free-masonry, he gratified his curiosity, and was constituted master of a lodge (1723), to which he presented an account of a Roman amphitheatre at Dorchester, in 4to. After having been one of the censors of the College of Physicians, of the council of the Royal Society, and of the committee to examine into the condition of the astronomical instruments of the Royal Observatory of Greenwich, he left London in 1726, and retired to Grantham in Lincolnshire, where he soon came into great request. The dukes of Ancaster and Rutland, the families of Tyrconnel, Gust, &c. &c. and most of the principal families in the country, were glad to take his advice. During his residence here, he declined an invitation from Algernon earl of Hertford, to settle as a physician at Marlborough, and another to succeed Dr. Hunter at Newark. In 1728 he married Frances daughter of Robert Williamson, esq. of Allington, near Grantham, a lady of good family and fortune. He was greatly afflicted with the gout, which used generally to confine him during the winter months. On this account, for the recovery of his health, it was customary with him to take several journeys in the spring, in which he indulged his innate love of antiquities, by tracing out the footsteps of Caesar’s expedition in this island, his camps, stations, &c. The fruit of his more distant travels was his “Itinerarium Curiosum; or, an Account of the Antiquities and Curiosities in his Travels through Great Britain, Centuria I.” adorned with one hundred copper-plates, and published in folio, London, 1724. This was reprinted after his death, in 1776, with two additional plates; as was also published the second volume, (consisting of his description of the Brill, or Caesar’s camp at Pancras,“IterBoreale,” 1725, and his edition of Richard of Cirencester , with his own notes, and those of Mr. Bertram of Copenhagen, with whom he corresponded, illustrated with 103 copper-plates engraved in the doctor’s lifetime. Overpowered with the fatigue of his profession, and repeated attacks of the gout, he turned his thoughts to the church; and, being encouraged in that pursuit hy archbishop Wake, was ordained at Croydon, July 20, 1720; and in October following was presented by lord-chancellor King to the living of All-Saints in Stamford . At the time of his entering on his parochial cure (1730), Dr. Rogers of that place had just invented his Oleum Artbriticum; which Dr. Stukeley seeing oihers use with admirable success, he was induced to do the like, and with equal advantage for it not only saved his joints, but, with the addition of a proper regimen, and leaving off the use of fermented liquors, he recovered his health and limbs to a surprising degree, ind ever after enjoyed a firm and active state of body, beyond any example in the like circumstances, to a good old age. This occasioned him to publish an account of the success of the external application of this oil in innumerable instances, in a letter to sir Hans Sloane, 1733; and the year after he published also, “A Treatise on the Cause and Cure of the Gout, from a new Rationale;” which, with an abstract of it, has passed through several editions. He collected some remarkable particulars at Stamford in relation to his predecessor bishop Cumberland; and, in 1736, printed an explanation, with an engraving, of a curious silver plate of Roman workmanship in basso relievo, found underground at Risley Park in Derbyshire; wherein he traces its journey thither, from the church of Bourges, to which it had been given by Exsuperius, called St. Swithin, bishop of Toulouse, about the year 205. He published also the same yea.- his “Palæographia Sacra, No. I. or, Discourses on the Monuments of Antiquity that relate to Sacred History,” in 4to, which he dedicated to sir Richard Kllys, bart. “from whom he had received many favours.” In this work (uhich was to have been continued in succeeding numbers) he undertakes to shew, how Heathen Mythology is derived from Sacred History, and that the Bacchus in the Poets is no other than the Jehovah in the Scripture, the conductor of the Israelites through the wilderness. In his country retirement he disposed his collection of Greek and Roman coins according to the order of the Scripture History; and cut out a machine in wood (on the plan of an Orrery), which shews the motion of the heavenly bodies, the course of the tide, &c. In 1737 he lost his wife and in 1738, married Elizabeth, the only daughter of Dr. Gale, dean of York, and sister to his intimate friends Roger and Samuel Gale, esquires; and from this time he often spent his winters in London. In 1740, he published an account of Stonehenge, dedicated to the duke of Ancaster, who had made him one of his chaplains, and given him the living of Somerby near Grantham the year before. In 1741, he preached the Thirtieth of January Sermon before the House of Commons; and in that year became one of the founders of the Egyptian society, composed of gentlemen who had visited Egypt. In 1743 he printed an account of lady Roisia’s sepulchral cell, lately discovered at Royston, in a tract, entitled “Palseographia Britannica, No. I.” to which an answer was published by Mr. Charles Parkin, in 1744. The doctor replied in “Palasographia Britannica, No. II.” 1746, giving an account of the origin of the universities of Cambridge and Stamford, both from Croylandabbey; of the Roman city Granta, on the north-side of the river, of the beginning of Cardike near Waterbeach, &c. To this Mr. Parkin again replied in 1748; but it does not appear that the doctor took any further notice of him. In 1747, the benevolent duke of Montagu (with whom he had become acquainted at the Egyptian society) prevailed on him to vacate his preferments in the country, by giving him the rectory of St. George, Queen-square, whence he frequently retired to Kentish-town, where the following inscription was placed over his door:

He had the misfortune to lose his patron in 1749 on whose death he published some verses, with others on his entertainment at Boughton, and a “Philosophic Hymn on Christmas-day.” Two papers by the doctor, upon the earthquakes in 1750, read at the Royal Society, and a sermon preached at his own parish-church on that alarming occasion, were published in 1750, 8vo, under the title of “The Philosophy of Earthquakes, natural and religious;” of which a second part was printed with a second edition of his sermon on “the Healing of Diseases as a Character of the Messiah, preached before the College of Physicians Sept. 20, 1750.” In 1751 (in “Palaeographia Britannica, No. III.”) he gave an account of Oriuna the wife of Carausius; in Phil. Trans, vol. XLVIII. art. 33, an account of the Eclipse predicted by Thales; and in the Gentleman’s Magazine, 1754, p. 407, is the substance of a paper read at the Royal Society in 1752, to prove that the coral-tree is a sea-vegetable. On Wednesday the 27th of February, 1765, Dr. Stukeley was seized with a stroke of the palsy, which was brought on by attending a full vestry, at which he was accompanied by serjeant Eyre, on a contested election for a lecturer. The room being hot, on their return through Dr. Stukeley’s garden, they both caught their deaths; for the serjeant never was abroad again, and the doctor’s illness came on that night. Soon after this accident his faculties failed him; but he continued quiet and composed until Sunday following, March 3, 1765, when he departed in his seventy eighth year, which he attained by remarkable temperance and regularity. By his own particular directions, his corpse was conveyed in a private manner to East- Ham in Essex, and was buried in the church-yard, just beyond the east end of the church, the turf being laid smoothly over it, without any monument. This spot he particularly fixed on, in a visit he paid some time before to the vicar of that parish, when walking with him one day in the church-yard. Thus ended a valuable life, daily spent in throwing light on the dark remains of antiquity. His great learning and profound skill in those researches enabled him to publish many elaborate and curious works, and to leave many ready for the press. In his medical capacity, his “Dissertation on the Spleen” was well received. His “Itinerariutn Curiosum,” the first-fruits of his juvenile excursions, presaged what might be expected from his riper age, when he had acquired more experience. The curious in these studies were not disappointed; for, with a sagacity peculiar to his great genius, with unwearied pains and industry, and some years spent in actual surveys, he investigated and published an account of those stupendous works of the remotest antiquity, Stonehenge and Abury, in 1743, and has given the most probable and rational account of their origin and use, ascertaining also their dimensions with the greatest accuracy. So great was his proficiency in Druidical history, that his familiar friends used to call him “the arch-druid of this age.” His works abound with particulars that shew his knowledge of this celebrated British priesthood; and in his Itinerary he announced a “History of the Ancient Celts, particularly the first inhabitants of Great Britain,” for the most part finished, to have consisted of four vplumes, folio, with above 300 copper-plates, many of which were engraved. Great part of this work was incorporated into his Stonehenge and Abury. In his “History of Carausius,” 1757, 1751), in two vols. 4to, he has shewn much learning and ingenuity in settling the principal events of that emperor’s government in Britain. To his interest and application we are indebted for recovering from obscurity Richard of Cirencester’s Itinerary of Roman Britain, which has been mentioned before. His discourses, or sermons, under the title of “Palaeographia Sacra, 1763, on the vegetable creation,” bespeak him a botanist, philosopher, and divine, replete with antient learning, and excellent observations; but a little too much transported by a lively fancy and invention. He closed the last scenes of his life with completing a long and laborious work on ancient British coins, in particular of Cunobelin; and felicitated himself on having from them discovered many remarkable, curious, and new anecdotes, relating to the reigns of that and other British kings. The twenty-three plates of this work were published after his decease; but the ms. (left ready for publishing) remained in the hands of his daughter Mrs. Fleming, relict of Richard Fleming, esq. an eminent solicitor, who was the doctor’s executor, and died in 1774. By his fii^t wife Dr. Stukeley had three daughters; of whom one died young; the other two survived him; the one, Mrs. Fleming already mentioned; the other, wife to the Rev. Thomas Fairchild, rector of Pitsey, in Essex. They both died in 1782. By his second wife, Dr. Stukeley had no child. To the great names already mentioned among his friends and patrons, may be added those of Mr. Folkes, Dr. Berkeley, bishop of Cloyne (with whom he corresponded on the subject of Tar* water), Dr. Pocock bishop of Meath, and many others of the first rank of literature at home: and amou. the eminent foreigners with whom he corresponded wete Dr. Heigertahl, Mr. Keysler, and the learned father Montfaucon, who inserted some of his designs (sent him by archbishop Wake) in his “Antiquity explained.” A good account of Dr. Stukeley was, with his own permission, printed in 1725, by Mr. Masters, in the second part of his History of Corpus Christi college; and very soon after his death a short but just character of him was given in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1765, by his friend Peter Collinson. Of both these, Mr. Nichols availed himself; and was favoured with several additional particulars from Dr. Ducarel and Mr. Gough. After his decease, a medal of him was cast and repaired by Gaub; on one side, the head adorned with oak leaves, inscribed Rev. Gvl. Stvkeley, M.D.S. R. & A. s. Exergue, act. 54. Reverse, a view of Stonehenge, Ob. Mar. 4, 1765, Æt. 84; [but this is a mistake, for he was in fact but 78]. There is a portrait of him, after Kneller, in mezzotino, by;J". Smith in 172 i, before he took orders, with his arms, viz. Argent, a spread-eagle double-headed Sable. Mrs. Fleming had another portrait of him in his robes, by Wills; and Mrs. Parsons (relict of Dr. James Parsons) had a fine miniature, which was esteemed a good likeness.

, a German of great learning, was of a noble family of Strasburg, and was born there in 1489 or 1490. He made himself illustrious by the services he did his country; and discharged the most considerable offices of state with the greatest ability and probity, particularly in several deputations to the diets of the empire, the imperial court, and that of England. He contributed very much to the reformation of religion at Strasburg, to the erecting of a college which was opened there ten years after, and to the compilation of the history of the reformation in Germany by Sleidan, which that author acknowledges in his preface. “I received the assistance of that noble and excellent person, James Sturmius, who, having been above thirty years engaged in public and important affairs with the highest reputation, and having generously honoured me with his friendship, frequently cleared up my doubts, and put me into the right way; and, at my request before his last illness, read over the greatest part of the work, and made the necessary remarks upon it.” He died at Strasburg Oct. 20, 1555, after languishing of a fever for two months. Sleidan says that “he was a man of great prudence and integrity, and the glory of the German nobility, on account of the excellent qualities of his mind, and his distinguished learning.”

, an engraver of some note, was born in London in 1658. At the age of seventeen he became the pupil of Robert White. His prints are exceedingly numerous, and prove him to have been a very industrious man, but of no great genius. Indeed, the chief of his excellence lay in the engraving of letters, and the minuteness with which they were executed. His best work is the “Book of Common Prayer,” which he engraved on silver plates. The top of every page is ornamented with a small historical vignette. Prefixed is the bust of George 1. in a circle, and facing it the prince and princess of Wales. The peculiarity of this work is, that the lines of the king’s face are expressed by writing, so small that few persons can read it without a magnifying glass, and that this writing consists of the Lord’s prayer, the Ten Commandments, prayers for the royal family, and the 21st Psalm. Tins Common Prayer Book was published by subscription in London in 1717, 8vo, and was followed by a “Companion to the Altar” of the same size, and executed in the same manner. Sturt also engraved the Lord’s Prayer within the area of a circle of the dimensions of a silver penny, and an elegy on queen Mary on so small a size that it might be set in a ring or locket. This last wonderful feat, which was announced in the Gazette, was performed m 1694. He was, however, a faithful copyist, as may be seen by the English translation of Pozzo’s Perspective, published by James, in folio. When old and poor, for it does not appear that he had great success, he had a placa offered him in the Charter-house, which he refused. He died in 1730, aged seventy-two. Lord Orford says, he received near 500l. of Mr. Anderson of Edinburgh, to engrave plates for his “Diplomata,” but did not live to complete them.

, a law-writer, was an esquire’s son, as Wood says, but probably the son of sir Humphrey Style, knt. and bart. whose family are buried in Beckenham in Kent. He was born in 1603, and became a gentlemancommoner of Brasenose college, Oxford, in 1618; but, as usual with gentlemen destined for the law, left the university without a degree, and went to the Inner Temple. He was afterwards called to the bar, but, according to Wood, “pleased himself with a retired and studious condition.” He died in 1679, if he be the William Style buried that year at Beckenham, as Mr. Lysons conjectures with great probability. The most valued of his writings are his “Reports,” published in 1658, folio, from the circumstance of being the only cases extant of the common law courts for several years in the time of the usurpation, during which sir Henry Rolle, and afterwards John Glynn, sat as chief justices of the upper bench. His other works are, “The Practical Register, or the Accomplished Attorney,” 1657, 8vo, and “The Common Law epitomized, with directions how to prosecute and defend personal actions,” 8vo. Wood also mentions a non-professional work, translated from the Latin of John Michael Delher, a name we are unacquainted with, under the title of “Contemplations, Sighs, and Groans of a Christian,” Lond. 1640, 8vo, with a singular engraved title.

, a Spanish Jesuit, born at Grenada, Jan. 5, 1548, was a professor of reputation at Alcala, at Salamanca, and at Rome. He was afterwards invited to Coimbra in Portugal, where he became the principal professor of divinity. He is an author of the most voluminous kind: his works extended to twenty -three volumes, in folio; and so extraordinary was his memory, that if any passage was cited from them, he could' immediately go on to the end of the chapter or book. Yet, with all his talents, his examiners had such an indifferent opinion of him, that it was with some difficulty he gained admission into the order of Jesuits. He died at Lisbon, Sept. 25, 1617. By order of pope Paul V. he wrote a book “against the errors of the English sect,” which James I. caused to be publicly burnt at St. Paul’s. “Happy should I be,” said he, “could I seal with my blood the truths I have defended with my pen.” Yet unpopular as this work must have rendered his name in this country, his treatise on law, “Tractatus de Legibus,” was printed in London in 1679, in folio. His works are chiefly on the subjects of metaphysics, morality, and theology; and what seems to recommend them is, that he almost every where relates and explains, with great fidelity and precision, the different sentiments of divines concerning the subjects on which he treats. The Jesuits consider Suarez as the greatest and best scholastic divine their order has produced, and lavish the highest encomiums upon him. He was the principal author of the system of Congruism, which is at bottom only that of Molina, although, perhaps, better adapted to the method and language of the theolorians, and disguised under a less offensive form. Father Noel, a French Jesuit, made an abridgment of the works of this commentator, which was published at Geneva in 173;2, in folio. There is a prolix life of him by AntonyIgnatius Deschamps, printed at Perpignan in 1671, a 4to of 800 pages.

As a poet, he was one of those who wrote for amusement, and was not stimulated by ambition, or anxious for fame. His pieces were sent loose about the world; and not having been collected until after his death, they are probably less correct than he left them. Many of his verses are as rugged and unhamionious as those of Donne; but his songs and ballads are elegant and graceful. He was particularly happy and original in expressing the feelings of artificial love, disdain, or disappointment. The “Session of the Poets,” the “Lines to a Rival,” the “Honest Lover,” and the “Ballad upon a Wedding,” are sufficient to entitle him to the honours of poetry, which the author of the lives published under the name of Gibber, is extremely anxious to wrest from him.

, an ancient historian and biographer, was born at Rome about the beginning of the reign of Vespasian, perhaps in the year 70, as may be collected from his own words in the life of Nero. His father Suetonius Lenis was tribune of a legion, in the service of the emperor Otho, against Vitellius. He passed his first years probably at Romej and when grown up, applied himself to the bar. He appears to have very early acquired the friendship of the younger Pliny, who procured for him the office of tribune and aiteru lkl.N, upon his resignation, transferred it to his kinsman, at Sdetonius’s request. He ohtained also In* him th “Jus trimn liberon.m;” a favour seldom granted, and which Pliny could not have obtained, if, besides hU great interest at court, he had not very earnestly solicited the emperor Trajan, in a letter written from Bnhynia, of which he was at that time governor. In this letter he describes Suetonius as a man of gr<at integrity, honour, a. d learning, whose manners and studies were the same with his own; and he adds, “the better I have known him, the more I have loved him. He has been rather unhappy in his marriage; and the privileges of those who have three children are upon several accounts necessary. He begs through me, therefore, that your bounty will supply what his ill fortune has denied him. I know, sir, the high value of the favour I ask but I am asking a sovereign whose indulgence to all my wishes I have long experienced. How desirous I am to obtain it, you will easily conclude, from my applying to you at this distance; which I should not have done, if it had been a mutter of indifference to me.” Suetonius advanced himself to be afterwards secretary to the emperor Adrian; but he lost that place, for not paying a due respect to the empress. Spartian, speaking of him and others involved in the same blame, uses the words “quod apud Sabinam uxorem, injussu ejus, familiarius se tune egerant, quam reverentia domus aulicae postulabat.” On the nature of this disrespect, or “too great familiarity,” critics are not agreed. Their offence probably rose only from the capricious temper of the emperor, who, we are told, treated her with great contempt himself for some reason, and permitted others also to do so under certain limitations; which limitations Suetonius and others might ignorantly transgress.

We know nothing more of Suetonius, nor of the time of his death. He wrote many books, none of which are come down to us, except his Lives of the first twelve emperors, and part of his treatise concerning the illustrious grammarians and rhetoricians; for he applied himself much to the study of grammar and rhetoric, and many are of opinion that he was a teacher. Suidas ascribes to him several works of the grammatical kind; and observes, that he wrote a book respecting the Grecian games, two upon the shows of the Romans, two upon the laws and customs of Home, one upon the life of Cicero, or upon his books “De Republica,” and “A catalogue of the illustrious men of Rome.” Many other pieces of his are cited by various authors; and the lives of Terence, Horace, Juvenal, Persius, and Lucan, have usually gone under his name, and been printed at the end of his works, though it is not absolutely certain that they are his. His *' History of the Emperors“is a work of great value, as illustrative of the manners of the times, and the particular character of these sovereigns, but is not written strictly either in the historical or biographical form. It consists of a continued series of curious facts, related succinctly, without digressions or reflections. There is in it a character of sincerity, which shews very plainly, that the author feared and hoped for nothing, and that his pen was not directed by hatred or flattery.* Suetonius, says Politian,” has given us evident proofs of his diligence, veracity, and freedom. There is no room for any suspicion of partiality in his books; nothing is advanced out of favour, or suppressed out of fear: the facts themselves have engrossed his whole attention, and he has consulted truth in the first place.“Politian is also of opinion, that he forbore writing the lives of Nerva, Trajan, and Adrian, the emperors of his time, because he would not be tempted to disregard the love of truth. Some have blamed him for his descriptions of the horrid debaucheries of Tiberius, Caligula, Nero, and Domitian, which Erasmus is willing to excuse on the score of his care and fidelity as an historian; but certainly such descriptions can* not be defended, because they cannot be necessary even to fidelity itself. A good English translation was published in 1796 by Dr. Alexander Thomson, in which he softened or suppressed Suetonius’s indelicacies, without any injury to the general effect of the narrative. Suetonius speaks disrespectfully of the Christians, calling them” genus hominum superstitionis novae & maleficae, a sort of people of a new and mischievous superstition:" but Lardner has selected from him some important corroborations of the facts of gospel history.

, one of the best painters hi his time which the French nation had produced, was born at Paris in 1617, and studied the principles of his art under Simon Vouet, whom he infinitely surpassed; and although he was never out of France, carried the art to a very high degree of perfection. His style was formed upon antiquity, and after the best Italian masters. He invented with ease, and his execution was always worthy of his designs. His attitudes are simple and noble, and his ex r pression well adapted to the subject. His draperies are designed after the manner of Raphael’s last works. Although he knew little of the local colours, or the chiaro scuro, he was so much master of the other parts of painting, that there was a great likelihood of his throwing off Vuuet’s manner entirely, had he lived longer. Immediately aiter Vouet’s death, he perceived that his master had led him out of the way: and by considering the antiques that were in France, and the designs and prints of the best Italian masters, particularly Raphael, he contracted a more refined style and happier manner. Le Brun could not forbear being jealous of Le Sueur, who did not mean, however, to give any man pain; for he had great simplicity of manners, and much candour, and probity. He died at Paris April 30, 1655, at no more than thirty-eight years of age. The life of St. Bruno, in twenty pictures, originally preserved in the Chartreux, and which employed him for three years, have, as Mr. Fuseli informs us, been “lately consigned to the profane clutch of restoration in the attic of the Luxembourg, and are now little more than the faint traces of what they were when issuing from the hand of their master. They have suffered martyrdom more than once.It is well that the nature of the subject permitted little more than fresco in the colouring at first, and that the great merit of their execution consisted in that breadth of vehicle which monastic drapery demands, else we should have lost even the fragments that remain.‘ The old man in the fore-ground, the head of St. Bruno, and some of the disputants in the back-ground of the Predication; the bishop and the condemned defunct in the funeral; the apparition of St. Bruno himself in the camp; the female figure in the eleemosinary scene, and what has suffered least of all, the death of St. Bruno, contain the least disputable marks of the master’s primitive touch. The subject of the whole, abstractly considered, is the personification of sanctity, and it has been represented in the series with a purity which seems to place the artist’s heart on a level with that of his hero. The simplicity which tells that tale of resignation and innocence, despises all contrast of more varied composition, though not always with equal success, St. Bruno on his bed, visited by angels, building or viewing the plan for building his rocky retreat; the hunting-scene, and’ the apotheosis; might probably have admitted happier combinations. As, in the different re* touchings, the faces have suffered most, the expression must be estimated by those that escaped; and from what still remains, we may conclude that it was not inferior to the composition.”

, author of a celebrated Greek Lexicon, is a personage of whom we are unable to give many particulars. Who he was, or when he lived, are points of great uncertainty; no circumstances of his life having been recorded, either by himself or any other writer. Politian and some oihers have been of opinion that no such person ever existed; but thai Suidas was a real person, appears, not only from his name being found in all the manuscripts of his Lexicon, but from his being often mentioned by Eustathius in his Commentary upon Homer. The learned have differed in the same manner concerning the age of Suidas; some, as Grotins, supposing him to have lived under Conjstantinus, the son of Leo, emperor of the East, who began to reign in the year 912; while others have brought him even lower than Eustathins, who is known to have lived in 1180. The learned Bentley thinks that as he has referred a point of chronology to the death of the emperor Zimisces, that is, to the year of Christ 975: we may infer that he wrote his Lexicon between that time and the death of the succeeding emperor, which was in 1075. This Lexicon is a compilation of matters from various authors, sometimes made with judgment and diligence, but often from bad copies; and he therefore sometimes gives his reader corrupt and spurious words, instead of those that are pure and genuine. He also mixes things of a different kind, and belonging to different authors, promiscuously; and some of his examples to illustrate the signification of words are very little to the purpose. His Lexicon, however, is a very useful book, and a storehouse of all sorts of erudition. Scholars by profession have all prized it highly; as exhibiting many excellent passages of ancient authors whose works are lost. It is to be ranked with the Bbliotheca of Photuis ard works of that kind. The “Etymologicon Magnum” has been ascribed to Suidas, but without sufficient authority, though it may have been composed in the same period with the Lexicon. Suidas’s Lexicon was first published at Milan, 1499, in Greek only: it has since been printed with a Latin version: but the best edition, indeed the only good one, is that of Kuster, Gr. & Lat. Cambridge, 1705, 3 vols. folio. To this should be added Toup’s valuable “Emendationes in Suidam,” Oxon. 1790, 4 vols. 8vo. Mr. Taylor had begun an appendix to Suidas, four sheets only of which were printed off at the time of his death, April 4, 1766. It had the following title, “Appendix notarum in Suidae Lexicon, ad paginas edit. Cantab. 1705, adcommodatarum; colligente, qui et suas etiani aliquammultas adjecit, Joanne Taylor.” This, we believe, was never finished.

Nothing could be more kind than the reception which the queen of Navarre, her children, and principal servants, met with from the king and queen; nor more obliging, than their treatment of them. The queen of Navarre died, and some historians make no doubt but she was poisoned; yet the whole court appeared sensibly affected, and went into deep mourning. Still many of the Protestants, among whom was Sully’s father, suspected the designs of the court; and had such convincing proofs, that they quitted the court, and Paris itself, or at least lodged in the suburbs. They warned prince Henry to be cautious; but he listened to nothing; and some of his chiefs were as incredulous, and the admiral de Coligni in particular, though one of the wisest and most sagacious men in the world. The fact to be perpetrated was fixed for the 24th of August, 1572, and is well known by the name of the massacre of St. Bartholomew. The feast of St. Bartholomew fell this year upon a Sunday; and the massacre was perpetrated in the evening.

Henry king of Navarre, who had been married to Charles the IXth’s sister bnt six days before, with the greatest solemnity and with all the marks of kindness and affection from the court, was awaked two hours before day by a great number of soldiers, who rushed boldly into a chamber in the Louvre, where he and the prince of Conde lay, and insolently commanded them to dress themselves, and attend the king. They would not suffer the two princes to take their swords with them, who, as they went, saw several of their gentlemen massacred before their eyes. This was contrived, doubtless, to intimidate them; and, with the same view, as Henry went to the king, the queers gave orders, that they should lead him under the vaults, and make him pass through the guards, drawn up in files on each side, and in menacing postures. He trembled, and recoiled two or three steps back; but the captain of the guards swearing that they should do him no hurt, he proceeded through, amidst carbines and halberts. The king waited for them, and received them with a countenance and eyes full of fury: he ordered them with oaths and blasphemies, which were familiar with him, to quit a religion, which he said had been taken up only for a cloke to their rebellion: he told them in a fierce and angry tone, “that he would no longer be contradicted in his opinions by his subjects; that they by their example should teach others to revere him as the image of God, and cease to be enemies to the images of his mother;” and ended by declaring, that “if they did not go to mass, he would treat them as Criminals guilty of treason against divine and human majesty.” The manner of pronouncing these words not suffering the princes to doubt the sincerity of them, they yielded to necessity, and performed what was required of them: and Henry was even obliged to send an edict into his dominions, by which the exercise of any other religion but the Romish was forbidden.

At the end of three days, however, a prohibition against murdering and pillaging any more of the Protestants was published at Paris; and then Sully was suffered to quit his cell in the college of Btirgundy. He immediately saw two soldiers of the guard, agents to his father, entering the college, who gave his father a relation of what had happened to him; and, eight days after, he received a letter from him, advising him to continue in Paris, since the prince he served was not at liberty to leave it and adding, that he should follow the prince’s example in going to mass. Though the king of Navarre had saved his life by this submission, yet in other things he was treated very indifferently, and suffered a thousand capricious insults. He was obliged, against his will, to stay some years at the court of France; he knew very well how to dissemble his chagrin 5 and he often diverted it by gallantries, and the lady de Sauves, wife to one of the secretaries of state, became one of his chief mistresses. But still he did not neglect such political measures as seemed practicable, and he had a hand in those that were formed to take away the government from Catharine de Medicis, and to expel the Guises from court which that queen discovering, caused him and the duke of Alengon to be arrested, set guards upon them, and ordered them to be examined upon many heinous allegations. They were set at liberty by Henry III. for Charles IX. died, 1574, in the most exquisite torments and horrors, the massacre of St. Bartholomew’s -day having been always in his mind. Sully employed his leisure in the most advantageous manner he was able. He found it impracticable in a court to pursue the study of the learned languages, or of any thing called learning; but the king of Navarre ordered him to be taught mathematics and history, and all those exercises which give ease and gracefulness to the person; that method of educating youth, with a particular attention to the formation of the manners, being peculiar to Henry, who was himself educated in the same way.

Henry III. upon his death-bed declared the king of Navarre his successor, who accordingly succeeded him, but not without very great difficulties. He was acknowledged king by most of the lords, whether catholic or protestant, who happened then to be at court; but the leaguers refused absolutely to acknowledge his title till he had renounced the protestant religion; 'and the city of Paris persisted in its revolt till the 22d of March, 1594. He embraced the catholic religion, as the only method of putting an end to the miseries of France, by the advice of Sully, whom he had long taken into the sincerest confidence; and the celebrated Du Perron, afterwards cardinal, was made the instrument of his conversion. He attempted also to convert Sully, but in vain: “My parents bred me,” said the minister, “in the opinions and doctrines of the reformed religion, and I have continued constant in the profession of it; neither threatenings, promises, variety of events, nor the change even of the king my protector, joined to his most tender solicitations, have ever been able to make me renounce it.”

Sully was now the first minister; and he performed all the offices of a great and good minister, while Henry performed the offices of a great and good king. He attended to every part of the government; prosecuted extortioners, and those who were guilty of embezzling the public money; and, in short, restored the kingdom, in a few years, from, a most desperate to a most flourishing condition; which, however, he could not have done, if the king had not resolutely supported him against favourite mistresses, the cabals of court, and the factions of state, which would otherwise have overwhelmed him. The king himself turned his whole application to every thing that might be useful, or even convenient, to his kingdom, without suffering things that happened out of it to pass unobserved, as soon as he had put an end to the civil wars of France, and had concluded a peace with Spain at Vervins, on the 2d of May, 1598. The state of the finances of France was at thu time in a wretched situation, as many of the provinces were entirely exhausted, and none of them in a condition of bearing any new imposition. The standing revenues brought into the king’s coffers no more than thirty millions, though an hundred and fifty millions were raised on the people: so great were the abuses of that government in raising money; and they were not less in the dispensation of it. The whole scheme of the administration was a scheme of fraud, and all who served cheated the public, from the highest offices down to the lowest; from the commissioners of the treasury, down to the under farmers and under treasurers. Sully beheld this state of things, when he came to have the sole superintendency of affairs, with horror; he was ready to despair but zeal for his master and for his country animated his endeavours, and he resolved to make the reformation of abuses, the reduction of expences, and a frugal management, the fund for the payment of national debts, and for all the great things he intended to do, without overcharging the people. This plan fully succeeded. The people were immediately eased, trade revived, the king’s coffers were filled, a maritime power was created, and every thing necessary was prepared to put the nation in a condition of executing great designs, whenever great conjunctures should offer themselves. “Such,” says Bolingbroke, “was the effect of twelve years of wise and honest administration: and this effect would have shewed itself in great enterprises against the house of Austria, more formidable in these days than the house of Bourbon has been in ours, if Henry IV. had not been stabbed by one of those assassins, into whose hands the interest of this house, and the frenzy of religion, had put the dagger more than once.”

The character of Sully, as it was given by his master Henry IV. is thus preserved in his memoirs. “Some persons,” said Henry, “complain, and indeed 1 do myself, sometimes, of his temper. They say he is harsh, impatient, and obstinate: he is accused of having too enterprising a mind, of presuming too much upon his own opinions, exaggerating the worth of his own actions, and lessening that of others, as likewise of eagerly aspiringafter honours and riches. Now, although I am well convinced that part of these imputations are true, and that I am obliged to keep a high hand over him, when he offends me with those sallies of ill humour yet I cannot cease to love him, esteem him, and employ him in all affairs of consequence, because I am very sure that he loves my person, that he takes an interest in my preservation, and that he is ardently solicitous for the honour, the glory, and grandeur of me and my kingdom. I know also that he has no malignity in his heart; that he is indefatigable in business, and fruitful in expedients; he is a careful manager of my revenue, a man laborious and diligent, who endeavours to be ignorant of nothing, and to render himself capable of conducting all affairs, whether of peace or war; who writes and speaks in a style that pleases me, because it is at once that of a soldier and statesman. In a word, I confess to you, that, notwithstanding all his extravagances and little transports of passion, I find no one so capable as he is of consoling me under every uneasiness.”

The “Memoirs of Sully” have always been ranked among the best, and certainly are among the most interesting and authentic books of French history, replete with good sense and virtuous remark. They contain a particular account of whatever passed from the peace in 1570, to the death of Henry IV. in 1610; a period of time, which has supplied the most copious subjects to the historians of France. They are full of numerous and various events; wars, foreign and domestic; interests of state and religion; master-strokes of policy; unexpected discoveries; struggles of ambition; stratagems of policy; embassies and negociations. These memoirs take their value, perhaps their greatest value, from the innumerable recitals of a private kind, which scarcely belong to the province of history; for, at the same time that they treat of the reign, they describe the whole life of Henry the Great. They are not, however, either in the form or language in which they were left by Sully: the form has been digested and methodized, and the language has been corrected and polished. The best edition in French is that of Paris, in 3 vois. 4to, and also in 8 vols. 12mo. They have been translated into English by Mrs. Charlotte Lennox, and published both in 4to and 8vo.

, an ancient Roman poetess, the wife of Calenus, flourished about the year 90, and was so admired as to be thought worthy of the title of the Roman Sappho. We have nothing left of her but a satire, or rather fragment of a satire, against Domitian, who published a decree for the banishment of the philosophers from Rome. This satire was published at Strasburgh, with other poems, by G. Merula,! 509, 4to, and may be found in other collections, but has usually been printed at the end of the “Satires of Juvenal,” to whom, as well as to Ausonius, it has been attributed by some critics. Grainger likewise added it to his “Tibullus,” with a translation and notes. From the invocation it should seem, that she was the author of many other po.ems, and the first Roman lady who taught her sex to vie with the Greeks in poetry. Her language is easy and elegant, and she seems to have had a happy talent lor satire. She is mentioned by Martial and Sidonius Apollinans, and is said to have addressed to her husband Calenus, who was a Roman knight, “A poem on conjugal love,” but this is lost. Her satire has been reprinted by Wernsdorf in the third volume of the “Poetae Minores Latini,” where may be seen some useful remarks respecting her works.

, an ecclesiastical writer, who flourished about the beginning of the fifth century, was a disciple of St. Martin of Tours, whose life he has written; and friend of Pauliims, bishop of Nola, with whom he held a constant and intimate correspondence. He was illustrious for his birth, his eloquence, and still more for his piety and virtue. After he had shone with great lustre at the bar, he married very advantageously; but, losing his wife soon after, he quilted the world, and became a priest. He was born at Agen, in the province of Aquitain, which at that time produced the best poets, the best rhetoricians, and the best orators of the Roman empire, of those at least who wrote in Latin. He lived sometimes at Elisso, and sometimes at Toulouse. Some have affirmed, that he was bishop of the Bitu rices; but they have erroneously confounded him with another Severus Sulpicius, who was bishop of that people, and died at the end of the sixth century. Sulpicius lived till about the year 420. He is said to have been at one time seduced by the Pelagians; and that, returning to his old principles, he imposed a silence upon himself for the rest of his days, as the best atonement he could make for his error; but some think that this silence meant only his refraining from writing or controversy. The principal of his works was his “Historia Sacra,” in two books; in which he gives a succinct account of all the reroaikible things that passed in the Jewish or Christian churches, from the creation of the world to about the year 400. He wrote, also, the “Life of St. Martin,” as we have said already; “Three Letters upon the death and virtues of this saint;” and “Three Dialogues;” the first upon the miracles of the Eastern monks, and the two last upon the extraordinary qualities and graces of St. Martin. These, with seven other epistles never before printed with his works, were all revised, corrected, and published with notes, in a very elegant edition, by Le Clerc, at Leipsic, in 1709, 8vo. There is another by Jerom de Prato, printed at Venice in 1741—54, 2 vols. 4to, the text of which is thought the most correct. Sulpicius has a purity in his style, far beyond the age in which he lived. He has joined a very concise manner of expressing himself to a remarkable perspicuity, and in this has equalled even Sallust himself, whom he always imitates and sometimes quotes. He is not, indeed, correct throughout in his “History of the Church;” and is very credulous upon the point of miracles. He admits also several opinions, which have no foundation in Scripture; and he is in some instances defective, taking no notice, for example, of the reign of Julian, &c. His “Dialogues” contain many interesting particulars, respecting the manners and singularities of the Eastern monks; the disturbances which the books of Origen had occasioned in Egypt and Palestine, and other matters of some curiosity.

, a very eminent German, or rather Swiss, philosopher, was born at Wmterthour, in the canton of Zurich, October 16, 1720, and is said to have been the youngest of twenty-five children. Both his parents died on the same day in 1734, and left him barely enough to defray the expence of his education. His taJents did not develope themselves early; and, at sixteen, jhe had not even acquired a taste for study. Wolfe’s Metaphyiics was the first book that awakened in him a love of philosophy; and the counsels and example of the celebrated Gesner soon after incited him to apply himself eagerly to mathematics and general science, and to resume the study of Grecian and Oriental literature. In 1739, he became an ecclesiastic; and a favourable situation for examining the beauties of nature, made him an enthusiast in that branch of knowledge. He published, therefore, at twenty- one, “Moral contemplations of the works of Nature” and, in the same year, 1741, “A Description of the most remarkable Antiquities in the Lordship of Knonau,” written in German. The year after, he published an account of a journey which he took in the Alps; in which he displayed, not only his sensibility of the beauties of nature, but his profound sense of the infinite power and goodness of its author. Becoming a tutor at Magdeburg, he obtained the acquaintance of Maupertuis, Euler, and Sack; in consequence of which his merits became more known, and he obtained, in 1747, the appointment of mathematical professor in the royal college at Berlin and became a member of the Royal Academy there in 1760.

With respect to his disposition, says his biographer, it was amiable; but his extreme sensibility, an excellent quality in a poet when tempered with philosophy, occasioned that singularity and vehemence of character, which gave so much trouble and uneasiness to all his acquaintance, but particularly to himself. He was polite and condescending towards those who treated him with respect, but haughty to those who behaved to him with pride. He knew no deceit; he was a true friend, and an open enemy and coul neither forget an obligation nor an injury. Passionate, and frequently inconsiderate in his pursuits^ he could not bear the least opposition and oftentimes looked upon the most trifling circumstance as the greatest evil. His extraordinary fame, the many favours which the empress conferred upon him, with the indulgence and veneration of his friends, might have made him extremely fortunate, if he had understood the art of being so. He had conceived a great, perhaps too great, idea of the character and merits of a true poet; and could not endure to see with patience this noble and much-esteemed art, which had been consecrated by Homer, Virgil, and other great men, profaned by persons without judgment or abilities. These pretenders, he would say, shock the public with their nonsense in rhyme; and clothe their monstrous conceptions in the dress of the Muses. The public recoil from them with disgust and aversion; and, deceived by their appearance, treat with irreverence those children of heaven the true Muses. The examples of Lomonozof and Sumorokof have tended to diffuse a spirit of poetry, and a taste for polite learning, among the Russians; and they are succeeded bj a, numerous band of poets.

, a celebrated Hebrew and Greek professor in the university of Amsterdam, is most known for his edition of the Mischna of the Jews, with notes, and a Latin version, which he began to publish in 1698, and completed in 1703, in 3 vols. folio. It contains also the commentaries of the Rabbins, Maimonides, and Bartenora. The period at which he flourished is ascertained by this publication; but, in the books which we have been able to consult, we do not find any account of the time when he was born or died. The latter event must have, however, been posterior to 1713, when he published a learned work in Latin, “in which the passages of the Old Testament, quoted in the New, are vindicated and reconciled, according to the forms of quotation, and the several ways of interpreting the scripture, used by the ancient Hebrew Theologers,” Amst. 4to.

, an English divine of considerable abilities in controversy, was educated at Trinity-college, Cambridge, but of his early history we have no account. In 1586, he was installed archdeacon of Taunton, and on Oct. 22, 1588, confirmed dean of Exeter. He had been admitted a civilian in 1582. He died in 162U, leaving a daughter his heiress, who, Prince thinks, was married to the son and heir of the Halse family in Devonshire; and as the estates Dr. Sutcliffe left to Chelsea-college were in that country, it probably was his birth-place. He was esteemed a very learned writer in defence of the protestant establishment; but although long in favour with James I. upon that account, we find that this prince, in 1621, ordered him to be taken into custody for the freedom of his remarks upon public affairs. On the other hand Strype, in his life of Whitgift, has published a long letter from that eminent prelate to Beza, defending Sutcliffe against some disrespectful expressions used by the reformer. Among his works, may be noticed, 1. “A treatise of Ecclesiastical Discipline,” Loud. 1591, 4to. 2. “De Presbyterio, ejusque nova in Ecclesia Christiana Politeia,” the same year, 4to. 3. “De Turco-Papismo,” or, on the resemblance between Mahometanism and Popery, London, 1599, 4to. 4. “De Purgatorio, adversus Bellarminum,” the same year, 4to. 5. “De vera Christi Ecclesia,” 1600, 4to. 6. “De Missa, adversus Bellarminurn,” 1603, 4to. 7. “The Laws of Armes,” 1593, 4to. 8. lt Examination of Cartwright’s Apology," 1596, 4to; and many other works, enumerated in the Bodleian catalogue, of the controversial kind, against Beliarmin, Parsons, Garnet, and other popish propagandists.

At first the undertaking seemed attended with good omens: prince Henry was a zealous friend to it: the king consented to be deemed the founder, called the college after his own name, “King James’s college at Chelsea,” endowed it with the reversion of certain lands at Chelsea, which were fixed upon for its site, laid the first stone of the building, gave timber out of Windsor forest, issued his royal letters to encourage his subjects throughout the kingdom to contribute towards the completion of the structure; and as a permanent endowment, procured an act of parliament to enable the college to raise an annual rent, by supplying the City of London with water from the river Lea. It appears by the charter of incorporation, dated May 8, 1610, that the college consisted of a provost and twenty fellows, eighteen of whom were required to be in holy orders; the other two, who might be either laymen or divines, were to be employed in writing the annals of their times. Sutcliffe himself was the first provost; Camden and Haywood the first historians; and among the fellows we find the well-known names of Overall, Morton, Field, Ahbot, Howson, Spencer, Boys, &c. When a vacancy happened in any department, the successor was to he nominated and recommended by the vice-chancellor and heads of colleges in the two universities, and approved by the archbishop of Canterbury, the chancellor or' each university, and the bishop of London. The charter granted th college the power of using a common seal; various privileges and immunities, and licence to possess lands in mortmain to the value of 3000l. per ann.

, the co-founder of Brasen-nose college, Oxford, descended from the ancient family of the Suttons of Sutton near Macciestield in the county palatine of Chester, was the younger son of sir William Sutton, knight. Of the time or place of his birth, we have no cer tain account, nor whether he was educated in the university to which he became so bountiful a benefactor. He practised as a barrister of the Inner Temple, and probably with success. In 1490 he purchased some estates in Leicestershire, and afterwards increased his landed property in different counties. In 1498, if not earlier, he was a member of Henry Vllth’s privy council, and attended the court for many years after. In 1505, he was one of the governors of the Inner Temple, and was in other years chosen to this annual office.

It is uncertain at what time he became steward of the monastery of Sion near Brentford in Middlesex, but he occurs in this office in 1513, and had chambers in the monastery, where he frequently resided. Besides bestowing estates and money on this religions house, he bore the exr pense of publishing a splendid, and now very rare book, in honour of the house, called “The Orcharde of Syon.” In 1512, he was employed in purchasing the manor of Pinchepolles in Farringdon, Berkshire, with lands in Westbrook and Farnham in that county, which were given by Mrs. Morley, and constituted the first permanent benefaction bestowed on Brasen-nose college. He appears to have received the honour of knighthood in 152'J, about two years before his death, but the exact time of the latter event is not known. As an annual commemoration of him is observed by the society on the Sunday after Michaelmas, it may be inferred that he died about that time. His will, drawn up March 16, 1523-4, was proved November 7, 1524; and he is supposed to have been buried, either at Macclesfield, or in the monastery of Sion. His bequests are almost all of the religious or charitable kind. To these scanty memoirs we may add, in the grateful language of his biographer, that, “Unmarried himself, and not anxious to aggrandize his family, which had long ranked among the best in a county justly proud of its ancient gentry, sir Richard Sutton bestowed handsome benefactions and kind remembrances among his kinsmen; but he wedded the public, and made posterity his heir. An active coadjutor from the first to the bishop of Lincoln in laying the foundation of Brasen-nose college, he completed the building, revised the laws, and doubled.the revenues of the growing seminary, leaving it a perpetual monument of the consolidated wisdom and joint munificence of Smyth and of Sutton.”

The estates given by sir Richard Sutton were, the manor of Burgh or Borowe or Erdeborowe, in the parish of Somerby in the county of Leicester, and other estates in the same parish and neighbourhood; an estate in the parish of St. Mary, Strand, London, which in 1673 was sold to the commissioners for enlarging the streets after the great fire, for the sum of 1700l. and with this an estate was purchased at Burwardescot or Burscot in Oxfordshire, which has recently been exchanged for other lands at Stanford in the vale of White Horse. He gave also the manor of Cropredy in the county of Oxford, and certain lands there, and an estate in North Ockmgton or Wokyndon, in the county of Essex. All these sir Richard granted to the college by lease, July 18, 1519, and on Nov. 29th following, by a conveyance under his own hand and seal, he released them to the society for ever.

, founder of the Charter-bouse school and hospital, was descended of the ancient family of the Buttons of Lincolnshire, and was born at Knaith, in that county, in 1532. He received the first part of his education at Eton school, whence it is supposed he was sent to Cambridge, and matriculated of St. John’s college, Nov. 27, 1551, but this seems very doubtful, at least there is no direct proof, and his being afterwards a benefactor to Magdalen and Jesus colleges svould incline us to give them the preference, but his name does not occur in the registers of either. He is said to have removed afterwards to Lincolu’s-inn, for the study of the law; but this not suiting his disposition, or what we think extremely probable, his father, and perhaps himself, inclining to the reformation, he evaded the miseries of queen Mary’s reign, by employing almost the whole of that disastrous period in travelling on the continent.

In 1590, having married his wife’s daughter by Mr. Dudley, to Francis Popham, esq. son and heir to the lord chief justice of that name, and being now without any children, or prospect of any by Mrs. Sutton, he gradually quitted business and London, and resided at one or other of his country seats, for he had now purchased several estates. He also in 1594 surrendered his patent of master of the ordnance in the north, and about the same time conveyed in trust all his estates in Essex to found an hospital at Hollingbury Bouchers in that county, hut with a power of revocation during life, which actually took place, when he meditated his greater foundation of the Charter-house. In 1602 his wife died at Balsham in Cambridgeshire, where he had for some time resided with great splendour. She appears to have been a woman of great good sense, and to have contributed so much to his comfort, that after her death, he began to wean himself from the world, reduced his household establishment, and lived in a comparatively private manner.

Of Mr. Sutton’s personal character, we are told, that “he was strong-built and compact, of a middle stature, with a good complexion and agreeable mien; neither nice nor negligent in his apparel, but modest and clean, enjoying a good state of health till the decays of old age broke in upon it. He was a very affectionate tender husband, an exact but kind master, a good natured honest man, sober and religious both at home and abroad, very compassionate and very grateful.” As a public benefactor, Sutton deserves to be held in honourable remembrance, and it is pleasing to reflect that his design has never been interrupted or impeded by improper administration, and that few schools have produced men of more eminence as teachers or scholars.

, or, as pronounced, Suvoroff, Rimnikski (Count Alexander), an eminent Russian general, of an ancient Swedish family, was born in 1730, or as some think in 1732, and was originally intended for the profession of the law. His inclinations, however, leading him to the army, he entered as a private in 1742, and in 1754 had attained the rank of lieutenant. He made his first campaign in the seven years war against the Prussians in 175.9, and entered upon actual service under prince Wolgon>ki. He marched against the Prussians with the rank of first major and was at the battle of Kimnersdorf, and at the taking of Berlin. He this campaign signalized himself by many acts of valour, until the year 1762, when a truce was made between Prussia and Russia, which was followed by a peace. Although he was attached to the infantry service, count Romanzow presented him at the general promotion as colonel of cavalry; from his superior knowledge in that department of the army; but there were certain obstacles which caused that line of promotion to be abandoned. Soon after, the count Panin, who commanded in Pomerania, sent him to Petersburgh with an account of the return oi the troops. On this occasion he gave him a special letter of recommendation to the empress, who presented him a colonel’s commission, written with her own hand.

In the end of the year 1786, Suworrow was promoted to the rank of general- in-chief; and at the breaking out of the war with the Turks in 1787, he shewed how well he was entitled to that rank, by his masterly defence of Kinburn; a place of no strength, but of great importance, as it is situated at the month of the Dneiper, opposite to Oczakow. At the siege of Oczakow he commanded the left wing of the army under prince Potemkin, and was dangerously wounded. In 1789, he was appointed to the command of the army which was to co-operate with the prince of Saxe Cobourgin Walachia, and on the 22d of September, gained, in conjunction with that prince, the memorable victory of Rymnik, over the Turks, one of the greatest that has ever been achieved. According to the least exaggerated accounts, the Turkish army amounted to 90,000 or 100,000 men, while that of the allies did not exceed 25,000. The carnage was dreadful, no quarter having been given to the Turks, and on this account the Russian general has been charged with savage barbarity. It is said, however, that the commanders of the allied army, aware of the immense superiority of their enemies, had resolved, before the engagement, not to encumber themselves with prisoners, whom they could not secure without more than hazarding the fate of the day. The taking of Bender and Belgrade were the immediate consequences of the victory of Rymnik, for his share in which Suworrow was created a count of the Roman empire by the emperor Joseph, and by his own sovereign, a count of the empire of Russia with the title of Rymnikski, and the order of St. Andrew of the first class.

His next memorable exploit was the taking of Ismailow in 1790, which he accomplished after a most furious assault in about eleven hours. In this dreadful space of time, the Ottomans lost 33,000 men killed or dangerously wounded: 10,000 who were taken prisoners: besides 6000 women and children, and 2000 Christians of Moldavia, who fell in the general massacre. The plunder was immense; but Suworrow, who was inaccessible to any views of private interest, did not appropriate to himself a single article, not so much as a horse, of which about 10,000, many extremely beautiful, were found in the place. Having, according to his custom, rendered solemn thanks to God for his victory, he wrote to prince Potemkin the following Spartan letter “The Russian colours wave on the ramparts of Ismailow.”

In his person Suworrow was tall, considerably exceeding six feet, and full chested. His countenance was stern; but among his friends his manners were pleasant, and his dispositions were kind. His temper was naturally violent; but that violence he constantly laboured to moderate, though he was never ahle completely to extinguish it. According to Mr. Anthing, an effervescent spirit of impatience predominated in his character; and it perhaps never happened (says that author) that the execution of his orders equalled the rapidity of his wishes. Though he disliked all public entertainments, yet when circumstances led him to an)- of them, he appeared to partake, and endeavoured to promote, the general pleasure. Sometimes he condescended even to dance and play at cards, though very rarely, and merely that he might not interrupt the etiquette of public manners, to which, when not in the field, he was very attentive. In the field he may be said to have spent the whole of his life from the period at which he first joined the army in the seven year*' war: for during the time he was not engaged in actual warfare, and that time, taken altogether, did not exceed twelve years, he was always placed at the head of armies stationed on the frontier of some enemy’s country. He was therefore a mere warrior, and as such had no fixed habitation. With respect to his table and lodging, he contented himself with whatever he found, requiring nothing but what absolute necessity demands, and what might be transported with ease from one place to another. His couch consisted of a heap of fresh hay sufficiently elevated, and scattered into considerable breadth, with a white sheet spread over it, a cushion for his pillow, and a cloak for his coverlid. For the last twenty years of his life, he never made use of a looking-glass, or incumbered his person with either watch or money.

He was sincerely attached to the religion of his country, and a strict observer of its rites, which he equally strictly enjoined on all under his command. His biographer assures us that from his earliest years he was enamoured of the sciences, and improved himself in them; but as the military science was the sole object of his regard, those authors of every nation who investigate, illustrate, or improve it, engrossed his literary leisure. Hence Cornelius Nepos was with him a favourite classic; and he read, with great avidity and attention, the histories of Montecuculi and Turenne. Caesar, however, and Charles XII. wore the heroes whom he most admired, and whose activity and courage became the favourite objects of his imitation. The love of his country, and the ambition to contend in arms for its glory, were the predominant passions of his active life; and to them he sacrificed every inferior sentiment, am) consecrated all the powers of his body and mind.

He returned to Leyden to take his degrees; and took the occasion of his stay there to cultivate a friendship with Van Home, who had been formerly his preceptor in anatomy. It was at this time, Jan. 1667, that in Van Home’s house, Swammerdam first injected the uterine vessels of a humaa subject with ceraceous matter, which most useful art he afterwards brought to great perfection. In February the same year, he was admitted to his degree as doctor or physic, after having publicly maintained his thesis on respiration; which was then conceived only in short and contracted arguments, but appeared soon after with considerable additions, with a dedication to Thevenot. It was thus that Swammerdam cultivated anatomy with the greatest art and labour, in conjunction with Van Home; but a quartan ague, which attacked him this year, brought him so very low, that he found himself under a necessity of discontinuing these studies; which, on his recovery, he entirely neglected, in order to give himself up to his favourite pursuit of entomology.

, a Swedish enthusiast, and the founder of a well-known, although, we trust, declining sect, was born at Stockholm J.n. 29, 1689. His father was bishop of West Gothia, and it may be supposed that his education was good, since he published a volume of Latin poetry when he was only twenty years old. The title was, “Ludus Heliconius, sive Carmina Miscellanea, quie variis in locis cecinit.” The same year he began his travels; and having visited England, Holland, France, and Germany, returned in 1714 to Stockholm, where two years after, he was appointed by Charles XII. assessor of the metallic college. His studies during this part of his life, were chiefly devoted to mathematics and natural philosophy; and he was essentially useful to his king by enabling him to convey his heavy artillery by water, where they could not go by land. He published about this period, many scientih'cal and philosophical works; and succeeding to the favour of queen Ulrica Kleanora, after the death of Charles XI I. was by her ennobled in 171I>. In pursuance of his duty, as belonging to the metallic college, he travelled to view the mines, and then inspected aiso the manufactures of his country. In consequence of this, he published several tracts on subjects relating to the philosophy of the arts. He returned to Stockholm in 1722,;.nd divided his time between the duties of his ofiice and his private studies. In 1733, he had completed his great work, entitled “Opera Philosophica et Mineralia,” which was printed under his direction in 1734, partly at Dresden, and partly at Leipsic. It forms 3 vols. folio, is illustrated hy plates, and is written with great strength of judgment. In 1720, he had been admitted into the society of sciences at Upsal; and between that and 1724, had received a similar honour from the royal academy at Stockholm, and that of Petersburgh. He corresponded also with many learned foreigners. But the time was now approaching when all the desire of baron Swedenborg, for literary or other worldly distinction, was to be absorbed in feelings of a sublimer nature. Whether too intense an application to study had disordered, or a natural tendency to enthusiasm had inflamed his mind, he conceived himself miraculously called to the office of revealing the most hidden arcana. “In the year 1743,” he says, in one of his works, “the Lord was graciously pleased to manifest himself to me, in a personal appearance; to open in me a sight of the spiritual world, and to enable me to converse with spirits and angels; and this privilege has continued with me to this day.” From this time, he devoted his very able pen to such subjects as this most extraordinary state of mind suggested. He published, “De cultu et Amore Dei,” Lond. 1745, 4to; “De telluribus in mundo nostro solari,” 1758 “De Equo albo in Apocalypsi,” 1758 “De nova Hierosolyma” “De Ccelo et Inferno” “Sapientia angelica de Divina Providentia,” Amsterdam, 1764 “Vera Christiana religio,” Amst. 1771 and many other books. He particularly visited Amsterdam and London, where these extravagant works were published, and where they have since been translated by his admirers. One of his fancies about the spiritual world is, that it admits not of space: yet he tells us, that a man is so little changed after death, that he does not even know that he is not living in the present world; that he eats and drinks, and even enjoys conjugal delights, as in the present world; that the resemblance between the two worlds is so great, that in the spiritual there are cities, palaces, houses, books, merchandise, &c. &c. Universal Theology, vol. J. p. 734. This extraordinary man died in London, March 29, 1772; his remains lay in state, and were afterwards deposited in a vault in the Swedish church near Radcliff-highway.

, a Flemish historian and antiquary, was born at Antwerp in 1567. We have no particulars of his literary progress, but a general character that he was a man of science and learning, of an amiable disposition, and occasionally a wit, a poet, and a man of business. He devoted much of his time to study, and published a great many works which brought him considerable reputation. Saxius says he does not know whother he married or lived single, nor, he acids, “is it of much importance. This, I know, that he does not speak very respectfully of the ladies and their company. He says of Janus Dousa, the father, that when he returned home, he married that necessary evil, a icife” Whatever reason Swert had for using this expression, Saxius might have known from Valerius Andreas, or from Foppen, that he married Susanna Van Erp, and had a family of six children. He died at Antwerp in 1629, aged sixty- two.

It happened, by whatever accident, that Jonathan was not suckled by his mother, but by a nurse, who was a native of Whitehaven and when he was about a year old, her affection for him was become so strong, that, finding it necessary to visit a sick relation there, she carried him with her, without the knowledge of his mother or uncle. At this place he continued about three years; for, when the matter was discovered, his mother sent orders not to hazard a second voyage, till he should be better able to benr it. Mrs. Swift, about two years after her husband’s death, quitted the family of Mr. Godwin Swift in Ireland, and retired to Leicester, the place of her nativity; but her son was again carried to Ireland by his nurse, and replaced under the protection of his uncle Godwin. It has been generally believed, that Swift was born in England; and, when the people of Ireland displeased him, he has been heard to say, “I am not of this vile country; I am an Englishman:” but this account of his birth is taken from one which he left behind him, in his own hand-writing Some have also thought, that he was a natural son of sir William Temple, because sir William expressed a particular regard for him; but that was impossible; for sir WilJiam was resident abroad in a public character from 1665 to 1670; and his mother, who was never out of the British dominions, brought him into the world in 1667.

Upon the death of sir William Temple, Swift applied, by petition to king William, for the- first vacant prebend of Canterbury or Westminster, for which the royal promise had been obtained by his late patron, whose posthumous works he dedicated to his majesty, to facilitate the success of that application. But it does not appear, that, after the death of sir William, the king took the least notice of Swift. After this he accepted an invitation from the earl of Berkeley, appointed one of the lords justices of Ireland, to attend him as chaplain and private secretary; but he was soon removed from this post, upon a pretence that it svas not fit for a clergyman. This disappointment was presently followed by another; for when the deanery of Derry became vacant, and it was the earl of Berkeley’s turn to dispose of it, Swift, instead of receiving it as an atonement for his late usage, was put off with the livings of Laracor and Rathbeggin, in the diocese of Meath, which together did not amount to half its value. He went to reside at Laracor, and performed the duties of a parish priest with the utmost punctuality and devotion. He was, indeed, always very devout, not only in his public and solemn addresses to God, but in his domestic and private exercises i and yet, with all this piety in his heart, he could not forbear indulging the peculiarity of his humour, when an opportunity offered, whatever might be the impropriety of the time and place. Upon his coming to Laracor, he gave public notice, that he would read prayers on Wednesdays and Fridays, which had not been the cus-> torn; and accordingly the bell was rung, and he ascended the desk. But, having remained some time with no other auditor than his clerk Roger, he began, “Dearly beloved Roger, the Scripture moveth you and me in sundry places;” and so proceeded to the end of the service. Of the same kind was his race with Dr. Raymond, vicar of Trim, soon after he was made dean of St. Patrick’s. Swift had dined one Sunday with Raymond, and when the bells had done ringing for evening prayers, “Raymond,” says Swift, “I will lay you a crown, that I begin prayers before you this afternoon.” Dr. Raymond accepted the wager, and immediately both ran as fast as they could to the church. Raymond, the nimbler of the two, arrived first at the door, and when he entered the church, walked decently towards the reading-desk: Swift never slackened his pace, but running up the aite, left Raymond behind him, and stepping into the desk, without putting on the surplice, or opening the book, began the service in an audible voice, During Swift’s residence at Laracor, he invited to Ireland a lady whom he has celebrated by the name of Stella. With this lady he became acquainted while he lived with sir William Temple: she was the daughter of his steward, whose name was Johnson; and sir William, when he died, left her 1000l. in consideration of her father’s faithful services. At the death of sir William, which happened in 1699, she was in the sixteenth year of her age; and it was about two years afterwards, that at Swift’s invitation she Jeft England, accompanied by Mrs. Dingley, a lady who was fifteen years older, and whose whole fortune, though she was related to sir William, was no more than an annuity of 27l. Whether Swift at this time desired the company of Stella as a wife, or a friend, it is not certain: but the reason which she and her companion then gave for their leaving England was, that in Ireland the interest of money was higher, and provisions were cheap. But, whatever was Swift’s attachment to Miss Johnson, every possible precaution was taken to prevent scandal: they never lived in the same house; when Swift was absent, Miss Johnson and her friend resided at the parsonage; when he returned, they removed either to his friend Dr. Raymond’s, or to a lodging; neither were they ever known to meet but in the presence of a third person. Swift made frequent excursions to Dublin, and some to London: but Miss Johnson was buried in solitude and obscurity; she was known only to a few of Swift’s most intimate acquaintance, and had no female companion except Mrs. Dingley.

During all this time he received no gratuity or reward till 1713; and then he accepted the deanery of St. Patrick’s, Dublin. A bishopric had been some “time before intended for him by the queen; but archbishop Sharpe having represented him to her majesty as a man whose Christianity was very questionable, and being supported in this by a certain very great lady, it was given to another. He immediately crossed the channel, to take possession of his new dignity but did not stay in Ireland more than a fortnight, being urged by an hundred letters to hasten back, and reconcile the lords Oxford and Bolingbroke. When he returned, he found their animosity increased; and, having predicted their ruin from this very cause, he laboured to bring about a reconciliation, as that upon which the whole interest of their party depended. Havin<* attempted this by various methods in vain, he went to a friend’s house in Berkshire, where he continued till the queen’s death; and, while he was at this place, wrote a discourse called” Free thoughts on the present state of affairs," which, however, was not published till some time after.

Upon his arrival to take possession of his deanery, he had been received with great kindness and honour; but now, upon his return after the queen’s death, he experienced every possible mark of contempt and indignation. The tables were turned; the power of the tories and the dean’s credit were at an end; and as a design to bring in the pretender had been imputed to the queen’s ministry, so Swift lay now under much odium, as being supposed to have been a well-wisher in that cause. As soon as he was settled at Dublin, Miss, or Mrs. Johnson, removed from the country to be near him, but they still lived in separate houses; his residence being at the deanery, and hers in lodgings on the other side of the river Liffy. The dean kept two public days every week, on which the dignity of his station was sustained with the utmost elegance and decorum, under the direction of Mrs. Johnson. As to his employment at home, he seems to have had no heart to apply himself to study of any kind, but to have resigned himself wholly to such amusements and such company as offered, that he might not think of his situation, the misfortunes of his friends, and his disappointments. “I was three years,” says he to Gay, “reconciling myself to the scene and business to which fortune had condemned me; and stupidity was what 1 had recourse to.”

The first remarkable event of his life, after his settlement at the deanery, was his marriage to Mrs. Johnson, after a most intimate friendship of more than sixteen years. This was in 1716; and the ceremony was performed by Dr. Ashe, then bishop of Clogher, to whom the dean had been a pupil in Trinity college, Dublin. But, whatever were the motives to this marriage, the dean and the lady continued to live afterwards just in the same manner as they had lived before. Mrs. Dingley was still the inseparable companion of Stella wherever she went; and she never resided at the deanery, except when the dean had his fits of giddiness and deafness. Till this time he had continued his visits to Vanessa, who preserved her reputation and friends, and was visited by many persons of rank, character, and fortune, of both sexes but now his visits were less frequent. In 1717 her sister died; and the whole remains of the family fortune centering in Vanessa, she retired to Selbridge, a small house and estate about twelve miles from Dublin, which had been purchased by her father. From this place she wrote frequently to the dean; and he answered her letters: she pressed him to marry her, but he rallied, and still avoided a positive denial. She pressed him still more, either to accept or refuse her as a wife; upon which he wrote an answer, and delivered it with his own hand. The receipt of this, which probably communicated the fatal secret of his marriage with Stella, the unhappy lady did not survive many weeks; she was, however, sufficiently composed to cancel a will she had made in the dean’s favour, and to make another, in which she left her fortune to her two executors, Dr. Berkeley, bishop of Cloyne, and Mr. Marshall, one of the king’s Serjeants at law.

As he lived much in solitude, he frequently amused himself with writing; and it is very remarkable, that although his mind was greatly depressed, and his principal enjoyment was at an end when Mrs. Johnson died, yet there is aji air of levity and trifling in some of the pieces he wrote afterwards, that is not to be found in any other: such in particular are his “Directions to Servants,” and several of his letters to his friend Dr. Sheridan. In 1733, when the attempt was made to repeal the test act in Ireland, the Dissenters often affected to call themselves brother-protestants, and fellow-christians, with the members of the established church. Upon this occasion the dean wrote a short copy of verses, which so provoked one Bettesworth, a lawyer, and member of the Irish parliament, that he swore, in the hearing of many persons, to revenge himself either by murdering or maiming the author; and, for this purpose, he engaged his footman, with two ruffians, to secure the dean wherever he could be found. This being known, thirty of the nobility and gentry within the liberty of St. Patrick’s waited upon the dean in form, and presented a paper subscribed with their names, in which they solemnly engaged, in behalf of themselves and the rest of the liberty, to defend his person and fortune, as the friend and benefactor of his country. When this paper was delivered, Swift was in bed, deaf and giddy, yet made a shift to dictate a proper answer. These fits of deafness and giddiness, which were the effects of his surfeit before he was twenty years old, became more frequent and violent in proportion as he grew into years: and in 1736, while he was writing a satire on the Irish parliament, which he called “The Legion Club,” he was seized with one of these fits, the effect of which was so dreadful, that he left the poem unfinished, and never afterwards attempted a composition, either in verse or prose, that required a course of thinking, or perhaps more than one sitting to finish.

From this time his memory was perceived gradually to decline, and his passions to pervert his understanding; and in 1741, he was so very bad as to be utterly incapable of conversation. Strangers were not permitted to approach him, and his friends found it necessary to have guardians appointed of his person and estate. Early in 1742, his reason was subverted, and his rage became absolute madness. In October his left eye swelled to the size of an egg, and several large boils broke out on his arms and body; the extreme pain of which kept him awake near a month, and during one week it was with difficulty that five persons restrained him, by mere force, from pulling out his eyes. Upon the subsiding of these tumours, he knew those about him; and appears so far to have recovered his understanding and temper, that there were hopes he might once more enjoy society. These hopes, however, were but of short duration; for, a few days afterwards, he sunk into a state of total insensibility, and could not, without great difficulty, be prevailed on to walk across the room. This was the effect of another bodily disease, his brain being loaded with water. Mr. Stevens, an ingenious clergyman lin, pronounced this to be the case during his illness; and, upon opening his body, it appeared that he was not mistaken. After the dean had continued silent a whole year in this state of helpless idiotism, his housekeeper went into his room on the 30th of November in the morning, and told him, “it was his birth-day, and that bonfires and illuminations were preparing to celebrate it as usual:” to which he immediately replied, “It is all folly; they had better let it alone.” Some other instances of short intervals of sensibility and reason, after his madness ended in stupor, seem to prove, that his disorder, whatever it was, had not destroyed, but only suspended, the powers of his mind. In 1744, he now and then called his servant by name; and once attempting to speak to him, but not being able to express his meaning, he shewed signs of much uneasiness, and at last said, “I am a fool.” Once afterwards, as his servant was taking away his watch, he said, “Bring it here:” and when the same servant was breaking a large hard coal, he said, “That is a stone, you blockhead.” From this time he was perfectly silent till the latter end of October 1745, and then died, without the least pang or conYu4sion, in the seventy-eighth year of his age.

His works have been printed often, and in various forms, and from them it is easy to collect his character. Of these the most elegant is in fourteen vols. 4to; a kind of variorum edition, of which eight were published by Dr. Hawkesworth, three by Deane Swift, esq. and three by Mr. Nichols. These have been reprinted in twenty-five volumes large 8vo; in twenty-seven volumes of a smaller 8vo \ and also in twenty-seven volumes 18mo. In 1784 a new edition was printed, in seventeen volumes 8vo, with an elaborate, but most injudicious Life, or rather panegyric on him, by the editor, T. Sheridan, which occupies the first volume; since which two editions, very much improved, have been published, in nineteen volumes 8vo, under the superintendence of Mr. Nichols, whose original care and judgment in collecting information respecting Swift, and procuring inedited portions of his works, has never relaxed, and never been exceeded.

There are some particulars relating to Swift’s conversation and manners which may not improperly conclude thi article. He had a rule never to speak more than a minu at a time, and to wait for others to take up the conversetion. He greatly excelled in punning and he used to say, “that none despised that talent, but those who were without it.” He excelled no less in telling a story, but in the latter part of his life he used to tell the same too often: he never dealt in the double entendre, or profaneness upon sacred subjects. He loved to have ladies in the company, because it preserved, he said, the delicacy of conversation: yet it is certain there are in his writings the greatest indelicacies. He kept his friends in some degree of awe, yet was more open to admonition than flattery. Though he appeared churlish and austere to his servants, yet he was in reality a most kind and generous master; and he was also very charitable to the poor. In the mean time, it must be owned, that there was not any great softness or sympathy in his nature; although, perhaps, not quite so much misanthropy as appears in his writings: and all allow, that he grew covetous, as he grew old. As an ecclesiastic, he was scrupulously exact in the exercise of his function, as well with regard to spiritual as temporal things. His manner was without ceremony, but not rustic; for he had a perfect knowledge of all the modes and variations of politeness, though he practised them in a manner peculiar to himself. He was naturally temperate, chaste, and frugal; and being also high-spirited, and considering wealth as the pledge of independence, it is not strange that his frugality should verge towards avarice.

As to his political principles, if his own account may be taken, he abhorred Whiggisrn only in those who made it consist in damning the church, reviling the clergy, abetting the dissenters, and speaking contemptuously of revealed religion. He always declared himself against a popish successor to the crown, whatever title he might have by proximity of blood; nor did he regard the right line upon any other account, than as it was established by law, and had much weight in the opinions of the people. That he was not at any time a bigot to party, or indiscriminately transferred his resentment from principles to persons, was. so evident by his conduct, that he was often rallied by the ministers, for never coming to them without a Whig in his sleeve; and though he does not appear 'to have asked any thing for himself, yet he often pressed lord Oxford in favour of Addison, Congreve, Rowe, and Steele. He frequently conversed with all these, choosing his friends by their personal merit, without any regard to their political principles; and, in particular, his friendship with Mr. Addison continued inviolable, and with as much kindness, as when they used to meet at lord Halifax’s or lord Somers’s, who were leaders of the opposite party.

, a near relation to the celebrated dean of St. Patrick’s, being grandson to Godwin Swift, the dean’s uncle, was in 1739 recommended by Swift to the notice of Pope, as “the most valuable of any in his family.” “He was first,” says the dean, “a student in this university [Dublin], and finished his studies in Oxford, where Dr. King, principal of St. Mary Hall, assured me, that Mr. Swift behaved with reputation and credit: he hath a very good taste for wit, writes agreeable and entertaining verses, and is a perfect master, equally skilled in the best Greek and Roman authors. He hath a true spirit for liberty, and with all these advantages is extremely decent and modest. Mr. Swift is heir to a little paternal estate of our family at Goodrich, in Herefordshire. He is named Deane Swift, because his great grandfather, by the mother’s side, was admiral Deane, who, having been one of the regicides, had the good fortune to save his neck by dying a year or two before the Restoration.” He published, in 1755, “An Essay upon the Life,' Writings, and Character of Dr. Jonathan Swift;” in 1765, the eighth quarto volume of the dean’s works; and, in 1763, two volumes of his “Letters.” Mr. Swift died at Worcester, July 12, 1783: he had long meditated a complete edition of his relation’s works, and had by him many new materials for that purpose.

, a law writer, of the seventeenth century, was the son of Thomas Swinburne of the city of York, where he was born. In his sixteenth year he was sent to Oxford, and entered a commoner of Hart-hall, whence after some time he removed to Broadgate-hall, now Pembroke college, and there took his degree of bachelor of civil law. Before he left the university he married Helena, daughter of Bartholomew Lant, of Oxford, and being then obliged to quit the college, he returned to York, and practised in the ecclesiastical courts as proctor. He afterwards commenced doctor of civil law, and became very eminent in his profession. On Feb. 10, 1612, he was advanced to be commissary of the Exchequer, and judge of the prerogative court of the province of York, in which office he continued till his death. Of this event we have no direct memorial; but, as his will was proved June 12, 1624, we may presume he died about that time. He was buried in the cathedral of York, leaving his dwelling house in York to his son Toby, and a benefaction to the poor of the city. It appears he was twice married, and that his second wife’s name was Wentworth. He wrote a “Treatise of Spousals, or Matrimonial contracts,” which was not published until 1686, 4to; but his more celebrated work was his “Treatise of Testaments and Last Wills, compiled out of the laws, ecclesiastical, civil, and canon, as also out of the common laws, customs, and statutes of this realm.” This work has passed through seven editions, 4to. 1590, 1611, 1635, 1677, 1728, fol. corrected and much en- x larged in 1743, and lastly in 1803, with valuable annotations illustrative of the subject to the present time, by the Jate John Joseph Powell, esq. and prepared for the press by James Wake, esq. in 3 vols. 8vo. Mr. Hargrave observes, that there is a curious dissertation on the customs of York, in respect to filial portions, which forms a valuable part of the work, but which is not contained in the first edition, having been afterwards added by Swinburne. Mr. Hargrave also complains that his later editors have not been careful to distinguish their own enlargements from what belongs to the author, but this is not the case in Powell’s edition, whose annotations are printed distinct from Swinburne’s text.

, a learned traveller, and probably a descendant of the preceding, was the youngest son of the late sir John Swinburne, bart. of Capheaton, in Northumberland, the long-established seat of that ancient Roman Catholic family. He was educated at Scorton school, in Yorkshire, and afterwards studied at Paris, Bourcleaux, and in the royal academy at Turin. He made the usual tour of Italy; and, in 1774, travelled with his lady on the Continent, for the express purpose of indulging their taste for antiquities and the fine arts. He spent six years in France, Spain, Italy, and Germany; formed an intimacy with some of the most celebrated literati of those coun­^ries, and received some signal marks of esteem from the sovereigns of the courts he visited. On his return to England he retired to his seat at Hamsterley, in the bishopric of Durham, which thenceforth became his principal residence. He published his Travels in Spain in a quarto volume, 1779; four years after, vol. I. of his Travels in the Two Sicilies, and a lid two years after. Both these works have been reprinted in octavo, the first in two, the other in four, volumes, with improvements. The learning and ingenuity of Mr. Swinburne have been generally acknowledged, and the warmth and animation of his descriptions discover an imagination highly susceptible of every bounty of nature or art; but he is perhaps too apt to relinquish simplicity for profusion of ornament. He was the first who brought us intimately acquainted with Spain, and the arts and monuments of its ancient inhabitants. By the marriage of his only daughter to Paul Benfield, esq. he became involved in the misfortunes of that adventurer, and obtained a place in the newly-ceded settlement of Trinidad, where he died in April 1803. His library had been sold by auction, by Leigh and Sotheby, the preceding year.

It is possible that he had not quitted England in the summer of 1730, for he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society in June that year, and admitted about three months later. It was probably while he was abroad that he was admitted into some foreign societies, namely the academy degli Apatisti at Florence, and the Etruscan academy of Cortona. On his return he seems to have taken up his abode at Oxford, where he resided all the latter part of his life, and was for many years chaplain to the gaol in that city. It may be presumed that he married in 1743; it was then at least that he gave up his fellowship. In 1759 he became bachelor of divinity; in 1767 he was elected -Gustos Archivorum, or keeper of the university records; and, on April 4, 1777, he died, in the seventy-fourth year of his age, leaving no children. His wife survived till 1784, and both were buried, with a very short and plain inscription, in the chapel of Wadham college.

The monuments of his literary life were numerous, and learned, but not of great magnitude. He published, 1. “De Linguae Etruriic Regalis vernacula Dissertatio,” Oxon. 1738, 4to, 19 pages. 2. “A critical essay concerning the words baipuv and Aaw/tAoviov, occasioned by two late inquiries into the meaning of the Demoniacks in the New Testament,” London, 1739, 8vo. 3. “De priscis Komanorum literis dissertatio,” Oxon. 1746, 4to, 20 pages. 4. “De primogenio Etruscorum alphabeto, dissertatio,” Oxon. 1746. 5. “Inscriptiones Citieae: sive in binas Inscriptiones Phoenicias, inter rudera Citii nnper repertas, conjecturae. Accedit de nummis quibusdam Samaritanis et Phceniciis, vel insolitam prae se literaturam ferentibus, vel in lucem hactenus non editis, dissertatio,” Oxford, 1750, 4to, 87 pages. 6. “Inscriptiones Citieae: sive in binas alias inscriptiones Phcenicias, inter rudera Citii nuper repertas, conjecturae,” 4to, 19 pages. 7. “De nummis quibusdam Samaritanis et Phceniciis, vel insolitam prae se literaturam ferentibus, vel in lucem hactenus non editis, dissertatio secunda,” 4to, 36 pages. 8. “Metilia: sive de quinario Gentis Metiliae, e nummis vetustis caeteroquin minimum notae, dissertatio,” Oxon. 1750, 4to, 22 pages. f J. Several dissertations published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. As, “A dissertation upon a Parthian coin; with characters on the reverse resembling those of the Palmyrenes,” vol. xlix. p. 593. “Some remarks on a Parthian coin, with a Greek and Parthian legend, never before published,” vol. i. p. 16. “A dissertation upon the Phoenician numeral characters, anciently used at Sidon,” vol. i. p. 791. “In nummum Parthicum hactenus ineditum conjecturae, vol. li. p. 683.” A dissertation upon a Samnite Denarius, never before published, vol lii. p. 28. “An account of a subaerated Denarius of the Pluetorian family, adorned with an Etruscan inscription on the reverse, never before published or explained,” vol. Jxii. p. 60. " Observations upon five ancient Persian coins, struck in Palestine or Phoenicia, before the dissolution of the Persian empire, vol. Ixii. p. 345. Other papers by him may be found in the general index to the Philosophical Transactions. 10. A part of the ancient universal history, contained in the sixth and seventh volumes of that great work. The particulars of this piece of literary history were communicated by Dr. Johnson to Mr. Nichols, in a i printed in the Gentleman’s Magazine for December 1784, p. 8l>2. The original of that paper, which affords a strong proof of the steady attachment of Johnson to the interests of literature, has been, according to his desire, deposited in the British Museum. The letter is as follows

"The late learned Mr. Swinton of Oxford having one day remarked, that one man, meaning, I suppose, no man but himself, could assign all the parts of the Universal History to their proper authors, at the request of sir Robert Chambers, or of myself, gave the account which I now transmit to you in his own hand, being willing that of so great a work the history should be known, and that each writer should receive his due proportion of praise from posterity. I recommend to you to preserve this scrap of literary intelligence, in Mr. Swinton’s own hand, or to deposit it in the Museum, that the veracity of the account may never be doubted. I am, sir,

In 1740 Mr. Swinton was involved in a law-suit, in consequence of a letter he had published. It appears from one of the newspapers of the time, that a letter from the Rev. Mr. Swinton, highly reflecting on Mr. George Baker, having fallen into the hands of the latter, the court of King’s Bench made the rule absolute for an information against Mr. Swinton. These two gentlemen were also engaged for some time in a controversy at Oxford; which took its rise from a matter relative to Dr. Thistlethwaite, some time warden of Wadham, which then attracted much attention. Mr. Swinton had the manners, and some of the peculiarities often seen in very recluse scholars, which gave rise to many whimsical stories. Among the rest, there is one mentioned by Mr. Boswell, in the Life of Johnson, as having happened in 1754. Johnson was then on a visit in the university of Oxford. “About this time,” he says, “there had been an execution of two or three criminals at Oxford, on a Monday. Soon afterwards, one day at dinner, I was saying that Mr. Swinton, the chaplain of the gaol, and also a frequent preacher before the university, a learned man, but often thoughtless and absent, preached the condemnation sermon on repentance, before the convicts on the preceding day, Sunday; and that, in the close, he told his audience that he should give them the remainder of what he had to say on the subject, the next Lord’s-day. Upon which, one of our company, a doctor of divinity, and a plain matter-of-fact man, by way of offering an apology for Mr. Swinton, gravely remarked, that he had probably preached the same sermon before the university:” Yes, sir, (says Johnson,) but the university were not to be hanged the next morning"

, a landscape painter, was born at Antwerp, about 1630, and brought up in that city under his father. He was a close imitator of nature in all his landscapes; and in his younger days went upon the Rhine and other adjacent places, where he drew several pleasant views in water-colours. Having spent more of his life in that way, than in painting, his drawings were more valued than his pictures. The duke of Buckingham, passing through the Netherlands, in his way home from his embassy into France, stayed some time at Antwerp; where, meeting with some of this master’s works, he was so well pleased with them, that he invited him over to England, and employed him at Cliefden. Sybrecht continued in his service three or four years, and then worked for the nobility and gentry of England, continuing in vogue a long time. He drew several sorts of cattle remarkably well, and usually contrived to place some of them in his landscapes. He died in London about 1703, and was buried in St. James’s church. There are some of his pictures at Newstede-abbey, lord Byron’s, and in other houses belonging to the nobility. In 1686 he made several views of Chatsvvorth.

, deserves a fuller account than can now be given of a learned and diligent man, unfortunately altogether un patronized, who undertook, and in part executed, a translation of the works of Plato. His proposals for this great undertaking were published in a quarto tract in 1759; and he produced successively, between that time and 1767, translation of the “lo, a discourse on poetry,” of “The Greater Hippias,” “The Lesser Hippias,” “The Banquet, Part I.” and “The Banquet, Part II.” He is said to have lived for some years, and finally to have died, in great indigence. The Gentleman’s Magazine places his death on April the 1st, 1787, and adds, that he was born in 1710, and educated at Wadham college, Oxford, where he took the degree of M. A. April 30, 1734. In an account published by the society called the Literary Fund, the following narrative of his death is given: “During the summer recess of the year 1788, an event took place, which tarnished the character of English opulence and humanity, and afflicted the votaries of knowledge. Floyer Sydenham, the well-known translator of Plato, one of the most useful, if not one of the most competent Greek scholars of his age; a man revered for his knowledge, and beloved for the candour of his temper and the gentleness of his manners, died in consequence of having been arrested, and detained, for a debt to a victualler, who had, for some time, furnished his frugal dinner. At the news of that event, every friend of literature felt a mixture of sorrow and shame; and one of the members of a club at the prince of Wales’s coffeehouse proposed, that it should adopt, as its object and purpose, some means to prevent similar afflictions, and to assist deserving authors and their families in distress.” Whether the account reported to these gentlemen, of the time and manner of Sydenham’s death was accurate or not, the friends of literature and humanity will feel great consolation in finding that it gave occasion to a society so benevolent in its designs; which arose 3 after a few changes and modifications, out of the proposal above-mentioned. The society is now in a flourishing and improving state, and has given very timely and important assistance to many deserving authors.

, a very eminent physician, and one of the most eminent as an improver of the art that England has produced, was born in 1624 at Winford Eagle in Dorsetshire, where his father William Sydenham, esq. had a large fortune. Under whose care he was educated, or in what manner he passed his childhood, is not known. At the age of eighteen, in 1642, he entered* as a commoner of Magdalen -hall, Oxford, where it is not probable that he continued long; for he informs us himself, that he was withheld from the university by the commencement of the war; nor is it very clearly known in what state of life he engaged, or where he resided during that long series of public commotion. It is indeed reported, that he had a commission in the king’s army*, but no particular account is given of his military conduct; nor are we told what rank he obtained (unless that of a captain), when he entered into the army, or when or on what occasion he retired from it. It is certain, however, that if ever he took upon him the profession of arms, he spent but few years in the camp; for in 1648 he obtained at Oxford the degree of bachelor of physic, for which, as some medical knowledge is necessary, it may be imagined that he spent some time in qualifying himself.

It is evident, says his biographer, that this conversation must have happened before his promotion to any degree in physic, because he himself fixes it in the interval of his absence from the university, a circumstance which will enable us to confute many false reports relating to Dr. Sydenham, which have been confidently inculcated, and implicitly believed. It is the general opinion, that he was made a physician by accident and necessity; and sir Richard Blackmore reports in plain terms (in the preface to his "Treatise on the Small-Pox 1 *), that he engaged in practice without any preparatory study, or previous knowledge,

been in the parliamentary army, in Wood, our earliest authority. of the medicinal sciences; and affirms, that, when he was consulted by him what books he should read to qualify him for the same profession, he recommended Don Quixote. That he recommended Don Quixote to Blackrnore, we are not, continues Dr. Johnson, to doubt; but the relater is hindered by that self-love which dazzles all mankind, from discovering that he might intend a satire very different from a general censure of all the ancient and modern writers’on medicine, since he might perhaps mean, either seriously or in jest, to insinuate, that Blackmore was not adapted by nature to the study of physic, and that, whether he should read Cervantes, or Hippocrates, he would be equally unqualified for practice, and equally unsuccessful in it. Whatever was his meaning, nothing is more evident, than that it was a transitory sally of an imagination warmed with gaiety, or the negligent effusion of a mind intent on some other employment, and in haste to dismiss a troublesome intruder for it is certain that Sydenham did not think it impossible to write usefully on medicine, because he has himself written upon it and it is not probable that he carried his vanity so far, as to imagine that no man had ever acquired the same qualifications besides himself. He could not but know that he had rather restored than invented most of his principles, and therefore could not but acknowledge the value of those writers whose doctrines he adopted and enforced.

That he engaged in the practice of physic without any acquaintance with the theory, or knowledge of the opinions or precepts of former writers, is undoubtedly false, for he declares that after he had, in pursuance of his conversation with Dr. Cox, determined upon the practice of physic, he applied himself in earnest to it, and spent several years in the university, before he began to practise in London. Nor was he satisfied with the opportunities of knowledge which Oxford afforded, but travelled to Montpellier, as Desault relates (“Dissertation on Consumptions” ), in quest of farther information, Montpellier being at that time the most celebrated school of physic. It is a common opinion that he was thirty years old before he formed his resolution of studying physic; but this arises from the misrepresentation of an expression in his dedication to Dr. Mapletoft, in which he observes that from his conversation with Dr. Cox to the publication of that treatise thirty years had intervened. The facts already related sufficiently confute this error, since it appears that Sydenham, after having been for some time absent from the university, returned to it in order to pursue his physical inquiries before he was twenty-four years old; for in 1648, when exactly of that age, he was admitted to the degree of M.B.

About the same time that he became bachelor of physic, he obtained, by the interest of a relation, a fellowship of All Souls’ college, having submitted, by the subscription required, to the authority of the visitors appointed by the parliament, upon what principles, or how consistently with his former conduct, it is now impossible to discover f. When he thought himself qualified for practice, he fixed his residence in Westminster, became doctor of physic at Cambridge, received a licence from the college of physicians, and lived in the first degree of reputation, and the greatest affluence of practice, for many years, without any other enemies than those which he raised by the superior merit of his conduct, the bright lustre of his abilities, or his improvements of his science, and his contempt of pernicious methods supported only by authority in opposition to sound reason and indubitable experience. These men are indebted to him for concealing their names, when he

Dr. Sydenham, however, was not destined for long life. His health began to fail in the fifty-second year of his age, by frequent attacks of the gout, to which he had long been subject, and which afterwards was accompanied with the stone in the kidneys, and its natural consequence, bloody urine. These were distempers, says his elegant biographer, which even the art of Sydenham could only palliate, without hope of a perfect cure, but which, if he has not been able by his precepts to instruct us to remove, he has, at least, by his example taught us to bear; for he never betrayed any indecent impatience, or unmanly dejection, under his torments, but supported himself by the reflections of philosophy, and the consolations of religion, and in every interval of ease applied himself to the assistance of others with his usual assiduity. After a life thus usefully employed, he died at his house in Pall-mall, Dec. 29, 1689, in the sixty-fifth year of his age, and was buried in the aile, near the south door, of the church of St. James’s, Westminster.

His works have been collected and frequently printed at London in one volume 8vo. The last edition is that by John Swan, M. D. of Newcastle in Staffordshire, 1742. To this is prefixed a life of Dr. Sydenham, by Dr. Johnson, which we have chiefly followed in the preceding account. His works were also printed at Leipsic in J 711, at Geneva in 1716, in 2 vols. 4to, and at Leyden in 8vo. They were written by himself in English, but translated afterwards into Latin, of which it is our opinion he was fully capable, although these translations, as already noticed, have been attributed to Dr. Mapletoft and others. The last English edition is that by Dr. George Wallis, 1788, 2 vols. 8vo, with notes and opinions of subsequent medical writers. Sydenham has frequently been called the father of physic among the moderns. He tells us, in the preface to his works, that “the increase and perfection of the medical art is to be advanced by these two means: by composing an history of distempers, or a natural and exact description of distempers and their symptoms; and by deducing and establishing a method of cure from thence.” This is the way which that great delineator of the right road to real knowledge in all its various branches, lord Bacon, had pointed out; and its being more closely pursued by Sydenham than by any modern physician before him, is what has justly entitled him to those high encomiums which have ever been paid him. Sir Richard Blackmore allows, and all are now convinced, that Sydenham, “who built all his maxims and rules of practice upon repeated observations on the nature and properties of diseases, and the power of remedies, has compiled so good an history of distempers, and so prevalent a method of cure, that he has improved and advanced the healing art much more than Dr. Willis with all his curious speculations and fanciful hypotheses.” He relates of himself, in his dedication to Dr. Mapletoft, that ever since he had applied himself to the practice of physic, he had been of opinion, and the opinion had been every day more and more confirmed in him, that the medical art could not be learned so surely as by use and experience; and that he, who should pay the nicest and most accurate attention to the symptoms of distempers, would infallibly succeed best in searching out the true means of cure. “For this reason,” says he, “I gave myself up entirely to thjs method of proceeding, perfectly secure and confident, that, while 1 followed nature as my guide, I could never err.” He tells him afterwards, that Mr. Locke approved his method, which he considered as no small sanction to it; and what he says upon this occasion of Mr. Locke is worth transcribing: “Nosti prseterea, quern huic meiE methodo suffragantem habeam, qui earn intimius per omnia perspexerat, utrique nostrum conjunctissimum dominum Joannem Locke; quo quidem viro, sive ingenio judicioque acri & subacto, sive etiam antiquis, hoc est, optimis moribus, vix superiorem quenquam, inter eos qui nunc.sunt homines repertum in confido; paucissimns rertci pares.” There are some Latin elegiac verses by Mr. Locke, addressed to Sydenham, prefixed to his 4< Treatise upon Severs." Mr. Granger has remarked that Sydenham received higher honours from foreign physicians than from his countrymen. This, however, applies only to his contemporaries, for no modern English physician has ever mentioned Sydenham unless in terms of high veneration. The encomiums of Boerhaave and Haller are well known to medical readers. His great merit consists in the accurate descriptions which he has left us of several diseases which first became conspicuous in his time. His account of the smallpox, and of his medical treatment of that disease, is admirable, and contributed in no small degree to establish his celebrity. He was the first person who introduced the cooling regimen in fevers, a method of treatment frequently attended with the happiest effects, though it must be acknowledged that he did not sufficiently distinguish between the typhus and the inflammatory fever, and on that account he sometimes carried his bleedings to an excess. He contributed also essentially to introduce the Peruvian bark as a cure for intermittents.

, a divine of the church of England, but to whom that church was little indebted, was the son of Mr. Arthur Sykes, of Ardely or Yardly in Hertfordshire, and was born in London about 1684. He was educated at St. Paul’s school under the celebrated Mr. Postlethwayte, and was admitted of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, in 1701, under the care of the rev; Charles Kidman, B. D. tutor of that college. In Feb. 1701-2 he was appointed a scholar of the house. While an undergraduate he wrote some Hebrew verses on the death of king William, which were printed in the Cambridge collection on that occasion. He took the degree of B. A. in 1704-5, and proceeded M. A. in 1708, After leaving college he was employed for some time as one of the assistants at St. Paul’s school, but quitted this situation as inconsistent with the prosecution of his private studies. In 1712-13 he was collated to the vicarage of Godmersham in Kent by archbishop Tenison, who had a great personal regard for him, and was a generous patron to the members of Corpus Christi) of which he had himself been fellow. In April 1714 he was instituted to the rectory of Dry-Dray ton in Cambridgeshire, on the presentation of the duchess dowager of Bedford, and in August following he resigned his vicarage of Godmersham in Kent. In Nov. 1718, he was instituted to the rectory of Rayleigh in Essex, which he retained to his death, but now resigned the living of DryDrayton. In Dec. following, at a meeting of the governors and directors of King-street chapel, Golden-square, he was unanimously appointed afternoon preacher at that place, which is a chapel of ease to St. James’s Westminster, of which his friend Dr. Clarke was then rector. In 1721, on the morning preachership becoming vacant by Dr. Wilcocks’s promotion to the see of Gloucester, Mr. Sykes was unanimously appointed to succeed him. In January 1723-4 he was collated to the prebend of AltonBorealis in the cathedral of Salisbury, by bishop Hoadly, and three years afterwards his lordship appointed him to the pnrcentorship of the same cathedral, vacant by the death of their common friend Dr. Daniel Whitby. In April 1725, upon the nomination of Dr. Clarke, he was appointed assistant preacher at St. James’s church, Westminster. In 1726 he proceeded to take the degree of D. D. in the university of Cambridge. In Feb. 1739 he was advanced to the deanry of St. Burien in Cornwall, which is in the patronage of the crown; and on October 15, 1740, he was collated to a prebend in the cathedral of Winchester, through the friendship of his former patron bishop Hoadly, who had been translated to the see of Winchester in 1734. His ecclesiastical promotions seem to have ended here.

During many years Dr. Sykes had been greatly afflicted with the gout and stone, but had received much relief from the pains of the latter disorder, for fifteen or sixteen years before his death, by the medicine purchased by parliament of Mrs. Stephens, for the public use. And upon the whole he enjoyed a general state of good health and spirits, until he was seized with a stroke of the palsy, while attending the funeral of a friend, on Monday evening, Nov. 15, 1756, and died, at his house in Cavendish-square, at two o'clock in the afternoon of Tuesday the 23d, in the seventythird year of his age. He was buried near the pulpit in the parish church of St. James’s Westminster 6n the 30th of November. Dr. Gregory Sharpe, who succeeded him in King-street chapel, and was afterwards master of the Temple, and who had long been in habits of friendship with the deceased, officiated upon this occasion.

His publications amount in the whole to sixty-three. Most of these are only pamphlets on temporary topics, and are now little known or sought after; but the following have been thought to possess a more permanent character: “Essay on the Truth of the Christian Religion; wherein its real foundation upon the Old Testament is shown” this was published in 1725 against Collins; and “The principles and connexion bf Natural and Revealed Religion distinctly considered,” 1740, 8vo.

, a learned German, eminent for his great skill in Greek, was born at Marpurg, in the landgraviate of Hesse, in 1546, or, as Saxius says, 1536. His father, who was a farmer, gave him a liberal education, of which he made so good a use, as to become perfect in the Latin, French, and Greek languages, at a time when the latter was understood by very few. He was a school-master at Licha, for some of the first years of his life; but afterwards quitted that employment, and applied himself wholly to the revision and correction of ancient authors, the Greek particularly; many of which, still held in estimation, were published by him, from the presses of Wechel and Commelin. Among these were Aristotle, Herodotus, Dionysius Halicarnassensis, Dion Cassius, Justin Martyr, Clemens Alexandrinus, Theodoret, &c. He gave some assistance to Henry Stephens in compiling his ^ Thesaurus Graecoe linguae;“and was also the author of a Greek grammar, which was much valued, a Hebrew grammar, notes upon Clenardus, &c. For these and other services, he had an arinual stipend allowed him by the university of Marpurg. He was universally well spoken of by the learned, and died much lamented by them in 1596.” Unhappy event,“says Casaubon,” to the republic of letters for, a few days before his death, he sent me word by Commelin of many new labours projected and begun. The lovers of Greek have more especially reason to deplore the loss of him."

, the laborious and quaint translator of Du Bartas, was born in 1563, and died September 28, 1618. His death happened at Middleburg in Holland. By what circumstances he was induced, or compelled, to quit his native country we have not discovered; but John Vicars, his friend, who styles him “the best of Poets,” speaks of it as a reproach to his country.

He was, in 1597, a candidate for the office of secretary to the company of merchant adventurers at Stade, of which he was a member; on which occasion the unfortunate earl of Essex interested himself in his favour, and wrote two letters in his behalf, dated from the court on the last of April; a private one to Mr. Ferrers, the deputy-governor, recommending Mr. Sylvester as an able and honest man; and a general one to the company, to the same purpose, in which he mentions that he had received a very good report of his sufficiency and fitness for the post of secretary, being both well qualified with language, and many other good parts, and honest and of good conversation; two especial motives of his lordship’s request in his behalf. Sylvester’s translation of Du Bartas is dedicated to king James;^nd among those who pay him the highest compliments appears Ben Jonson, whom tradition makes an intimate friend, and, as some think, a relation. He translated also the Quatrains of Pibrac, and many other pieces of French poetry; with some from the Latin of Fracastorius, &c. One of his own pieces has the ridiculously quaint title of “Tobacco battered, and the pipes shattered, (about their ears that idlely idolize so base and barbarous a weed; or at least-wise over-love so loathsome a vanitie:) by a volley of holy shot thundered from mount Helicon.” This may be supposed to have been written to please the great enemy of tobacco, James I. Not much can now be said in favour of his compositions, either the translations, or those that are original, although he gained greater reputation from the former than the latter. Dryden tells us, in the Dedication to the Spanish Fryar, that tf when he was a boy, he thought inimitable Spenser a mean poet, in comparison of Sylvester’s Dubartas," and ^ was wrapt into an ecstacy when he read these lines

, a celebrated physician of France, was the son of Nicholas du Bois, a camblet-weaver, who had eleven sons and four daughters. He was born at Amiens in Picardy, in 1478, and went through a course of classical learning, under his elder brother Francis Sylvius; who was principal of the college of Tournay at Paris, and was a great promoter of letters in that age of barbarism. There he learned the Latin language, in much greater purity than it had been taught for a long time; and hence it was, that his writings are distinguished to such advantage by the elegance of the style. He became a very accomplished scholar in Latin and Greek, and had some little knowledge of the Hebrew; and applied himself also to mathematics and mechanics so successfully, as to invent machines, which deserved public notice. When the time was come for giving himself entirely up to physic, to which study his inclination had always led him, he traced it to its sources; and engaged so deeply in the reading of Hippocrates and Galen, that he scarcely did any thing but examine and translate those two authors. He discovered from thence the importance of anatomy, and applied himself to it so ardently, that he became as great a master as that age would permit. He studied pharmacy with no less care, and took several journeys to see, upon the spot, the medicines which different countries produce. Upon his return to Paris, he read lectures, and explained in two years a course of physic from Hippocrates and Galen; which so much extended his reputation, that scholars from all parts of Europe resorted to him. But being prohibited at last from teaching as not having taken his degree, he went to Montpellier in 1520 for that purpose, but not being willing to pay the expences of graduation, he returned to Paris, and by an agreement with the faculty, recommenced his lectures, although only a bachelor of physic. In 1535 he taught in the college of Treguier, while Fernelius taught in tbat of Cornouailles; but the latter had few scholars, while the former had about five hundred. The reason of this difference was, that Sylvius dissected bodies, and read lectures upon botany and the preparation of medicines, advantages which the scholars of Fernelius had not. The professorship of physic in the royal college becoming vacant in 1548, Sylvius was nominated to fill it; which he did, after hesitating about it two years. He continued in it till his death, which happened Jan. 13, 1555. He was never married, and shewed even an aversion to women. His personal character was particularly obnoxious. His behaviour was rude and barbarous. He had nothing social in his temper, or ever departed from a certain pompous stiffness; and it was observed that when he attempted to relax, he did it aukwardly. The only witticism related of him is, that “he had parted with three beasts, his cat, his mule, and his maid.” His avarice was extreme, and he lived in the most sordid manner: he allowed his servants nothing but dry bread, and had no fire all the winter. Two things served him as a remedy against cold; he played at foot-ball, and carried a great log upon his shoulders: and he said that the heat which he gained by this exercise was more beneficial to his health than that of a fire. He was most rigid in demanding his fees from his scholars, yet was puzzled often what to do with his money, for when, in 1616, his house in the rue de St. Jacques was pulled down, the workmen found many pieces of gold, which he had probably hid and knew not where to find. This avarice, which was his ruling passion, exposed him to the wit of his contemporaries. Buchanan has a distich on him, beginning “Sylvius hie situs est, gratis qui nil dedit unquam, &c.” and a dialogue was published under the title of “Sylvius ocreatus,” or “Sylvius booted,” of which it was thought that Henry Stephens was the author, by the assumed name of Ludovicus Arrivabenus Mantuanus. It is founded on the supposition that Sylvius, wishing to pass Acheron without paying anything, went in boots that he might ford it. This satire was answered by John Melet, one of his pupils, who adopted the name of Claudius Burgensis, and entitled his performance “Apologia in Lud. Arrivabenum pro D. J. Silvio.”

, an ancient fathei: and bishop of the Christian church, flourished at the beginning of the fifth century. He was born at Cyrene in Africa, a town situated upon the borders of Egypt, and afterwards travelled to th neighbouring country for improvement, where he happily succeeded in his studies under the celebrated female philo-r sopher Hypatia, who presided at that time over the Platonic school at Alexandria, where also the eminent mathematicians Theon, Pappus, and Hero taught. Nicephorus, patriarch of Constantinople, who wrote annotations on a piece of Synesius, called “De insomniis,” represents him as a man of prodigious parts and learning and says, that “there was nothing he did not know, no science wherein he did not excel, no mystery in which he was not initiated and deeply versed.” His works are in high esteem with the curious; and his epistles, in Suidas’s opinion, are admirable, and in that of Photius, as well as Evagrius, “elegant, agreeable, sententious, and learned.' 1 Synesius was a man of noble birth, which added no less weight to his learning, than that reflected lustre on his quality; and both together procured him great credit and authority. He went, about the year 400, upon an embassy, which lasted three years, to the emperor Arcadius at Constantinople, on the behalf of his country, which was miserably harassed by the auxiliary Goths and other barbarians; and it was then, as he himself tells \is, that” with greater boldness than any of the Greeks, he pronounced before the emperor an oration concerning government.“About the year 410, when the citizens of Ptolemais applied to Theophilus of Alexandria for a bishop, Synesius was appointed and consecrated, though he took all imaginable pains to decline the honour. He declared himself not at all convinced of the truth of some of the most important articles of Christianity. He was verily persuaded of the existence of the soul before its union with the body; he could not^ conceive the resurrection of the body; nor did he believe that the world should ever be destroyed. He also owned himself to have such an affection for his wife, that he would not consent, either to be separated from her, or to Jive in a clandestine manner with her; and told Theophilus, that, if he did insist upon making him a bishop, he must leave him in possession of his wife and all his notions. Theophilus at length submitted to these singular terms,” upon a presumption,“it is said,” that a man, whose life and manners were in every respect so exemplary, could not possibly be long a bishop without being enlightened with heavenly truth. Nor,“continues Cave,” was Theophilus deceived; for Synesius was no sooner seated in hit bishopric, than he easily acquiesced in the doctrine of the resurrection.“Baronius says in his Annals,” that he does not believe these singularities of Synesius to have been his real sentiments; but only that he pretended them, with a view of putting a stop to the importunities of Theophilus, and of warding off this advancement to a bishopric, which was highly disagreeable to him." That the advancement was highly disagreeable to Synesius, is very certain; but it is likewise as certain, that Baronius’s supposition is without all foundation. There is extant a letter of Synesius to his brother, of which an extract may be given, as illustrative of his character and opinions.

“I should be exceedingly to blame if I did not return most hearty thanks to the inhabitants of Ptolemais, for thinking me worthy of such honours, as I own I do not think myself worthy of: yet it is highly incumbent on me to consider, not only the great things they offer, but how far it may be prudent in me to accept them. Now, the more I reflect upon it, the more I am convinced of my own inability to sustain the office and dignity of a bishop; and I will frankly tell you my thoughts upon this occasion. While I had nothing to support but the character of a philosopher, I acquitted myself, I may say, with tolerable credit; and this nas made some imagine that I am fit to be a bishop. But they have riot considered, with what difficulty the mind acquires a new bent; that is, adapts itself to a province it has hitherto been a stranger to. I for my part am afraid, that by quitting the philosopher, and putting on the bishop, I should spoil both characters, that my new honours should make me arrogant and assuming, destroying at once the modesty of the philosopher; and yet that I should not be able to support them with a becoming dignity. For only consider my way of life hitherto. My time has always been divided between books and sports. In the hours of study nothing can be more retired, but in our sports every body sees us; and you know very well, that no man is fonder of all kinds of recreations than myself. You know also, that I have an aversion to civil employments, as indeed my education, and the whole bent of my studies, have been quite foreign to them. But a bishop ought to be, as it were, a man of God, averse to pleasures and amusements, severe in his manners, and for ever employed in the concerns of his flock. It requires a happy complication of qualities to do all this as it should be done; to sustain such a weight of care and business; to be perpetually conversant with the affairs of men; and yet to keep himself unspotted from the world. It is true, I see this done- by some men, and I highly admire and revere them lor it; but I am myself incapable of doing it; and I will not burthen my conscience with undertaking what I know I cannot perform. But I have still farther reasons for declining this charge, which I will here produce; for though I am writing to you, yet I beg this letter may be made public: so that, whatever may be the result of this affair, or which way soever I may be disposed of, I may, at least, stand clear with God and man, and especially with Theophilus, when I shall have dealt thus openly and fairly. I say then, that God, the laws of the land, and the holy hands of Theophilus, have given me a wife: but I declare to all men, that I will neither suffer myself to be separated from her, nor consent to live like an adulterer in a clandestine manner: the one I think impious, the other unlawful. I declare further, that it will always be my earnest desire and prayer, to lywe as many children by her as possible. Again, let it be considered how difficult, or rather how absolutely impossible it is, to pluck up those doctrines, which by the means of knowledge are rooted in the soul to a demonstration. But you know, that philosophy is diametrically opposite to the doctrines of Christianity; nor shall I ever be able to persuade myself, for instance, that the soul had no existence before its union with the body, that the world and all its parts will perish together, and that the trite and thread-bare doctrine of the resurrection, whatever mystery be couched under it, can have any truth in it, as it is professed by the vulgar. A philosopher, indeed, who is admitted to the intuition of truth, will easily see the necessity of lying to the people; for Jight is to the eye, what truth is to the people. The eye cannot bear too much light; nay, if it is under the least indisposition, it is actually relieved by darkness: in like manner fable and falsehood may be useful to the people, while unvdling the truth may do them hurt. If, therefore, this method be consistent with the duties of the episcopal dignity; if I may freely philosophize at hyme, while I preach tales abroad; and neither teach nor unteach, but suffer people to retain the prejudices in which they were educated, I may indeed be consecrated; but if they shall say, that a bishop ought to go farther, and not only speak, but think like the people, I must declare off, &c.”

Besides rejecting the doctrine of the resurrection of the body, in his “Hymns” Synesius adapts the triad, or rather quaternion of the schools, to the received Christian doc* trine of the Trinity. If the language of these mystical odes, says Brucker, be compared with that of the gnostics and cabbalists, with the theology of Proclus, and the Zo-> roastrean oracles, it will be easily seen that Synesius was a more worthy disciple of Hypatia than of Jesus Christ. His works were published, together with those of Cyril of Jerusalem, by Petavius at Paris, 1612; and afterwards, with an addition of notes, in 1633, folio. They are far from being voluminous, consisting only of about one hundred and fifty epistles, and some small pieces. He is chiefly celebrated for his eloquence, an elegant specimen of wbich remains in his “Dion,” a treatise on the manner in which he instructed himself.

, a pious and learned archbishop of Tuam in Ireland, was the second son of Edward, bishop of Cork, &c. and was born April the 6th, 1659, at Inishonaner, of which parish his father was then vicar. He was educated at the grammar school at Cork, and thence admitted a commoner at Christchurch, Oxford, where he tooTt the degree of B. A. but on his father’s death returned to Ireland, and finished his studies in the university of Drabiin. His first preferment was two small parishes in the di-ocese of Meath, both together of about the yearly value of 100l. These he exchanged for the vicarage of Christchurch in the city of Cork, of the same value, but one of the most painful and laborious cures in Ireland. This he served for above twenty years, mostly without any assistant; preached twice every Sunday, catechised, and discharged all the other duties of his function. Some ecclesiastical preferments, tenable with his great cure, were given him at different times by the bishops of Cork and Cloyne, which at last increased his income to near 400l. per annum. In this situation an offer was made him by government;,' in 1699, of the deanery of Derry; but, although this uras a dignity, and double in value to all that he had, yet he; declined it from a motive of filial piety. He would not; separate himself from an aged mother, who either could not, or was unwilling, to be removed. Remaining therefore at Cork, he was chosen proctor for the chapter, in the convocation called in 1703. Soon after, the duke of Ormond, then lord-lieutenant of Ireland, gave him the crown’s title to the deanery of St. Patrick’s, in Dublin. But the chapter disputed this title, and claimed a right of election in themselves; and to assert this right, they chose Dr. John Sterne, then chancellor of the cathedral, their dean. The title of the crown being thus thought defective, and, after a full discussion of the point, found to be so,Dr. King, archbishop of Dublin, proposed an accommodation, which took place, and in consequence Dr. Sterne continued dean, and the archbishop gave the chancellorship to Mr. Synge.

This brought Mr. Synge to Dublin, though without any addition of income, or relaxation from labour, for the chancellor of St. Patrick’s, as such, has the care of the parish of St. Werburgh, one of the most populous in Dublin. This great cure Mr. Synge served for eight years, preaching almost constantly to a crowded audience. During this period he took his degree of D. D. and a new convocation being summoned in 1713, he was chosen proctor for the chapter of St. Patrick’s. On Dr. Sterne’s promotion to the see of Dromore, the archbishop of Dublin appointed Dr. Synge his vicar-general, in which office he continued until he was made bishop of Raphoe, in 17 14. His distinguished zeal for the revolution, and the Hanover succession, which had effectually obstructed his preferment in the latter years of queen Anne’s reign, now as effectually promoted it, for, in 1716, he was made archbishop of Tuam, over which see he presided about twentyfive years. He died at Tuam, July 24, 1741, aged eightytwo, and was buried in the church-yard of his own cathedral.

, one of the most eminent Roman historians, was born, most probably, in the year of Rome 809 or 810, or about 56 of the Christian aera; but the place of his nativity is no where mentioned. He was the son of Cornelius Tacitus, a procurator appointed by the prince to manage the Imperial revenue, and govern a province in Belgic Gaul. Where he was educated is not known; but it is evident that he did not imbibe the smallest tincture of that frivolous science, and that vicious eloquence which in his time debased the Roman genius. He most probably was formed upon the plan adopted in the time of the republic; and, with the help of a sound scheme of home-discipline, and the best domestic example, he grew up, in a course of virtue, to that vigour of mind which gives such animation to his writings. His first ambition was to distinguish himself at the bar. In the year of Rome 828, the sixth of Vespasian, being then about eighteen, he attended the eminent men of the day, in their inquiry concerning the causes of corrupt eloquence, and is supposed to have been the author of the elegant dialogue concerning oratory, usually printed with his works.

Nerva died Jan. 27, in the year of Rome 851, having, about three months before, adopted Trajan as his successor. In that short interval the critics have agreed to place the publication of the “Life of Agricola,” by Tacitus, but Mr. Murphy assigns very good reasons for referring it to the reign of Trajan. The “Treatise on the Manners of the Germans,” it is generally agreed, made its appearance in the year of Rome 851. The “Dialogue concerning Oratory” was an earlier production, and probably was published in the reign of Titus or Domitian, who are both celebrated in that piece, for their talents and their love of polite literature.

Without entering on the merits of Tacitus as a historian, which have been the subject of very extensive discussion, we may refer to Mr. Murphy’s comprehensive view of his life and genius. It is universally acknowledged that his works are among the most precious remains of antiquity, and it is not much less universally acknowledged that he exhibits the defects as well as excellencies of the historian, The first edition of his works was published at Venice by John de Spira in 1468, containing the last six books of the “Annals,” four books of the “History,” with part of the fifth, the treatise on the “Manners of the Germans,” and the “Dialogue concerning Oratory,*' which we see has always been printed with Tacitus’ s works, although many critics have doubted whether it was his. Another edition was published in a year or two after by Franciscus Puteolanus, more correct and elegant than the former, with the addition of the life of Agricola. The first six books of the” Annals" had not then been found, but diligent search being made in all parts of Europe, they were at length discovered in the monastery of Corby in Westphalia. Leo X. purchased this treasure, and, under his patronage, Beroaldus, in 1515, gave the world a complete edition of the. whole, the manuscript having been deposited in the Florentine library. The principal subsequent editions were those of Froben, 1519, 1533, and 1544, fol.; several by Lipsius, 1574 1619; by Freinsheim, 1638 and 1664, 8vo; Elzivir, 1634, 1640, 2 vols. 12mo; the Variorum, 1672 and 1685, 2 vols. 8vo; by Rickius, 1687, 2 vols. 12mo; by Gronovius, 1721, 2 vols. 4to by Mrs. Grierson of Dublin, 1730, 3 vols. 8vo; by Ernest, 1752, 1772,2 vols. 8vo; by Lallemand, 1760, 3 vols. 12mo; by Brotier, 1771, 4 vols. 4to; by Crellius, 1779—02, 4 vols. 8vo; by Homer, 1790, 4 vols. 8vo; at Edinburgh, 1796, 4 vols. 4to and 8vo and by Oberlin, 1801, 2 vols. 8vo. Broiler’s, undoubtedly the best edition, is the model of all that followed. There have been translations of Tacitus in most European languages. His whole works have been published in English, with large political discourses annexed, by Mr. Gordon. The style of Gordon is, however, so vicious and affected, that it is impossible to read him with patience; and Tacitus has lately found a much more elegant and judicious translator in Mr. Murphy, whose work in 4 vols. 4to, was published in 1793, and has met with very general approbation. There have been in all, four English translations of Tacitus; that of Greenway and sir Henry Saville in the reign of Elizabeth that performed by Dry den and others; the translation by Gordon; and that of Murphy.

Although we cannot fix the exact time of his going to France, it appears that he attended Henry V. at the siege of Caen in 1417; and the following year, in conjunction with Richard Beauchamp, earl of Warwick, lord Talbot took the strong castle of Dumfront: and was afterwards present at the siege of Rouen, on all which occasions he was esteemed one of the bravest of those officers who had contributed to the conquest of France. About 1422 we find him again in England, employed in suppressing some riots, in the counties of Salop, Hereford, &c. but he returned again to the continent before the year 1427, at which time he regained possession of the city of Mans, which had been a considerable time in the hands of the English, but had in part been retaken by the French, who were now attacked with such impetuosity, that all their troops were either killed or taken prisoners. The unexpected recovery of this important place, the capital of the province of Maine, as it was entirely owing to lord Talbot, contributed not a little to encrease his military fame. He then made himself master of the town of Laval, and having joined the earl of Warwick in the siege of Pontorson, carried that place too, which had before been the grand obstacle in preventing the regent, the duke of Bedford, from carrying the war beyond the Loire. On its surrender, the earl of Warwkk appointed lord Talbot and lord Ross governors of it.

Lord Talbot had sustained a tedious captivity of three years and a half in the hands of the French, when the duke of Bedford found means to have him exchanged, Feb. 12, 1433, for Xaintrailles, a French officer of great reputation; and after paying a short visit to England, his lordship resumed his command in France, and Joan of Arc’s magic having no longer any influence, she having, according to the common accounts, been put to death as an impostor, or a witch, Lord Talbot, whose name was still an object of terror, extended his conquests, and took several fortified places, with his accustomed skill and bravery. In some instances he is accused of having treated the garrisons with improper severity, and perhaps the long duration of his captivity might have contributed to increase his animosity against the enemy. Among the places he took were the castle of Joigny, Beaumont upon the Oise, Creil, Pont de Maxeme, Neufville, Rouge Maison, Crespi in Valois, Clermont, St. Dennis, and Gisors. One of his exploits was performed in a singular manner. In the beginning of H37, the weather was so extremely cold, that the generals on both sides could not undertake any regular operation in the field, yet even this lord Talbot contrived to turn to advantage. He collected a body of troops, and putting white cloths, or shirts, over their other clothes, marched with them all night, and brought them to the very walls of Pontoise, unperceived by the garrison, who did not distinguish them from the snow with which the ground was covered. They then mounted the walls by means of scaling-ladders, and seizing the chief gates, lord Talbot made himself master of this important place, which exposed the Parisians to the continual incursions of the English garrison up to the very gates of Paris.

It has been said of lord chancellor Talbot, that eloquence never afforded greater charms from any orator, than when the public attention listened to his sentiments, delivered with the most graceful modesty; nor did wisdom and knowledge ever support it with more extensive power, nor integrity enforce it with greater weight. In apprehension he so far exceeded the common rank of men, that he instantaneously, or by a kind of “intuition, saw the strength or imperfection of any argument; and so penetrating was his sagacity, that the most intricate and perplexing mazes of the law could never so involve and darken the truth, as to conceal it from his discernment. As a member of each house of parliament, no man ever had a higher deference paid to his abilities, or more confidence placed in his inflexible public spirit; and so excellent was his temper, so candid his disposition in debate, that he never offended those whose arguments he opposed. When his merit, and the unanimous suffrage of his country, induced his prince to intrust him with the great seal, his universal affability, his easiness of access, his humanity to the distress, which his employment too frequently presented to his view, and his great dispatch of business, engaged to him the affection and almost veneration of all who approached him. And by constantly delivering with his decrees the reasons upon which they were founded, his court was a very instructive school of equity, and his decisions were generally attended with such conviction to the parties, against whose interest they were made, that their acquiescence in them commonly prevented any farther expence. As no servile expedient raised him to power, his country knew he would use none to support himself in it. He was constant and regular in his devotions both in his family and in public. His piety was exalted, rational, and unaffected. He was firm in maintaining the true interest and legal rights of the church of England, but an enemy to persecution. When he could obtain a short interval from business, the pompous formalities of his station were thrown aside; his table was a scene where wisdom and science shone, enlivened and adorned with elegance of wit. There was joined the utmost freedom of dispute with the highest good breeding, and the vivacity of mirth with primitive simplicity of manners. Whtii he had leisure for exercise, he delighted in field-sports; and even in those trifles shewed, that he was formed to excel in whatever he engaged; and had he indulged himself more in them, especially at a time when he found his health unequal to the excessive fatigues of his post, the nation might not yet have deplored a loss it could ill sustain. But though he was removed at a season of life when others but begin to shine, he might justly be said,” satis & ad vitam & ad gloriam vixisse" and his death united in one general concern a nation, which scarce ever unanimously agreed in any other particular; and notwithstanding the warmth of our political divisions, each party endeavoured to outvie the other in a due reverence to his memory.

Besides her mother’s instructions, which were chiefly confined to religious principles, Miss Talbot enjoyed the benefit of a constant intercourse with the eminent divine with whom they lived; and his enlightened mind soon discovered the extent of her early genius, and was delighted to assist in its improvement. Hence, although she never studied the learned languages, unless perhaps a little Latin, she reaped all the advantages of Mr. Seeker’s deep and extensive learning, of his accurate knowledge of the Scriptures, and of his critical and unwearied research into the sciences and languages more immediately connected with that important study. Yet though so much attention was bestowed on serious pursuits, the lighter and more ornamental parts of female education were not neglected; and for the acquirement of these there was abundant opportunity in the different situations in which Mr. Seeker’s rapid progress in the church placed him. From the time that she was seven years old, she lived, almost constantly, in or near large cities; and was consequently enabled to acquire every useful branch of education, and all elegant accomplishments. She made some progress in music, but much more in drawing and painting in water-colours. Nor were the sciences and modern languages neglected; she had a competent knowledge of French and Italian, and late in life she taught herself German. She studied also geography and astronomy with much care and attention, and her master in the latter of these sciences, a Mr. Wright, was the means of her becoming acquainted with the celebrated Mrs. Carter, with whom she formed a strict friendship, the amiable turn of which may be seen in their correspondence lately published. Miss Talbot formed also other friendly connections with persons of merit and rank, who highly esteemed her.

At what age she began to compose does not appear; but certainly it was early in life, for her poem on reading Hammond’s elegies was written when she was not more than twenty- two years of age and though not one of the best of them, it shows that she was familiar with composition, and that her powers of mind had been accustomed to exertion. There are no dates, however, to her different productions, and therefore we cannot trace her progress in composition or sentiment, nor could she be prevailed upon by her friends either to arrange her papers, or to publish them herself. This is much to be regretted, for the world has been sufficiently inclined to do justice to Miss Talbot’s talents; and few books of moral and religious instruction have had a greater sale, and gone through more editions than the little posthumous volume of her miscellaneous works. Of the “Reflections on the Days of the Week,” published separately, up wards of 25,000 copies have been sold; and of the collection of her works, that now before us (1812, 8vo) is the seventh edition. This is a circumstance not less creditable to the age, than it is to the author; and it also proves the correctness of her friend’s judgment into whose hands they were put by Mrs. Talbot. Mrs. Car* ter published them upon her own account and at her own hazard, and the event shewed that she had formed a just estimate both of their merit and the reception they would meet with.

On the death of this affectionate friend in 1768, who bequeathed Mrs. Talbot and her daughter about 400l. a year, they removed from Lambeth-palace to a house in Grosvenor-street, but in the following year the declining state of Miss Talbot’s health obliged them to leave London for a cooler and better air. Their kind and constant friend, the late marchioness Grey, lent them for this purpose her house at Richmond, together with every thing she could think of to contribute to their comfort or amusement; and from this delightful retreat Miss Talbot only returned in time to breathe her last in her mother’s house in town, Jan. 9, 1770, in the forty- ninth year of her age. Her chief disorder, added to a very weak, and now completely worn-out constitution, was a cancer, which had been for three years preying upon her enfeebled frame.

, one of our earliest antiquaries, was born at Thorp, in Northamptonshire, and was educated at Winchester school, whence he was admitted of New college, Oxford, in 1525. He left the university in 1530, but took the degree of D. D. either there or in some other place. In 1541 he was made a prebendary of Wells, and April 9, 1547, treasurer of the cathedral church of Norwich, which he possessed at the time of his death, Aug. 27, 1558. He was a very diligent searcher into the antiquities of his country, and his collections proved of great service to Leland, Bale, Caius, Camden, and others. He also furnished archbishop Parker with many Saxon books, some of which he had from Dr. Ovvtn, physician to Henry VIII. He left his Mss. to New college. He was the first of our countrymen who illustrated Antoniiins’s Itinerary with various readings and notes, which were of great use to Camuen, and are printed by Hearne at the end of the third volume of Leland’s Itinerary from a ms in the Bodleian library, which belonged to John Stowe, and is in his ha 1 iwriting; but Talbot’s notes reach only to the sixth her. Two other copies are in Bene't college library a fourth is in Caius college library, with additions by Dr. Caius; and a fifth in the Cotton library. Camden followed his settlement of the stations in most instances, but William B 1 ir ton frequently differs from him in his “Commentary on Antoninus his Itinerary.” His other Mss. are “Aurum ex Stercore vel de Ænigmaticis et PropliL j ticis,” in Corpus college, Oxford; and “De chartis quibusdamRegnm Britannorurn,” in Bene't college, Cambridge.

, a non-conformist divine of considerable eminence and learning, was born at Paisley, near Chesterfield, Nov. 1619, and educated at the public schools at Mansfield and Newark, whence he went to Pete rhouse, Cambridge, but being chosen sub-tutor to the sons of the earl of Suffolk, removed for that purpose to Magdalen college, and in 1642 travelled with them on the continent. On his return he was chosen fellow of Magdalen college, and afterwards became senior fellow and president. In 1648 he was ordained at London, in the presbyterian form. In 1652 he left the university, and went to Shrewsbury, where he became minister of St. Mary’s. At the restoration, an event in which he rejoiced, he was inclined to conform, but probably scrupling to be re-ordained, which was the chief obstacle with many other non-conformists, he was ejected. In 1670 he again visited the continent as tutor to two- young gentlemen, and about three years afterwards returned to Shrewsbury, and preached in a dissenting meeting there, while unmolested. He lived also some time in London, but very privately. After reaching the very advanced age of eighty-nine, he died April 11, 1708, and was buried in St. Mary’s, Shrewsbury. His funeral sermon was preached by the celebrated Matthew Henry, who, in an account appended, gives him a very high character for piety, learning, and moderation. He was one of those of whom the great Mr. Boyle took early notice, and Jived in friendship with all his life. He published a few religious, chiefly controversial, tracts, but is principally remembered as the editor of a work once hi very high reputation, “A view of Universal History; or, chronological Tables,” engraved in his house and under his particular inspection, on sixteen large copper-plates.

, one of the greatest musicians of this country, or of Europe, in his time, flourished about the middle of the sixteenth century. He is said to have been organist of the royal chapel to king Henry VIII. king, Edward VI. queen Mary, and queen Elizabeth; but the inscription on his grave-stone warrants no such assertion. In the two reigns of Edward VI. and queen Mary, he was simply a gentleman of the chapel, and served for sevenpence halfpenny a day; but under Elizabeth, he and Bird were gentlemen of the chapel and organists. The studies of Tall is seem to have been wholly devoted to the service of the church, for his name is not to be found to any musical compositions of songs, ballads, madrigals, or any of those lighter kigds of music framed with a view to private recreation. Of the many disciples who had profited by his instruction, Bird seems to have possessed the greatest share of his affection, one proof of which was a joint publication by them of one of the noblest collections of hymns and other compositions for the service of the church that ever appeared in any age or country. This was printed by Vautrollier in 1575, with the title of “Cantiones qua? ab argumento sacrae vocantur quinque et sex partium, Autoribus Thomas T-allisio et Gulielmo Birdo, Anglis, sefenissimse reginee majestati a privato sacello generosis et organistis,” and was published under the protection of a patent of queen Elizabeth, the first of the kind that had ever been granted.

Though it has been commonly said that Tallis was organist to Henry VIII. and the three succeeding princes his descendants, it may well be doubted whether any \-ayman were employed in that office till the beginning of the reign of queen Elizabeth, when Tallis and Bird were severally appointed organists of the royal chapel. Notwithstanding he was a diligent collector of musical antiquities, and a careful peruser of the works of other men, the compositions of Tallis, learned and elegant as they are, are so truly original, that he may justly be said to be the father of the cathedral style; and, though a like appellation is given by the Italians to Palestrina, it is much to be questioned, considering the time when Tallis flourished, whether he could derive the least advantage from the improvements of that great man. Perhaps he laid the foundation of his studies in the works of the old cathedralists of this kingdom, and probably in those of the German musicians, who in his time had the pre-eminence of the Italians; and that he had an emulation to excel even these, may be presumed from the following particular. John Okenheim, a native of the Low Countries, and a disciple of Iodocus Pratensis, had made a composition for no fewer than thirty-six voices, which, Glareanus says, was greatly admired. Tallis composed a motet in forty parts, the history of which stupendous composition, as far as it can now be traced, i< ^iven by sir John Hawkins. Notwithstanding his supposed attachment to the Romish religion, it seems that Tallis accommodated himself and his studies to the alterations introduced at the reformation. With this view, he set to music those several parts of the English liturgy, which at that time were deemed the mojt proper to be sung, namely, the two morning services, the one comprehending the “Veriite Exultemus,” “Te Deum,” and “Benedictus” and the other, which is part of the communion-office, consisting of the “Kyrie Eleison,” “Nicene Creed,” and “Sanctus:” as also the evening service, containing the “Magnificat,” and “Nunc dimittis.” All these are comprehended in that which is called Tallis’s first service, as being the first of two composed by htm. He also set musical notes to the Preces ftnd Responses, and composed that Litany which for its excellence is sung on solemn occasions in all places where the choral service is performed. As to the Preces of Tallis in his first service, they are no other than those of Marbeck in his book of Common-prayer noted: the Responses are somewhat different in the tenor part, which is supposed to contain the melody; but Tallis has improved them by the addition of three parts, and has thus formed a judicious contrast between the supplications of the priest and the suffrages of the people as represented by the choir. The services of Tallis contain also chants for the “Venite Kxultemus,' 1 and the” Creed of St. Athanasius:" these are tunes that divide each verse of the psalm or hymn according to the pointing, to the end that the whole may be sung alternately by the choir, as distinguished by the two sides of the dean and thfe chanter. Two of these chants are published in Dr. Boyce’s Cathedral Music, vol. I. The care of selecting from the Common-prayer the offices most proper to be sung was a matter of some importance, especially as the rubric contains no directions about it; for this reason it is supposed that the musical part of queen Elizabeth’s liturgy was settled by Parker, archbishop of Canterbury, who was not only a great divine, an excellent canonlawyer and ritualist, and a general scholar, but also a skilful musician. Besides the offices above-mentioned, constituting what are now termed the Morning, Communion, and Evening Services, in four parts, with the Preces, Responses, and Litany, Tailis composed many anthems. He died Nov. 23, 1585, and was buried in the parishchurch of Greenwich in Kent; where there is a brass plate for him in the chancel; the inscription on which was repaired by dean Aldrich, and may be seen in Strype’s Stow, but no memorial now remains,

, or Timur Bec, the great conqueror of the East, was born in 1335, in the village of Kesch, belonging to the ancient Sogdiana. His name of Tamerlane is derived by some writers from Timur Lenc 9 or Timur the lame, as he had some defect in his feet. His origin is uncertain, some reporting him to be the son of a shepherd, and others of the royal blood. He raised himself, however, by his personal courage and talents. He was distinguished early by these qualities; and, having acquired some followers devoted to his fortunes, his first conquest was that of Balk, the capital of Khorasan, on the frontiers of Persia. He then made himself master of the whole province of Candahar, and returning to subdue the people beyond the Oxus, took Bagdad. He now determined to undertake the conquest of India; but his soldiers, fatigued by their former efforts, refused at first to follow him. On this occasion he employed a pretended prophet to exhort them in the name of heaven; and having made them ashamed of their reluctance, and filled them with a strong enthusiasm, led them on to greater victories. Delhi fell before him, aiifl he became possessed of the immense treasures of the Mogul empire. Returning from his Indian exploits, he entered Syria and took Damascus: and Bagclad having attempted to revolt, he made a terrible example, by putting many thousands of the inhabitants to the sword, and delivering the city to pillage. Bajazet, emperor of the Turks, now attracted his notice, and to him he sent an embassy, requiring him to do justice to some Mahometan princes whom he had deposed, and to abandon the siege of Constantinople. This haughty message being as haughtily answered, war was commenced between them. Tamerlane marched towards Bajazet, whom, in 1402, he engaged, conquered, and took prisoner, in the plains of Ancyra near Phrygia. The battle lasted three days. The Turkish writers say, that after this event, Tamerlane asked JBajazet what he would have done to him, if he had been victorious. “I would have shut you up,” said Bajazet, “in an iron cage.” Upon which he was himself condemned to the same punishment. Some writers, however, boast of the generosity and magnanimity of the conqueror. Be this as it may, he certainly carried his victories to a wonderful extent: while he was engaged in the war with Bajazet, he vanquished Egypt, and seized the immense treasures of Grand Cairo, nor could any thing in the East withstand him. He died about three years after his victory, on the first of April, 1405, in the seventy-first year of his age, and the thirty-sixth of his reign. When he found death approaching, he called the princes together, appointed his grandson to be his heir, and died, professing his implicit faith in the Koran, and repeating the sacred words of the Mahometans, “There is no God but God, and Mahomet is his prophet.”

, a gentleman who deserves to be recorded among the benefactors to literature, was great grandson to sir Richard Tancred, who was knighted for his services and severe sufferings during the rebellion. This sir Richard was the son of Charles Tancred, esq. who purchased the manor and rectory of Whixley, anciently Qnixley, situated between York and Aidborough. Christopher Tancred, the subject of this article, died in 1754 unmarried, and left his house and estate at Whixley for the maintenance of twelve decayed gentlemen who have borne arms in the service of their country, each of whom receive twenty-two guineas annually, and a separate apartment is assigned to each of them, but the whole dine in common. He also founded four medical exhir bitions at Caius college; four in divinity at Christ’s college, Cambridge, and four law studentships at Lincoln’sJnn, of which he was a bencher. These were originally of the yearly value of 50l., but are now 100l. each. The trustees in this foundation are the masters of Caius and Christ’s college, the president of the college of Physicians, the treasurer of Lincoln’s-Inn, the master of the Charterhouse, the president of Christ’s hospital, and the governor of Greenwich hospital. These exhibitions continue for about eight years, three years after taking the degree of M. A. or M. B. and after being called to the bar; and a Latin oration is spoken annually, by one of the exhibitioners and students, in commemoration of their liberal benefactor.

Bishop Tanner’s character seems to have descended to posterity without any blemish. His virtues are acknowledged by his contemporaries, and of his learning as an antiquary, which was very extensive, he was most readily communicative to all who were engaged in publications of that nature. He had a considerable hand in the second edition of Wood’s “Athemr,” but appears to have given offence to some of Wood’s friends, by softening certain of his prejudices as well as his coarse language. This produced something like a controversy, which the reader may find detailed in the life of A. Wood, prefixed to his “Annals,” or in the preface to the new edition of the “Athenac,” by Mr. Bliss. Of the publications more particularly belonging to himself, the first appeared before he was twenty years old. It formed an excellent compendium of our religious houses, setting forth, when and by whom they were founded, their dedications, orders, and value; and v\as entitled, “Notitia Monastica, or a short History the Religious Houses in England and Wales,” 1695, 8vo. This was so favourably received that it became very scarce, and at the request of his friends he set about revising and enlarging it in 1715, but the duties of his station, and afteruarcls his infirmities, prevented him from leaving it quite complete. It appeared, however, under the care of the rev. John Tanner, his brotht-r, in 1744, folio, under the title of “Notitia Monastica; or an Account of all the Abbies, Priories, and House* of Friers, heretofore in England and Wales; and also of all the Colleges and Hospitals founded before A. D. 1511. By the right rev. Dr. Thomas Tanner, late lord bishop of St. Asaph. Published by John Tanner, A. M. vicar of Lowestoft in Suffolk, and precentor of the cathedral church of St. Asaph.” Of this a much improved edition was published in 1787, by Mr. Nasmith; but the greater part of the impression having been consumed in Mr. Nichols’s fire, it now ranks among scarce books. His “Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica,” which employed him forty years, was published in 1748, folio, with a posthumous preface by Dr. Wilkins. He left large collections for the county of Wilts, and large notes on Richard Hegge’s Legend of St. Cuthbert, 1663. His immense and valuable collections are now in the Bodleian library at Oxford. His portrait was engraved by Vertue in 1736, at the expence of the Society of Antiquaries. The portrait prefixed to the “Notitia,” is inscribed, “Reverendus admodum Thomas Tanner, Asaphensis Episcbpus, PilmaevEB Antiquitatis Cultor. G. Vertue sculp. 1743.” This print was a copy of that engraved by Vertue, with some difference in the decoration, and this addition to the inscription: “Hoc ectypum fratris sui dignissimi antiquis moribus ornati posteris sacratum esse voluit Soc. Ant. Lond. 1736.”

, a French physician, born at Courtenai, died in 1761, at what age is uncertain. He was known by Tarious works, of which the following were the chief 1. “Elements of Physiology,” translated from the Latin of Haller, 17-52, 8vo. 2. “Adversaria Anatomica, 1750, 4to, with a medical Bibliography, extracted from the” Methodus Studii Medici“of Haller. 4.” Osteographia,“Paris, 1753, 4to, a compilation, illustrated by engravings. 5.” Anthropotomie,“or the art of dissecting, 1750, 2 vols. 12rno. 6.” Desmographie,“or a treatise on ligaments, the same year. 7.” Observations on Medicine and Surgery,“1758, 3 vols. 12mo. 8.” Myographia," or a description of the muscles, 1753, 4to, with figures from Albinus. He wrote also some medical articles for the Encyclopedia.

, styled by Dr. Burney, “the admirable,” was born in April 1692, at Pirano in the province of Istria. His father having been a great benefactor to the cathedral at Parenzo, was ennobled for his piety. Joseph was intended for the law, but taking up the study of music, among his other pursuits, it prevailed over all the rest in gaining his attachment. In 1710, he was sent to the university of Padua, to study as a civilian; but, before he was twenty, having married without the consent of his parents, they wholly abandoned him. After wandering for some time in search of an asylum, he was received in a convent at Assissi, by a monk to whom he was related. Here he amused himself by practising the violin, till being accidentally discovered by a Paduan acquaintance, family differences were accommodated, and he settled with his wife at Venice. While he remained there, he heard, ia 1714, the celebrated Veracini, whose performance, excelling every thing he had then heard, excited in his mind a wonderful emulation. He retired the very next day to Ancona, to study the use of the bow with more tranquillity, and attain, if possible, those powers of energy and expression which he had so greatly admired. By diligent study and practice, he acquired such skill and reputation, that iti 1721, he was invited to the place of first violin, and master of the band, in the famous church of St. Antony of Padua. He had also frequent invitations, which he declined, to visit Paris and London By 17i38, he had made many excellent scholars, and formed a school, or method of practice, that was celebrated all over Europe, and increased in fame to the end of his life. In 1744, he is said to have changed his style, from extremely difficult execution, to graceful and expressive; and Pasqualino Bini, one of his besfc scholars, having heard of the change, placed himself afresh under his tuition. This admirable musician, and worthy mail, for such he is represented, died Feb. 26, 1770, to the great regret of the inhabitants of Padua, where he had resided near fifty years; and where he was not only regarded as its chief and most attractive ornament, but as a philosopher, and even a saint, having devoted himself to the service of his patron St Antony of Padua.

The first book of solos by Tartiui, was published at Amsterdam, in 1734, the second at Home, in 1745; and Dr, Burney relates that he possesses the third, sixth, seventh, and ninth of his publications, besides two books printed in England, amounting to upwards of fifty solos, exclusive of manuscripts. His concertos amount to two hundred but a surreptitious copy of two sets having appeared ic- Hoilaud, he would never own them. Of taese, which are yet supposed to be certainly genuine, six were composed in his first manner, and six after 1744, when he had improved his style. But his most celebrated work is his “Traitato di Musica,” or treatise on music, in which, though his system, as to the scientific parr, has since been confuted, he appears as one of the most ingenious theorists of this century. It was published in 1754, in 4to. He published, in 1767, “Dissertazione de‘ principi dell’ Armenia Musicale, contenuta nel Diatonico genere,” another theoretical work. Tartini was so ambitious of being thought a follower of Corelli’s precepts and principles, that, after his own reputation was in its zenith, he refused to teach any other music to his disciples, till they had studied the opera quinta y or solos of Corelli. His musical character is thus drawn by the very able judge to whose account we have already referred: “Tartini, on a recent examination of his works, seems, to my feelings and conceptions, to have had a larger portion of merit, as a mere instrumental composer, than any other author who flourished during the first fifty or sixty years of the present century. Though he made Corelli his model in the purity of his harmony, and simplicity of his modulation, he greatly surpassed that composer in the fertility and originality of his invention; not only in the subjects of his melodies, but in the truly cantabile manner of treating them. Many of his adagios want nothing but words to be excellent, pathetic, opera songs. His allegros are sometimes difficult; but the passages fairly belong to the instrument for which they were composed, and were suggested by his consummate knowledge of the fingerboard, and powers of the bow. He certainly repeats his passages, a- d adheres to his original motive, or theme, too much for the favourite desultory style of the present times; but it must be allowed that, by his delicate selection and arrangement of notes, his passages are always good; play them quick, or play them slow, they never seem unmeaning or fortuitous. Indeed, as a harmonist, he was, perhaps, more truly scientific than any other composer of his time, in the clearness, character, and precision of his bases; which were never casual, or the effect of habit, or auricular prejudice and expectation, but learned, judicious, and certtin.”

, a noted mathematician, was born at Brescia in Italy, probably towards the conclusion of the fifteenth century, as we find he was a considerable master or preceptor in mathematics in 1521, when the first of his collection of questions and answers was written, which heafterwards published in 1546, under the title of “Quesiti et Invention! diverse,” at Venice, where he then resided as a public lecturer on mathematics, he having removed to this place about 1534. This work consists of nine chapters, containing answers to a number of questions on all the different branches of mathematics and philosophy then in vogue. The last or ninth of these, contains the questions in algebra, among which are those celebrated letters and communications between Tartalea and Cardan, by which our author put the latter in possession of the rules for cubic equations, which he first discovered in 1530.

The first work of Tartalea’s that was published, was his “Nova Scientia inventa,” Venice, 1537, in 4to. This is a treatise on the theory and practise of gunnery, and the first of the kind, he being the first writer on the flight and path of balls and shells. This work was translarH into English by Lucar, and printed at London in 1588, folio, with many notes and additions by the translator. Tartalea published at Venice, 1543, in folio, the whole books of Euclid, accompanied with many curious notes and commentaries. But the last and chief work of Tartalea was his “Trattato di Numeri etMisure,” 1556, and 1560, fol. This is an universal treatise on arithmetic, algebra, geometry, mensuration, c. It contains many other curious particulars of the disputes between our author and Cardan, which ended only with the death of Tartalea, before the last part of this work was published, or about 1558.

Dr. Quin, in looking out for an assistant, soon discovered Tassie to be one in whom he could place perfect confidence. He was endowed with fine taste; he was modest and unassuming; he was patient; and possessed the highest integrity. The doctor committed his laboratory and experiments to his care. The associates were fully successful and found themselves able to imitate all the gems, and take accurate impressions of the engravings. As the doctor had followed the subject only for his amusement, when the discovery was completed, he encouraged Mr. Tassie to repair to London, and to devote himself to the preparation and sale of those pastes as his profession. Accordingly, m 1766, he arrived in the metropolis; but he was diffident and modest to excess; very unfit to introduce himself to the attention of persons of rank and of affluence; besides, the number of engraved gems in Britain was small; and those few were little noticed. He long struggled under difficulties which would have discouraged any one who was not possessed or' the greatest patience, and the warmest attachment to the subject. But he ^gradually emerged from obscurity, obtained competence, and what to him was more, he was able to increase his collection, and add higher degrees of perfection to his art. His name soon became respected, and the first cabinets in Europe were open for his use; and he uniformly preserved the greatest attention to the exactness of the imitation and accuracy of the engraving, so that many of his pastes were sold on the continent by the fraudulent for real gems. His taste led him to be peculiarly careful of the impression and he uniformly destroyed those with which he was in the least dissatisfied. The art has been since practised by others; anci many thousauds of pastes have been sold as Tassie’s, which he would have considered as injurious to his fame. Of the fame of others he was not envious; for he uniformly spoke with frankness in praise of those who executed them well, though they were endeavouring to rival himself.

To the ancient engravings he added a numerous collection of the most eminent modern ones; many of which approach in excellence of workmanship, if not in simplicity of design and chastity of expression, to the most celebrated of the ancients. Many years before he died he had a commission from the empress Catherine of Russia, for above 15,000 different engravings, which being executed in the best and most durable manner, were arranged in elegant cabinets, and were placed in the apartments of the palace of Czarsk Zelo. In executing this commission, Mr. Tassie availed himself of all the advantages which the improved state of chemistry, the various ornamental arts, and the knowledge of the age, seemed to afford. The impressions were taken in a beautiful white enamel composition, which is not subject to shrink, or form air-bladders; which emits fire when struck with steel, and takes a fine polishand which shews every stroke and touch of the artist in higher perfection than any other substance. When the colours, mixed colours, and nature of the respective originals, could be ascertained, they were imitated as completely as. art-tan imitate them: insomuch that many of the paste intaglios and cameos in this collection are such faithful imitations, that artists themselves have owned they could hardly be distinguished from the originals. And when the colour and nature of the gems could not be authenticated, the pastes were executed in agreeable, and chit- fly transparent colours: constant attention l>t:ing bestowed to preserve the outlines, extremities, attributes, and inscriptions. It was the learned Mr. Raspe (from whom this account is taki n), who arranged this great collection, and made out the dc srnptsve i at; iogue. (See “A Descriptive Catalogue,” &c. 2 vols. 4-to, 1791.)

Portia was six months gone with child, when she was invited by her sister Hippolita to Sorrento, to pay her a visit. Bernardo accompanied her thither and in this place Portia was delivered of a son, on the 11th day of Mcirch, 154-4, at noon. The infant was baptised a few days after, in the metropolitan church of Sorrento, by the name of Torquato. Bernardo and Portia returned soon after to Naples with him, concerning whom historians relate incredible things of his early and promising genius’. They tell us, that at six months oid, he not only spoke and pronounced his words clearly and distinctly, bin thought, reasoned, expressed his wants, and answered questions that there was nothing childish in his words, but the tone of his voice that he seldom laughed or cried; and that, even then, he gave certain tokens of that equality of temper which supported him so well in his future misfortunes.

As soon as the departure of the prince of Salerno was known, he, and all his adherents, were declared rebels to the state; and Torquato Tasso, though but nine years of age, was included by name in that sentence. Bernardo, following the prince of Salerno into France, committed his son to the care of his friend and relation Maurice Cataneo, a person of great ability, who assiduously cultivated the early disposition of his pupil to polite literature. After the death of Sanseverino, which happened in three or four years, Bernardo returned to Italy, and engaged in the service of Guglielmo Gonzaga, duke of Mantua, who had given him a pressing invitation. It was not long before Ije received the melancholy news of the decease of his wife Portia, which determined him to send for his son, that they might be a mutual support to each other in their affliction. He was now his only child, for his wife, before her death, had married his daughter to Martio Sersale, a gentleman of Sorrento. He was greatly surprised, on his son’s arrival, to see the vast progress he had made in his studies. Although but twelve years of age, he had, according to the testimony of the writers of his life, entirely completed his knowledge in the Latin and Greek tongues: he was well acquainted with the rules of rhetoric and poetry, and completely versed in Aristotle’s ethics. Bernardo soon determined to send him to the university of Padua, to study the laws, in company with the young Scipio Gonzaga, afterwards cardinal, nearly of the same age as himself. With this nobleman Tasso, then seventeen years of age, contracted a friendship that never ended but with hi life. He prosecuted his studies at Padua with great diligence and success: at the same time employ ing his leisure hours upon philosophy and poetry, he soon gave a public proof o/ his talents, by his poem of f< Rinaldo,“which he published in the eighteenth year of his age. This poem, which is of the romance kind, is divided into twelve books in ottava rima, and contains the adventures of Rinaldo, the famous Paladin of the court of Charlemain, who makes so principal a figure in Ariosto’s work, and the first achievements of that knight for the love of the fair Clarice, whom he afterwards marries. The action of this poem precedes that of the” Orlando Furioso.“It was composed in ten months, as the author himself informs us in the preface, and was first printed at Venice in 1562. Paolo Beni speaks very highly of this performance, which undoubtedly is not unworthy the early efforts of that genius which afterwards produced the” Jerusalem."

Here Tasso formed the design of his celebrated poem, ie Jerusalem Delivered:“he invented the fable, disposed the different parts, and determined to dedicate this work to the glory of the house of Este. He was greatly esteemed by Alphonso II. the last duke of Ferrara, that great patron of learning and learned men, and by his brother, cardinal Luigi. There was a sort of contest between these two brothers, in relation to the poem: the cardinal imagined that he had a right to he the Maecenas of all Tasso‘ s works, as ’fRinaldo,” hi? first piece, had been dedicated to him: the duke, on the other bane), thought that, as his brother had already received his share pf honour, he ought not to be offended at seeing the name qf Alphonso at the head of the “Jerusalem Delivered.” Tasso for three or four years Suspended his deterrainatipn: at length, being earnestly pressed by both the brothers to take up his residence in Ferrara, he suffered himself to be prevailed upon. The duke gave him an apartment in his palace, where he lived in peace and affluence, and pursued his design of completing his “Jerusalem,” which be riov resolved to dedicate to Alphonso. The duke, who was desirous of fixing Tasso near him, had thoughts of marrying hiin advantageously, but he always evaded any proposal of that kind: though he appeared peculiarly devoted to Alphonso, yet he neglected not to pay his court to the cardinal.

Though writers have left us very much in the dark with regard to the real motives that induced the duke to keep Tasso in confinement, yet, every thing being weighed, it seems highly probable that the affair of a delicate nature, said to have been divulged by his friend, must have related to the princess Leonora, the duke’s sister : and indeed it will be extremely difficult, from any other consideration, to account for the harsh treatment he received from a prince, who had before shown him such peculiar marks of esteem and friendship. However, Tasso himself had undoubtedly secret apprehensions that increased upon him every day, while the continual attacks which were made upon his credit as an author, not a little contributed to heighten his melancholy. At length he resolved to take the first opportunity to fly from his prison, for so he esteemed it, which after about a year’s detention he effected, and retired to Turin, where he endeavoured to remain concealed; but notwithstanding all his precautions, he was soon known, and recommended to the duke of Savoy, who received him into his palace, and showed him every mark of esteem and affection. But Tasso’s apprehensions still continued; he thought that the duke of Savoy would not refuse to give him up to the duke of B'errara, or sacrifice the friendship of that prince to the safety of a private person. Full of these imaginations he set out for Rome, alone and unprovided with necessaries for such a journey. At his arrival there he went directly to his old friend Mauritio Cataneo, who received him in such a manner as entirely to obliterate for some time the remembrance of the fatigue and uneasiness he had undergone. He was not only welcomed by Cataneo, but the whole city of Rome seemed to rejoice at the presence of so extraordinary a person. He was visited by princes, cardinals, prelates, and by all the learned in general. But the desire of revisiting his native country, and seeing his sister Cornelia, soon made him uneasy in this situation. He left his friend Mauritio Cataneo one evening, without giving him notice; and, beginning his journey on foot, arrived by night at the mountains of Veletri, where he took up his lodging with some shepherds: the next morning, disguising himself in the habit of one of these people, he continued his way, and in four days time reached Gaieta, almost spent with fatigue: here he embarked on board a vessel bound for Sorrento, at which place he arrived in safety the next day. He entered the city and went directly to his sister’s house: she was a widow, and the two sons she had by her husband being at that time absent, Tasso found her with only some of hr i <-n:ale attendants. He advanced towards her, without discovering himself, and pretending he came with news from her brother, gave her a letter which he had prepared for that purpose. This letter informed her that her brother’s life was in great danger, and that he begged her to make use of all the interest her tenderness might suggest to her, in order to procure letters of recommendation from some powerful person, to avert the threatened misfortune. For further particulars of the affair, she was referred to the messenger who brought her this intelligence.The lady, terrified at the news, earnestly entreated him to give her a detail of her brother’s misfortune. The feigned messenger then gave her so interesting an account of the pretended story, that, unable to contain her affliction, she fainted away. Tasso was sensibly touched at this convincing proof of his sister’s affection, and repented that he had gone so far: he began to comfort her, and, removing her fears by little and little, at last discovered himself to her. Her joy at seeing a brother whom she tenderly loved, was inexpressible after- the first salutations were over, she was very desirous to know the occasion of his disguising himself in that manner. Tasso acquainted her with his reasons, and, at the same time, giving her to understand, that he would willingly remain with her unknown to the world, Cornelia, who desired nothing further than to acquiesce in his pleasure, sent for her children and some of her nearest relations, whom she thought might be entrusted with the secret. They agreed that Tasso should pass for a relation of theirs, who came from Bergamo to Naples upon his private business, and from thence had come to Sorrento to pay them a visit. After this precaution, Tasso took up his residence at his sister’s house, where he lived for some time in tranquillity, entertaining himself with his two nephews Antonio and Alessandro Sersale, children of great hopes. The princess Leonora of Este, however, who was acquainted with the place of his retreat, invited him to return to Ferrara, which he did in company with Gualingo, ambassador from the duke to the pope. Concerning the motive of Tasso’s return to Ferrara, some authors think that, weary of living in obscurity, he had resolved to throw himself upon the duke’s generosity. This opinion seems indeed drawn from Tasso’s own words in a letter written by him to the duke of Urbino, in which he declares, “that he had endeavoured to make his peace with the duke, and had for that purpose written severally to him, f the duchess of Ferrara, the duchess of Urbino, and the princess Leonora; yet never received any answer but from the last, who assured him it was not in her power to render him any service.” We see here that Tasso acknowledges himself the receipt of a letter from the princess; and in regard to what he says to be the purport of it, it is highly reasonable to suppose, that he would be very cautious of divulging the real contents to the duke of Urbino, when his affairs with that lady were so delicately circumstanced. This apparent care to conceal the nature of his correspondence with her, seems to corroborate the former suppositions of his uncommon attachment to her; and when all circumstances are considered, it seems more than probable that he returned to Ferrara at the particular injunction of Leonora.

The duke received Tasso with great seeming satisfaction, and gave him fresh marks of his esteem: but this was not all that Tasso expected; his great desire was to be master of his own works, and he was very earnest that his writings might be restored to him, which were in the duke’s possession; but this was what he could by no means obtain: his enemies had gained such an ascendancy over the mind of' Alphonso, that they made him believe, or pretend to believe, that the poet had lost all his fire, and that in his present situation he was incapable of producing any thing new, or of correcting his poems: he, therefore, exhoried him to think only of leading a quiet and easy life for the future: but Tasso was sensibly vex-ed at this proceeding, and believed the duke wanted him entirely to relinquish his studies, and pass the remainder of his days in idleness and obscurity. “He would endeavour,” says he, in his letter to the duke of Urbino, “to make me a shameful deserter of Parnassus for the gardens of Epicurus, for scenes of pleasures unknown to Virgil, Catullus, Horace, and even Lucretius himself.” Tasso, therefore, reiterated his entreaties to have his writings restored to him, but the duke continued inflexible, and, to complete our poet’s vexation, all access to the princesses was denied him: fatigued at length with useless remonstrances, he once more quitted Ferrara, and fled (as he expresses it himself) ITke another Buis, leaving behind him even his books and manuscripts.

At the approach of winter they returned to Naples, when the prince of Palena again pressed Tasso to reside with him; but Tasso, who judged it highly unadvisable to comply with his request, resolved to retire to Rome, and wait there the issue of his law-suit. He lived in that city about a year in high esteem with pope Sixtus V; when, being invited to Florence by Ferdinando, grand duke of Tuscany, who had been cardinal at Rome when Tasso first resided there, and who now employed the pope’s interest to procure a visit from him, he could not withstand such solicitations, but went to Florence, where he met with a most gracious reception. Yet not all the caresses he received at the duke’s court, nor all the promises of that prince, could overcome his love for his native country, or lessen the ardent desire he had to lead a retired and independent life. He therefore took his leave of the grand duke, wbo would have loaded him with presents; but Tasso, as usual, could be prevailed upon to accept of no more than was necessary for his present occasions. He returned to Naples by the way of Rome, and the old prince of Conca dying about this time, the young count of Palena prevailed upon Tasso, by the mediation of Manso, to accept of an apartment in his palace. Here he applied himself to a correction of his Jerusalem, or rather to compose a new work entitled “Jerusalem Conquered,” which he had begun during his first residence at Naples. The prince of Conca, being jealous lest any one should deprive him of the poet and poem, caused him to he so narrowly watched that Tasso observed it, and being displeased at such a proceeding, left the prince’s palace, and retired to his friend Manso’s, where he lived master of himself and his actions; yet he still continued upon good terms with the prince of Conca.

Manso’s garden commanded a full prospefct of the sea. Tasso and his friend being one day in a summer-house with Scipio Belprato, Manso’s brother-in-law, observing the waves agitated with a furious storm, Beiprato said, “that he was astonished at the rashness and folly of men who would expose themselves to the rage of so merciless an element, where such numbers had suffered shipwreck.” “And yet,” said Tasso, “we every night go without fear to bed, where so many die every hour. Beheve me, death will rind us in all parts, and those places that appear the least exposed are not always the most secure from his attacks.” While Tasso lived with his friend Manso, cardinal Hippolito Aldobrandirii succeeded to the papacy by the name of Clement VIII. His two nephews, Cynthio and Pietro Aldobrandini, were created cardinals: the first, afterwards called the cardinal of St. George, was the eldest, a great patron of science, and a favourer of learned men: he had known Tasso when he resided last at Rome, and had the greatest esteem for him; and now so earnestly invited him to Rome, that he could not peluse, but once more abandoned his peaceful retreat;it Naples. As in consequence of the confines of the ecclesiastical state being infested with banditti, travellers, for security, used to go together in large companies, Tasso joined himself to one of these; but when they came within sight of Mola, a little town near Gaietu, they received intelligence that Sciarru, a famous captain of robbers, was near at hand with a great body of men. Tasso was of opinion, that they should continue their journey, and endeavour to defend themselves, if attacked: however, this advice was overruled, and they threw themselves for safety into Mola, in which place they remained for some time in a manner blocked up by Sciarra. But this outlaw, hearing that Tasso was one of the company, sent a message to assure him that he might pass in safety, and offere.i himself to conduct him wherever he pleased. Tasso returned him thanks, but declined accepting the offer, not choosing, perhaps, to rely on the word of a person of such character. Sciarra upon this sent a second message, by which he informed Tasso, that, upon his account, he would withdraw his men, and leave the ways open. He accordingly did so, and Tasso, continuing his journey, arrived without any accident at Rome, where he was most graciously welcomed by the two cardinals and the pope himself. Tasso applied himself in a particular manner to cardinal Cynthio, who had been the means of his coming to Rome; yet he neglected not to make his court to cardinal Aldobrandini, and he very frequently conversed with both of them. One day the two cardinals held an assembly of several prelates, to consult, among other things, of some method to put a stop to the license of the pasquinades. One proposed that Pasquin’s statue should be broken to pieces and cast into the river. But Tasso' s opinion being asked, he said, “it would be much more prudent to let it remain where it was; for otherwise from the fragments of the statue would be bred an infinite number of frogs on the banks of the Tyber, that would never cease to croak day and night.” The pope, to whom cardinal Aldobrandini related what had passed, interrogated Tasso upon the subject. “It is true, holy father,” said he, “such was my opinion; and I shall add moreover, that if your holiness would silence Pasquin, the only way is to put such people into employments as may give no occasion to any libels or disaffected discourse.”

Though he had only completed his fifty- first year, his studies and misfortunes had brought on a premature old age. Being persuaded that his end was approaching, he resolved to spend the few days he had yet to live in the monastery of St. Onuphrius. He was carried thither in cardinal Cynthio’s coach, and received with the utmost tenderness by the prior and brethren of that order. His distemper was now so far increased, and his strength so exhausted, that all kind of medicine proved ineffectual. On the 10th of April he was taken with a violent fever, occasioned perhaps by having eat some milk, a kind of aliment he was particularly fond of. His life now seemed in imminent danger: the most famous physicians in Rome tried all their art, but in vain, to relieve him: he grew worse and worse every day. Rinaldini, the pope’s physician, and Tasso’s intimate friend, having informed him that his last hour was near at hand, Tasso embraced him tenderly, and with a composed countenance returned him thanks for his tidings; then looking up to Heaven, he “acknowledged the goodness of God, who was at last pleased to bring him safe into port after so long a storm.” From that time his mind seemed entirely disentangled from earthly affairs: he received the sacrament in the chapel of the monastery, being conducted thither by the brethren. When he was brought back to his chamber, he was asked where he wished to be interred; he answered, in the church of St. Onuphrius: and being desired to leave some memorial of his will in writing, and to dictate himself the epitaph that should be engraven on his tomb, he smiled and said, “that in regard to the first, he had little worldly goods to leave, and as to the second, a plain stone would suffice to cover him.” He left cardinal Cynthio his heir, and desired that his own picture might be given to Giovanni Baptista Manso, which had been drawn by his direction. At length having attained the fourteenth day of his illness, he received the extreme unction. Cardinal Cynthio hearing that he was at the last extremity, came- to visit him, and brought him the pope’s benediction, a grace never conferred in this manner but on cardinals and persons of the first distinction. Tasso acknowledged this honour with great devotion and humility, and said, “that this was the crown he came to receive at Rome.” The cardinal having asked him “if he had any thing further to desire,” he replied, “the only favour he had now to beg of him, was, that he would collect together the copies of all his works (particularly his” Jerusalem Delivered,“which he esteemed most imperfect) and commit them to the flames: this task, he confessed, might be found something difficult, as those pieces were dispersed abroad in so many different places, but yet he trusted it would not be found altogether impracticable.” He was so earnest in his request, that the cardinal, unwilling to discompose him by a refusal, gave him such a doubtful answer as led him to believe that his desire would be complied with. Tasso then requesting to be left alone, the cardinal took his farewel of him with tears in his eyes, leaving with him his confessor and some of the brethren of the monastery. In this condition he continued all night, and till the middle of the next day, the 25th of April, being the festival of St. Mark; when, finding himself fainting, he embraced his crucifix, uttering these words: In manus tuas, Domine but expired before he could finish the sentence. Tasso was tall and well-shaped, his complexion fair, fyut rather pale through sickness and study; the hair of his head was of a chesnut colour, but that of his beard somewhat lighter, thick and bushy; his forehead square and high, his head large, and the tore part of it, towards the end of his life, altogether bald; his eye-brows were dark; his eyes full, piercing, and of a clear blue; his nose large, his lips thin, his teeth well set and white; his neck well proportioned; his breast full; his shoulders broad, and all his limbs more sinewy than fleshy. His voice was strong, clear, and solemn; he spoke with deliberation, and generally reiterated his last words: he seldom laughed, and never to excess. He was very expert in the exercises of the body. In his oratory, he used little action, and rather pleased by the beauty and force of his expressions, than by the graces of gesture and utterance, that compose so great a part of elocution. Such was the exterior of Tasso: as to his mental qualities, he appears to have been a great genius, and a soul elevated above the common rank of mankind. It is said of him, that there never was a scholar more humble, a wit more devout, or a man more amiable in society. Never satisfied with, his works, even when they rendered his name famous throughout the world; always satisfied with his condition, even when he wanted every thing; entirely relying on Providence and his friends; without malevolence towards his greatest enemies; only wishing for riches that he might be serviceable to others, and making a scruple to receive or keep auy thing himself that was not absolutely necessary. So blameless and regular a life was ended by a peaceable death, which carried him off in 1595, in the fifty-second year of his age.

As to his works, we have mentioned his principal his “Rinaldo,” “Aminta,” and “Gierusalemme liberate,” an epic poem in twenty-four books. This poem had been published in an imperfect state, through the importunity and authority of some of his noble patrons, but the first complete edition of it appeared at Ferrara in 1581, 4to. The critics falling upon this work, he proposed to give a new and corrected edition of it, or, more properly speaking, to write it over again, which he did, and published at Home, under the title of “Gierusalemme conquistata,” in 1593, 4to. But the poem, thus accommodated to the taste and humour of his critics, was not received by the world at large with the same applause as the first edition had been, which is the only one now read. Many writers, especially among the Italians, have compared Tasso to Virgil; and their partiality has, perhaps, made Boileau criticize him more severely than he would otherwise have done: he calls Tasso' s verses tinsel, when compared with the gold of Virgil; and censures the simple judgment of those, who prefer “le clinquant du Tasse a tout Tor de Virgile,” In the mean time some virtuosi of Italy have made it a question for a long while, whether Ariosto does not deserve the precedency of Tasso: a comparison which more judicious critics think never ought to have been instituted; and Tiraboscbi says we may as well compare Virgil’s Æneid with Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Tasso’s “Jerusalem” is regularly epic in its whole construction, and ranks deservedly among the few of that species of composition, ancient or modern, which all ages will probably admire. A little too much of the marvellous, one or perhaps two of the episodes, and part of his machinery, are the only subjects to which the most rigid criticism has ventured to object. Where some of his defects, some of his conceits, are visible, they have been referred to his age, but these are not frequent, and it seems generally acknowledged that while he is inferior to Homer, in simplicity and fire, to Virgil, in tenderness, and to Milton, in daring sublimity of genius, he yields to no other in any poetical talents.

His works are, 1. his “Secchia rapita,” or rape of the bucket, which the Italians in general consider as the first model of a mock-heroic poem that was given in their language. It seems, say the critics of that nation, that the graces clothed this poem with all their ornaments. A delicate burlesque, with the art of joining great things to small; an unaffected lightness, and consummate elegance, concurred in it to form a complete Italian model of an heroi-comic poem, which will in time be admired by strangers. The edition most valued is that of Ronciglione iti 1624. It was translated into French by Peter Perrault, 1678, in two vols. 12mo; and again by M. de Cedars, in 1759, in three volumes. 2. “Considerazione sopra il Petrarca.” He thought Petrarch, great as he was, too much imitated, and tried in this publication to lessen the rage for that kind of imitation. In that he succeeded. 3. He published also “Pensieri diversi,” which he made a very amusing book. His attack upon the imitators of Petrarch occasioned a contest between him and Gius. Aromatari; and that produced finally, 4. “La Tenda rossa, risposta di Girolamo Nomisenti (Alessandro Tassoni) ai dialoghi de Falcidio Melampodio,” (Giuseppe de gli Aromatori,) Francfort, 1613, 8vo. His will is also cited as a piece of humour, and there are some productions by him still remaining in manuscript; among the rest, one entitled “Esequie della monarchia di Spagna.” Many interesting particulars respecting Tassoni, accompanied with contemporary literary history, and much sound criticism, has just been given in “Memoirs of Aiessandro Tassoni, &c. By the late Joseph Cooper Walker, esq. M. R. I. A.” 1815, 8vo; edited by his brother, Sam. Walker, esq. No other reference can hereafter be wanting.

, a well known Psalmodist, was born in Dublin in 1652. His father, Dr. Faithful Tate, was also son to a Dr. Tate, a clergyman, and was born in the county of Cavan, and educated in the college of Dublin, where he took the degree of D. D. In 1641, being then minister of Ballyhays, in that county, he was a great sufferer by the rebels, against whom he had given some information, and in his way to Dublin was robbed by a gang, while about the same time his house at Ballyhays was plundered, and all his stock, goods, and books, burnt or otherwise destroyed. His wife and children were also so cruelly treated, that three of the latter died of the severities inflicted upon them. After this he lived for some time in the college of Dublin, in the provost’s lodgings. He became then preacher of East Greenwich, in Kent, and lastly minister of St. Werburgh’s church, in Dublin. He was esteemed a man of great piety but, as Harris says, was thought to be puritanically inclined, as perhaps may be surmised from his own and his son’s Christian names, names taken from the Scriptures heing very common with a certain class of the puritans. He was living in 1672, but the time of his death we have not been able to fix. Besides two occasional sermons, he published, 1. “The doctrine of the three sacred persons of the Trinity,” Lond. 1669, 8vo; and, 2. “Meditations,” Dublin, 1672, 8vo.

His apology for Christianity, entitled “Oratio ad Graecos,” “An address to the Greeks,” the only genuine work of Tatian which remains, every where breathes the spirit of the Oriental philosophy. He teaches that God, after having from eternity remained at rest in the plenitude of his own light, that he might manifest himself, sent forth from his simple nature, by an act of his will, the Logos, through whom he gave existence to the universe, the essence of which had eternally subsisted in himself. “The Logos,” he says, “through the will of God, sprang from his simple nature.” This first emanation, which, after the Alexandrian Platonists, he calls the Logos, and which, like the Adam Kadmon of the Cabbalists, is the first medium through which all things flow from God, he represents as proceeding, without being separated from the divine nature. Matter is conceived by Tatian to have been the production of the Logos, sent forth from his bosom. And the mind of man is, according to him, reason produced from a rational power, or an essential emanation from the divine Logos. He distinguishes between the rational mind and the animal soul, as the Alexandrian philosophers between *3j and ^%>i, and the Cabbalists between Zelem and Nephesh. The world he supposed to be animated by a subordinate spirit, of which all the parts of visible nature partake: and he taught that daemons, clothed in material vehicles, inhabit the aerial regions; and that above the stars, aeons, or higher emanations from the divine nature, dwell in eternal light. In fine, the sentiments and language of Tatian upon these subjects perfectly agree with those of the Ægyptian and the Cabbalistic philosophy, whence it may be presumed that he derived them, in a great measure, from these sources. After Plato, this Christian father maintained the imperfection of matter as the cause of evil, and the consequent merit of rising above all corporeal appetites and passions; and it was, probably, owing to this notion, that, with other fathers, he held the superior merit of the state of celibacy above that of marriage; and that he adopted, as Jerom relates, the Gnostic opinion, that Christ had no real body. The tenor of Tatian’s Apology concurs with what is known of his history, to prove, that he was a Platonic Christian. His “Oratio” was first printed at Zurich in 1546, together with the Latin version of Conradus Gesner. It was afterwards subjoined to Justin Martyr’s works, printed at Paris in 1615 and 1636, folio but the best edition of it is that of Oxford, 1700, in 12mo.

It can hardly be called a regular history, but is rather a connected series of chronicles, whose antiquated Sclavonian dialects are only changed into the Russian idiom; and the author is justly censured for not regularly citing the various annalists as he abridges or new models them, and for not assigning the reasons which induced him to prefer the writers whose relations he has adopted, to those which he has rejected.

, a writer famous among the mystical devotees, flourished in the fourteenth century. We have no certain account of the year or place of his birth, He was born in Germany, and became a monk of the Dominican order, and acquired great skill in philosophy and school-divinity; but he applied himself principally to mystical divinity; and as it was believed that he was favoured with revelations from heaven, he was styled the illuminated, divine. He had great talents for preaching, and there was no preacher in that age more followed than he. He reproved with great zeal and great freedom the faults of every body; and this made him odious to some monks, whose persecutions of him he bore patiently. He submitted witii the same resolution to other trials, and it was thought that he was thus visited by God, that he might not grow proud of the extraordinary gifts which he had received from heaven. The two principal cities in which he preached, were Cologne and Strasburg. He died in the latter after a long sickness, May 17, 1361, and was honourably interred there in the academical college, near the winter-auditory. He wrote several books; concerning which different judgments have been formed; some catholics have censured them, and some protestants have commended them. Among the latter, we may mention our Dr. Henry More, who exceedingly admired Taulerus’swork entitled “Theologia Germanica,” which Luther also praises. This was first translated from the German into Latin by Surius, and then by Sebastian Castalio, and went through a great many editions from 1518 to 1700, when it was printed in French at Amsterdam.

, a pious layman of the reigns of Henry VIII. Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth, descended from an ancient family in Norfolk, and was the eldest son of John Taverner of Brisley, where he was born in 1505. He is said to have studied logic for some time in Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, and, if so, must have been contemporary with archbishop Parker. He afterwards removed to Oxford, and was one of the learned scholars invited by cardinal Wolsey to his new college there. Wood informs us that he took the degree of A. B. on May 21, 1527, and that of A.M. in 1530, having been made one of the junior canons the year before. Having thus acquired a competent knowledge in the sciences and learned languages, he studied law in the Inner Temple. In 1534 he was introduced to court, and being taken into the service of sir Thomas Cromwell, principal secretary of state, he was recommended by him to the king for one of the clerks of the signet in 1537, which place he held until the reign of queen Mary, notwithstanding his commitment to the Tower about four years after for “slandering the ladie Anne of Cleve,” or rather on account of his being deemed one of the gospellers, as they were termed, of his college. He certainly was a friend to the reformation, and in order to promote it undertook a new translation or edition of the English bible, “recognized with great diligence after most faithful examples,” Lond. 1539, fol. It was dedicated to the king, and allowed to be read in churches. But in 1545, his patron, lord Cromwell, being then dead, the popish bishops caused the printers to be imprisoned and punished; and the editor himself also was committed to the Tower. Here however he acquitted himself so well, that he was not only soon after released, but restored again to the king’s favour, and chosen a member of parliament in 1545. Bale calls Taverner’s edition of the Bible, “Sacrortim Bibliorum recognitio, seu potius versio nova;” but it is neither a bare revisal of the preceding editions, nor a new version, but between both. It is a correction of what is called Matthewe’s Bible; many of whose marginal notes are adopted, and many omitted, and others inserted by the editor. Archbishop Newcome thinks it probable that Taverner’s patron, Cromwell, encouraged him to undertake this work, on account of his skill in the Greek tongue; but it is more probable that he was principally induced to it by the printers, as we learn from a passage in the dedication, in which, after telling the king that a correct or faultless translation of the Bible must be the production of many learned men, and of much time and leisure, he adds; “but forasmuch as the printers were very desirous to have the Bible come forth as faultless and emendately as the shortness of the time for the recognising of the same would require, they desired him, for default of a better learned, diligently to overlook and peruse the whole copy, and, in case he should find any notable default that needed correction, to amend the same, &c.”

On the accession of king Edward, Taverner, although a layman, had a special licence in 1552 to preach throughout the king’s dominions. Good preaching was at that time so very scarce, that not only the king’s chaplains were obliged to make circuits round the country to instruct the people, and to fortify them against popery, but even laymen, who were scholars, were employed for that purpose. From this however he was obliged to desist when queen Mary came to the throne, and therefore retired to Norbiton hall, near Kingston in Surry, where he lived quietly during the whole of her reign. As soon as Elizabeth became queen, to whom he presented a congratulatory epistle in Latin upon that happy occasion, he resumed his preaching in Oxford and elsewhere. Her majesty had a high respect for him, and besides offering him knighthood (which Tanner thinks he accepted), put him into the commission of the peace for the county of Oxford. Here numerous concerns were intrusted to him, and in 1569, he was made high sheriff of the county. His zeal was still warm against popery, probably owing to the frightful effects of popish bigotry which he had witnessed in Mary’s reign, and notwithstanding his new office, he continued his preaching. Even while high sheriff, he appeared in St. Mary’s pulpit, with his gold chain about his neck, and his sword by his side, and is said to have begun one of his sermons in the following words “Arriving at the mount of St. Mary’s, in the stony stage where I now stand, I have brought you some fine biskets, baked in the oven of charity, and carefully conserved for the chickens of the church, the sparrows of the spirit, and the sweet swallows of salvation.” This style was much admired in his days even by the generality of the scholars, and indeed such alliteration was long afterwards a favourite both with speakers and hearers. He also endeavoured to promote the reformation by his writings and translations; of which, besides his Bible, we have the following list: 1. “The sum and pith of CL Psalms of David, reduced into a form of prayers and meditations, with certain other godly orisons,” Lond. 1539, 8vo. 2. “The Epistles and Gospels, with a brief postill upon the same, from Advent to Low Sunday; and from Easter to Advent,” Lond. 1540, two parts, 4to. 3. “Fruit of Faith, contain* ing all the prayers of the patriarchs, &c. in the Old and New Testament,” ibid, 1582, 12mo. 4. “The Garden of Wysdome, &c. containing the sayings of princes, philosophers, &c.” 1539, 2 books. 5. “Flores aliquot sententiarum ex variis scriptoribus,” translated from Erasmus. 6. “Catonis Disticha Moralia,” Lond. 1553, 8vo, 1555, 4to. 7. “In Mimum Publianum lib. 1,” 1562. 8. “Catednsmus fidei.” 9. “Proverbs or adagies gathered out of the Chiliades of Erasmus,” 1515. His translations were, “Grostete’s Prayers on the Psalms” “Confession of the Germans, with the apology of Melancthon,” and some tracts from Erasmus.

, a Frenchman, famous for his travels, was born at Paris in 1605. His father, who was a native of Antwerp, settled at Paris, and traded very largely in geographical maps, so that the natural inclination which Tavernier had for travelling was greatly increased, by the conversations which daily passed in his father’s house, concerning foreign countries. He began to gratify his passion so early, that, at the age of two and twenty years, he had seen the finest countries of Europe, France, England, the Low Countries, Germany, Switzerland, Poland, Hungary, and Italy. During the space of forty years he travelled six times into Turkey, Persia, and the East Indies, and by all the different routes he could take. In the course of these peregrinations, he gained a great estate by trading in jewels; and, being ennobled by Louis XIV. purchased the barony of Aubonne, near the lake of Geneva, in 1668. He had collected a great number of observations, but he had not learned either to speak or write well in French; for which reason he was forced to employ others in drawing up his relations. M. Chappuseau, with whom he lodged at Geneva, lent him his pen for the two first volumes of his travels; and M. Chapelle for the third. They have frequently been printed, and contain several curious particulars; yet not without some fables, which were told him purely to impose upon his simplicity. He is charged also with stealing from others to fill up his own accounts: thus Dr. Hyde, having cited a very long passage from Tavernier, tells us that “he had taken it like a downright plagiary from a book printed at Lyons, 1671, in 8vo, and written by father Gabriel de Chinon, who had lived in Persia thirty years.”

His distinguished abilities as a mathematician had now recommended him particularly to the esteem of the Royal Society, who, in 1714, elected him to the office of secretary. In the same year, he took the degree of doctor of laws, at Cambridge. In 1715, he published his “Methodus incrementorum,” and a curious essay in the Philosophical Transactions, entitled, “An Account of an Experiment for the Discovery of the Laws of Magnetic Attraction;” and, besides these, his celebrated work on perspective, entitled “New Principles of Linear Perspective: or the art of designing, on a plane, the representations of all sorts of objects, in a more general and simple method than has hitherto been done.' 7 This work has gone through several editions, and received some improvements from Mr. Colson, Lucasian professor at Cambridge. In the same; year Taylor conducted a controversy, in a correspondence with Raymond count de Montmort, respecting the tenets of Malbranche, which occasioned him to be noticed afterwards in the eulogium pronounced on that celebrated metaphysician. In 1716, by invitation from several learned men, to whom his merits were well known, Dr. Taylor visited Paris, where he was received with every mark of respect and distinction. Early in 1717, he returned to London, and composed three treatises, which are in the thirtieth volume of the Philosophical Transactions. But his health having been impaired by intense application, he was now advised to go to Aix-la-chapelle, and resigned his office of secretary to the Royal Society. After his return to England in 1719, it appears that he applied his mind to studies of a religious nature, the result of which were found in some dissertations preserved among his papers,” On the Jewish Sacrifices,' 7 &c. He did not, however, neglect his former pursuits, but amused himself with drawing, improved his treatise on linear perspective, and wrote a defence of it against the attacks of J. Bernoulli!, in a paper which appears in the thirtieth volume of the Philosophical Transactions, Bernouilli objected to the work as too abstruse, and denied the author the merit of inventing his system. It is indeed acknowledged, that though Dr. B. Taylor discovered it for himself, he was not the first who had trod the same path, as it had been done by Guido Ubaldi, in a book on perspective, published at Pesaro in 1600. The abstruseness of his work has been obviated by another author, in a work entitled, “Dr. Brook Taylor’s method of Perspective made easy, both in theory and practice, &c. by Joshua Kirby, painter;” and this publication has continued to be the manual both of artists and dilettanti. Towards the end of 1720, Dr. Taylor visited lord Bolingbroke, near Orleans, hut returned the next year, and published his last paper in the Philosophical Transactions, which described, “An Experiment made to ascertain the Proportion of Expansion in the Thermometer, with regard to the Degree of Heat.”

About this time also he was appointed chaplain 4n ordinary to the king, having already been made chaplain to archbishop Laud; and in March 1638, he was instituted to the rectory of Uppingham, in the county of Rutland, by Francis Dee, bishop of Peterborough, on the presentation of William Juxon, bishop of London. He had no sooner received institution into this preferment than he commenced his charge over it, and continued to reside at Uppingham until 1642. In May 1639 he was married in the church of that town to Phoebe Landisdale, or Langsdale, a lady of whose family little is known, unless that she had a brother of the medical profession, a Dr. Langsdale of Gainsborough. By her Mr. Taylor had four sons and three daughters. Of the exemplary manner in which he administered the spiritual concerns of his parish, a fair conclusion may be drawn, both from his ardent piety, and from the way in which he himself speaks of his experience in the conduct of souls. He was no less attentive and useful in managing the secular affairs of his parish, of which many proofs exist in its records.

In August 1642, when the king went to Oxford, Taylor was called upon to attend him in his capacity of chaplain, and was there honoured with a doctor’s degree, but probably lost his living, as after this time there is no trace of him at Uppingham; yet though it was sequestered, it does not appear that he relinquished his claim to it, nor, in point of fact, does any rector occur between his departure and the year 1661, when John Allington signs himself as such. Being one of the king’s retinue, Dr. Taylor probably accompanied the army, but there are no distinct particulars of his progress at this unfortunate period, and it is probable that he retired into Wales, either in the summer of 1645, or the spring of the following year. We can, however, more certainly trace his pen in the controversies of the times. When the assembly of divines at Westminster published their “Directory,” which abolished the usual forms of prayer, Dr. Taylor published “A Discourse concerning. Prayer extempore, or by pretence of the Spirit, in justification of authorised and set forms of Liturgie.” This was printed in 1646, but without the place being specified. It had been preceded, probably about 1644-, with “An apology for authorised and set forms of Liturgy against the pretence of the Spirit.” They form a very able defence of liturgy.

While in Wales, he was obliged to maintain himself and family by keeping school, at Newton, in Carmarthenshire, where he was assisted by Mr. William Wyatt of St. John’s college, Oxford, and they jointly produced, in 164-7, “A new and easie institution of Grammar,” London, 12mo. This scarce little volume has two dedications, one in Latin to lord Hatton by Wyatt, the other in English, by Taylor, addressed to lord Hatton’s son. The eminence of Dr. Taylor’s learning, and the integrity of his principles procured him scholars, who, as his biographer says, “having, as it were, received instruction from this prophet in the wilderness, were transplanted to the universities.” He found also a generous patron in Richard Vaughan, earl of Carbery, who resided at Golden Grove, the seat of his ancestors, in the parish of Llanfihangel Aberbythick, near Llandillo Fawr, in Carmarthenshire. Into this hospitable family he was received as chaplain, and had a stipend allotted him, as he himself intimates in his dedication to lord Carbery, prefixed to his “Course of Sermons.” It would appear that persecution had followed him into Wales, before he obtained his present comfortable asylum, but in what manner or to what extent is not known.

Previous to the death of the countess of Carbery, Taylor had been occupied in writing his “Rule and Exercises of Holy Dying,” and that part of his volume of “Sermons,” which was preached at Golden Grove, in the summer halfyear. These, with the addition of the funeral sermon lately delivered, and a “Discourse of the Divine institution, necessity, and sacredness of the office Ministerial,” he published in 1651. His “Holy Living” and “Holy Dying” have been supposed by their late editor, the rev. Thomas Thirwall, to have been Dr. Taylor’s favourite works, and they are certainly elaborated with more than his usual care; and the latter, as being occasioned by the countess of Carbery’s illness, comes more from the heart. His “Sermons” have been ably analysed by his biographer, and are indeed to be recommended to the attention of the present age, rather in the form of extracts or selections, than as originally published.

In 1652 Dr. Taylor published “A short Catechism, composed for the use of the schools in South Wales,” which he afterwards reprinted under the head “Credenda” in his “Golden Grove.” In the same year he consented to the publication of a “Discourse on Baptism, its institution, and efficacy upon all believers,” which was only part of a projected work of a larger description. This was followed, in 1653, by another collection of “Twenty five Sermons” for the winter season, making, together with the former, a course of sermons for the whole year. These, with ten additional, preached after the restoration, were republished in one volume folio, and before 1678 had gone through five editions. In 1654, he published “The Heal Presence and Spiritual of Christ in the blessed sacrament proved against the doctrine of Transubstantiation.” This he dedicated to Warner, bishop of Rochester, with whom he afterwards engaged in controversy. In 1655, the short catechism he had published for the youth of Wales, considerably enlarged, was republished under the title of “The Guide of Infant Devotion, or the Golden Grove, a manual of daily prayers and litanies fitted to the days of the week: containing a short summary of what is to be believed, practised, and desired. Also festival hymns, according to the manner of the ancient church.”

In the same year appeared his “Unum necessarium, or the Doctrine arrd Practice of Repentance.” This, says his biographer, led him into the consideration of original sin, and its effects; points which were at that time much controverted between the Arminian and Calvinistic parties, and he adopted the opinion of the former, carrying it to a degree that the latter utterly condemned, and which the church of England does not approve. His sentiments with regard to the doctrine of original sin were then, and are at present, generally considered heterodox; and are irreconcilable to the tenets of our church, as laid down in her liturgy, articles, and homilies. It was this, therefore, which drew him into controversy. His friend, the bishop of Rochester, Dr. Warner, shewed his disapprobation of the chapter of original sin, in a letter addressed to Dr. Taylor, dated July 28, 1656. It was also censured by Dr. Sanderson, afterwards bishop of Lincoln, and others, to whom he endeavoured to reply in two tracts, the one “Deus justificatus, or a Vindication of the Glory of the divine attributes, &c.” and the other “A further explication of the doctrine of original sin, &c.”

During some part of this controversy, he was in confinement in Chepstow castle, from a suspicion that he was concerned in the insurrection of the royalists at Salisbury, but appears to have been released after the autumn of 1656, when he was at home, and lost two of his sons by the small pox. After this, in the beginning of 1657, he went to London, having determined to relinquish altogether hfs situation in Wales; and officiated to a private congregation of loyalists, but not without great danger from the prevailing p.my. During the preceding year, a treatise appeared which his biographer says is attributed to Dr. Taylor by Anthony Wood, and still occupies a place in the list of his writings, entitled “A Discourse of auxiliary Beauty, or artificial handsornenesse. In point of conscience between two ladies;” but this appears to be an oversight, for Anthony Wood attributes this little volume to Dr. Gauden, and not to Dr. Taylor, and gives 1662 as the date, and not 1656.

In this year, 1657, Dr. Taylor was induced by a new friend and patron, lord Conway, to go over to Ireland, and reside at Portmore, the mansion of that nobleman in the county of Antrim. This situation being adapted to study and contemplation, was to him a delightful retreat; and here he employed his time in arranging the treasures with which his mind was stored, and in correspondence with men of literature. Here he accomplished the largest and most laborious of his works, the “Ductor Dubitantium, or the Rule of Conscience in all her general measures; serving as a great instrument for the determination of cases of conscience,” 1660, fol. Of this work it has been said, without exaggeration, that it is the production of retentive memory and laborious research, of learning various and profound, and of reasoning close and dispassionate. The demand for this work has lately risen very considerably; and what we can remember holding a very inferior, if any place, in sale catalogues, is now a prominent article with a handsome price. It is undoubtedly a very interesting work to men that delight in the exercise of the reasoning power, but its real utility in satisfying scruples of conscience is, we think, not quite so apparent.

In the autumn of 1661, bishop Taylor, foreseeing a vacancy in the deanery of Connor, wrote to Cambridge for some able person, who might fill that dignity, and the proposition being made to Dr. George Rust, he was preferred as soon as the vacancy took place (See Rust); and thus a friendship commenced between these two great men, which continued with mutual warmth and admiration till it was interrupted by death. Dr. Rust was the survivor, and succeeded bishop Taylor in the see of Dromore, and preached his funeral sermon. In 1662-3, bishop Taylor published “Three Sermons” which he had preached at Christ’s church, Dublin “Eleven Sermons,” preached since the restoration and his “Discourse on Confirmation” In July 1663, he preached the funeral sermon of Dr. John Bramhall, archbishop of Armagh, from whose hands he had received confirmation. This was published, and contains a well-drawn character of the primate. In the same year, at the request of the bishops of Ireland, he published “A Dissuasive from Popery, addressed to the people of Ireland.” This work went through several editions, and some answers being published by the popish party, he wrote a second part of his “Dissuasive,” which however, did not appear until after his death. He had also began a discourse on the beatitudes, when he was attacked by a fever, which proved fatal in ten days. He died at Lisburn, August 13, 1667, and was interred in the choir of the cathedral of Dromore. Dr. Rust, as we have already observed, preached his funeral sermon, and entered largely into his character. He was indisputably, as Dr. Rust represents him, a man of the acutest penetration and sagacity, the richest and most lively imagination, the solidest judgment, and the profoundest learning. He was perfectly versed in all the Greek and Roman writers, and was not unacquainted with the refined wits of later ages, whether French or Italian. His skill was great, both in civil and canon law, in casuistical divinity, in fathers, and ecclesiastical writers ancient and modern. He was a man of the greatest humility and piety: it is believed, says Dr. Rust, that he spent the greatest part of his time in heaven, and that his solemn hours of prayer took up a considerable portion of his life. He was indeed a great devotee, and had in him much of natural enthusiasm. Dr. Rust concludes his character with observing, that “he had the goodhumour of *a gentleman, the eloquence of an orator, the fancy of a poet, the aruter.ess of H schoolman, the profoundness of a philosopher, the wisdom of a chancellor, the sagacity of a prophet, the rrnson of an angel, and the piety of a saint. He had devotion enough for a cloister, learning enough for an university, and wit enough for a college of virtuosi; and had his parts and endowments been parcelled out among his clergy that he left In-hind him, it would, perhaps, have made one of the otst dioceses in the world.” Yet amidst the blaze of this panegyric, we must not forget that dispassionate criticism will assign as bishop Taylor’s highest excellence, his powers of moral suasion. He is always seen to most advantage as a moral writer, and his genius is every where inspired and invigorated by a love of what is good. Nor must it be forgot that he was one of the refiners of our language. His biographer has justly said that “English prose was in his time in a progressive state. It had been advanced very far by the genius of Sidney and the wisdom of Hooker; but the pedantry of the reign of James had done much to eclipse its lustre. In Taylor it broke out from its obscurity with energy and brightness. His polemical discourses exhibit a specimen of English composition superior to any that had gone before.”

, usually called the Water- Poet, from his being a waterman as well as a poet, and certainly more of the former than the latter, was born in Gloucestershire about 1580. Wood says he was born in the city of Gloucester, and went to school there, but he does not appear to have learned more than his accidence, as appears by some lines of his own. From this school he was brought to London, and bound apprentice to a waterman, whence he“was either pressed or went voluntarily into the naval service, for he was at the taking of Cadiz un;ler the earl of Essex, in 1596, when only sixteen years old, and was afterward* in Germany, Bohemia, Scotland, as may be collected from various passages in his works. At home he was many years collector, for the lieutenant of the Tower, of the wines which were his fee from all ships which brought them up the Thames; but was at last discharged because he would not purchase the place at more than it was worth. He calls himself the” King’s Water Poet,“and the” Queen’s Waterman," and wore the badge of the royal arms. While * waterman, he very naturally had a great hatred to coaches, and besides writing a satire against them, he fancied that the watermen were starving for want of employment, and presented a petition to James I. which was referred to certain commissioners, of whom sir Francis Bacon was one, to obtain a prohibition of all play-houses except those on the Bank-side, that the greater part of the inhabitants of London, who were desirous of seeing plays, might be compelled to go by water. Taylor himself is said to have undertaken to support this singular petition, and was prepared to oppose before the commissioners the arguments of the players, but the commission was dissolved before it came to a hearing.

He died in 1654, aged seventy-four, as Wood was informed by his nephew, a painter of Oxford, who gave his portrait to the picture-gallery there in 1655. This nephew’s own portrait, also by himself, is on the staircase. His works were published under the title of “All the Workes of John Taylor the water-poet, being sixty and three in number, collected into one volume by the author, with sundry new additions; corrected, revised, and newly imprinted,” 1630, folio. These pieces, which are not destitute of natural humour, abound with low jingling wit, which pleased and prevailed in the reign of James I. and which too often bordered upon bombast and nonsense. He was countenanced by a few persons of rank and ingenuity; but was the darling and admiration of numbers of the rabble. He was himself the father of some cant words, and he has adopted others which were only in the mouths of the lowest vulgar. From the date of this volume it is evident that it does not contain those “pasquils” and satires which Wood says he wrote at Oxford, and which perhaps it might have been unsafe to avow, or re-publish, as he did not survive the times of the usurpation. Five articles, however, whose titles may be seen in the “Bibliotheca Angb-Poetica,” were published between 1637 and 1641. One of them is the life of old Par, printed in 1635, when Par is said to have been living at the age of one hundred and fifty-two.

He died March 5, 1761, having gone to bed as well as usual the night before, only complaining a little of a pressure on his stomach. Of his writings, the first he published was “A prefatory Discourse to a Narrative of Mr. Joseph Rawson’s Case;” who was excluded from communion with the congregational church at Nottingham, for asserting the unity and supremacy of God the Father. In 1740, “The Scripture doctrine of Original Sin,” in which that doctrine is denied. This has gone through three editions. In 1745, “A Paraphrase on the Romans” republished by bishop Watson in his “Tracts,” and recommended by Dr. Bentham in his “Reflections on the study of Divinity;” and the same year, “A Scripture Catechism with Proofs.” In 1750, “A Collection of Tunes in various Airs, with a Scheme for supporting the spirit and practice of Psalmody in congregations.” In 1751, “The Importance of Children; or, Motives to the good Education of Children.” In 1753, “The Scripture Doctrine of Atonement.” In 1754, his great work, the labour of his whole life, “An Hebrew English Concordance,” in 2 vols. folio, which will remain a lasting monument of his indefatigable industry and critical skill. The same year, “The Lord’s Supper explained upon Scripture principles.” In 1755, “The Covenant of Grace in defence of infant baptism.” In 1757, “A Charge delivered at the ordination of Mr. Smithson.” In 1756, “A Sermon,” preached at the opening of the new chapel in Norwich. In 1759, “An Examination of Dr. Hutcheson’s Scheme of Morality.” His last performance, in 1760, was “A Sketch of Moral Philosophy;” which he drew up for the use of his own pupils, and as introductory to “Wollaston’s Religion of Nature.”